Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

Officiating In The Nhl What Do You Think?


Recommended Posts

I just watched another game where I came away pissed at the officiating. When is the NHL gonna come down with some decent officials. Put some standards in for a official where there some feel for the game being played out there, instead of calling stupid penalties like was called tonight, my children play harder than that hit on Ward tonight. The most and I mean the most if you want to clean up the hits from behind would have been 2 minutes. This was a marginal hit at best. If this is a major, then we should be seeing a major from now on for hitting from behind.

We should also be seeing suspension for others that I have seen this year. I'm tired of watching games where the outcomes are determined by marginal calls made by a referee who usually decides a game. Chris Lee, Tim Peel are two idiots that rank right up there in morons for officiating. They must be the posted boys for refereeing blindly,or how to affect the outcome of a game and look good doing it.

Maybe it's just me, but do anybody else see this? The NHL has to crack down on officials who don't know what their doing out there. The other nite in Montreal vs Toronto was another game where the referee let the game escalate to the point where the game was over and they let Toronto pull that *****. This is when players get hurt. The officials are not consistent with the calls a trip is called one minute and the next time a same play happens again it's not called. I can see why Carbo gets so frustrated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The officiating has been inconsistent / bad for a while for everyone and the League doesn't seem to want to do anything about it

You nailed it right on the head. It's as simple as one word... "Inconsistent." The only referee I even like is the fellow with the mustache whose name I forget... Bill McCreary, I think. I kind of enjoy him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should be alot more consistent.

I wonder if they have to go into meetings to discuss every play they called / Questionble plays that they Didnt call..

Like they do in the NFL.. Probably not as we have 8x the amount of games as the NFL.

Maybe we should have 8x the amount of Refs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should be alot more consistent.

I wonder if they have to go into meetings to discuss every play they called / Questionble plays that they Didnt call..

Like they do in the NFL.. Probably not as we have 8x the amount of games as the NFL.

Maybe we should have 8x the amount of Refs?

Or perhaps the exact opposite? ;)

Perhaps the league should scale back, A] The number of teams, B] The number of game played, and C] The number of people, officials included, employed by the NHL. The fewer referees employed, perhaps the higher standard and quality of referee, and by extension officiating, we would have.

I don't know, Bettman's a moron though, isn't he?

I don't know? :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or perhaps the exact opposite? ;)

Perhaps the league should scale back, A] The number of teams, B] The number of game played, and C] The number of people, officials included, employed by the NHL. The fewer referees employed, perhaps the higher standard and quality of referee, and by extension officiating, we would have.

I don't know, Bettman's a moron though, isn't he?

I don't know? :unsure:

A. No

B. No

C. Can't comment because I don't know the # officials or how their cycles work.

If we reduce the teams or the games the NHL becomes very bush-league and the laughing stock of professional sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when a ref puts his arm up he is trying to say that the game is under duress. it is not a question of whether or not the player has made an infraction of the rules.

a ref is not a trained physical thrapist, not a psychiatrist, but he is by definition dedicated to the game of hockey.

they do not publish briefs on their officiating, though it is possible to know them through the course of games, and it is the responsibility of the team to know each one for who they are, their rythyms, their aspirations for overall contests, and their demeanor. ( many people think that one is entitled to a lawyer if one is poor and cannot afford one, but that rule about lawyers was when judges travelled or were not called often enough to get an idea of who they were- frontier days. those days are long gone)

as for individual effort while playing the game of hockey- when most controversial calls are made- yes that is a fact.

an official takes it unto himself that in the nhl there is a level a maturity and skill, an aging of the player to the extent that one has the ability to retain self respect, and that the learning curve for the player has been passed. this lends itself to fact checking in the rate of pay the players recieve for playing the game. the ref is not a tool of the player- he is an agent of the league and will not be swayed in this regard.

if a player enters the game and thinks he is going to train the other team he is likely in for a fall.

well that's my view- its not like refs go home to a flock of colts and fillies and get to make them ranch horses- they do their job as if like i said the player is trained to a level of nhl play, and they expect skills and persistence to win games, and nothing else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A. No

B. No

C. Can't comment because I don't know the # officials or how their cycles work.

If we reduce the teams or the games the NHL becomes very bush-league and the laughing stock of professional sports.

How do you figure that?

Why would reducing teams, and by extension having a higher quality of player spread around the league, make us a laughing stock? I have news for you, we're alreayd a laughing stock in the U.S.A. Why would reducing the number of games be foolish? It's something that has been discussed widely here previously, and seems like a decent enough idea. My line of thought is such that the less referees you need will correspond to a better quality officiating because the referees left in the NHL would be more experienced and capable.

I don't know, the basic principle seems to make sense to me. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you figure that?

Why would reducing teams, and by extension having a higher quality of player spread around the league, make us a laughing stock? I have news for you, we're alreayd a laughing stock in the U.S.A. Why would reducing the number of games be foolish? It's something that has been discussed widely here previously, and seems like a decent enough idea. My line of thought is such that the less referees you need will correspond to a better quality officiating because the referees left in the NHL would be more experienced and capable.

I don't know, the basic principle seems to make sense to me. :rolleyes:

I have news for you, the NHL is making progress in the States, the recession isn't helping things but there most certainly has been progress made since the lockout and reducing the games and teams kills that progress because you take away the product you're trying to sell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have news for you, the NHL is making progress in the States, the recession isn't helping things but there most certainly has been progress made since the lockout and reducing the games and teams kills that progress because you take away the product you're trying to sell.

I'm glad you, "Have news for me." :rolleyes: The last I read, franchises like Phoenix were losing $30 million annually, and were having to be propped up by the league financially to stay alive. However, that doesn't have much to do with this conversation, so...

:mellow::mellow:

I enjoy when the referees stay out of the game; Blow the whistle for icing and off-sides, point at the net when a goal is scored, call hooking and holding when it actually impedes a players progress, penalize goonery. There's nothing worse than watching a game of hockey and having a penalty called every two minutes. The game of hockey then becomes a game of power-play/penalty kill which is far less interesting than two teams going up and down the ice against each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad you, "Have news for me." :rolleyes: The last I read, franchises like Phoenix were losing $30 million annually, and were having to be propped up by the league financially to stay alive. However, that doesn't have much to do with this conversation, so...

:mellow::mellow:

I enjoy when the referees stay out of the game; Blow the whistle for icing and off-sides, point at the net when a goal is scored, call hooking and holding when it actually impedes a players progress, penalize goonery. There's nothing worse than watching a game of hockey and having a penalty called every two minutes. The game of hockey then becomes a game of power-play/penalty kill which is far less interesting than two teams going up and down the ice against each other.

Yes but nearly every business in America is losing money so the time context can mislead the results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...