| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| T-RAV |
Posted - 02/09/2011 : 03:03:51
Is it just me or are the refs getting worse every year?
I'm not bashing all refs, just the ones that blow important calls.
Last night, Cooke got a "boarding" charge when it was clearly a hit from BEHIND! He should have been kicked out of the game, no question.
Not to mention, last Friday's game in the Chi vs. Van game. The Hawks scored the first tally of the night, just to be called back. I believe they called it Goaltender interference, but there was never any contact. Then in the SAME period Vancouver scored a goal from OFF-SIDE! But of course this is a good goal. What?!
Call me jealous, but the Leafs don't get too many breaks like this.
Although referees are supposed to be un-biased, it often seems like they have a favorite.
"If we succumb to a dream world, then we will wake up to a nightmare" - Jimmy Carter |
| 19 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 02/13/2011 : 17:28:58
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
what would be the point of reviewing a major penalty? They're probably the clearest ones of all.
They still miss alot, and have the biggest impact on the game
Go OILERS Go!!! |
| doublechamp7 |
Posted - 02/13/2011 : 17:20:31
I agree with Beans, take a ref off the ice and have him watching the game from off the ice. You would still have him making calls, and there is no way that that will change the game, except for the fact that the right calls will be made.
Bring back the Jets! |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 02/13/2011 : 15:38:37
what would be the point of reviewing a major penalty? They're probably the clearest ones of all. |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 02/13/2011 : 14:47:12
All potential major penalties should be reviewed, and goaltender interference too, which leads to a goal.
Go OILERS Go!!! |
| Utemin |
Posted - 02/13/2011 : 13:59:06
I agree with beans I don't have too big of a problem with the refs, they do a solid job. The only thing that pisses me off with them is they aren't calling headshots.
Don't hate me because i'm Beautiful |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 02/11/2011 : 14:23:20
Yo genious ..... i hate the idea of a ref watching a TV like the rest of us. WE ALL blow "calls" when watching on the television do we not? I need the reply often to see if it's a penalty or a dive or otherwise. No ref can watch the replay and then flip his "light" on for a penalty! Either i don't get your suggestion, or i simply don't like it.
I really don't like penalties being reviewed. |
| Awesome One |
Posted - 02/11/2011 : 09:26:21
Refs are fine, I think the best thing would be an improved instant replay system.
There was once a license plate in Toronto that abbreviated "Go Leafs" it read "Golfs". |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 02/11/2011 : 09:22:09
I am not one for challenge flags. It works in the NFL because there is a 40 second break between every play. There is time for it. A challenge flag in the NHL would slow the game.
I propose 2 changes:
1) Have the refs able to meet, huddle, and talk over penalties. This means linesmen can call penalties as well.
2) Take one ref off the ice and put them in the same location as the TV cameras. I mean, we all see the penalties from our view right?? Why not have a ref there too?? They could tie in a button at the ref in the sky's booth to a light at the score keepers box. The light goes off an it's a delayed penalty. That ref in the sky gets tied into the buildings PA system and at the stoppage in play can announce the penalty and show the replay.
Done. Another unsolvable issue solved by the only genius on this site.  |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 02/10/2011 : 17:58:59
[/quote]
Call me jealous, but the Leafs don't get too many breaks like this.
Although referees are supposed to be un-biased, it often seems like they have a favorite.
[/quote]
Dallas gets breaks, so does Detroit. and good players like ovechkin and such always get the calls from those egotistical bastards called refs
Go OILERS Go!!! |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 02/10/2011 : 17:56:14
quote:
Originally posted by nuxfan
quote:
Then the structure should be changed, we're leaving games up to the human error that is referees, when video replay could be accessible in about 5 seconds.
when has video replay ever taken 5 seconds? Every time a goal is replayed it takes 2-5 minutes to figure it out. Can you imagine how the game would slow down if we had a 2-3 minute stop every time a video replay was required?
they have to look at every angle for a goal, it would take about 5 seconds to see if someone was tripped or if it was a dive. or a highstick or not
Go OILERS Go!!! |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 02/10/2011 : 17:42:12
As i stated before, if it's for a goal, especially one such as Ehrhoff's i have no prob with a review. BUT, i don't want every penalty being reviewed, every offside (where no goal results immediately), every highstick which doesn't result in anything, etc.
Look at the NFL. Do they allow coaches challenges on pass interference calls? NO, and that's one of the biggest penalties in the game and often costs teams half the field! They cannot challenge penalties!!!
Look at MLB. Do they review the potential human error when an ump makes a call on a guy being safe or out? No, as far as i know, they only review home run balls to see if they were actually fair home runs?
I just don't wanna see every call being challenged! Just the goals or plays that directly result in goals and that's pretty much the way it is except for the odd call. |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 02/10/2011 : 17:26:55
quote:
Then the structure should be changed, we're leaving games up to the human error that is referees, when video replay could be accessible in about 5 seconds.
when has video replay ever taken 5 seconds? Every time a goal is replayed it takes 2-5 minutes to figure it out. Can you imagine how the game would slow down if we had a 2-3 minute stop every time a video replay was required? |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 02/10/2011 : 16:31:21
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
As always, mine is the unpopular opinion but I believe the refs in the NHL do pretty good job considering the structure.
Then the structure should be changed, we're leaving games up to the human error that is referees, when video replay could be accessible in about 5 seconds.
Go OILERS Go!!! |
| nuxfan |
Posted - 02/10/2011 : 10:17:14
the problem with having a challenge on infractions is that nearly all penalties do result from some sort of infraction of the rules, if looked at by the book.
Take the average slash - ref's normally don't call a slashing penalty unless a stick breaks or is hit very hard, or if the slash hits the body particularly hard. But in nearly every instance, a slash has indeed taken place if you go by the book on "slashing" - what would you expect a review to do?
I can see review being useful for offsides or icings, the Erhoff goal is a good example. Or some instances of goalie interference, or the rare tripping call where there was no contact but a player went down, making it look like a trip. But thats about it. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 02/10/2011 : 09:15:39
quote:
Originally posted by T-RAV
Clearly it is redundant for me to argue this, but most Leafs fans would disagree with you that "no team gets an undeserved amount of penalties".
DO NOT TAKE THIS OUT OF CONTEXT!
Most penalties are deserved, undoubtedly, but TML are the most hated franchise in North America, and not just by fans.
T-RAV....it's hard to comment on this without being accused of taking it out of context, therefore, i'm gonna pretend that i didn't read it.
Slozo / T-RAV......the "challenge" issue has been discussed before and i don't mind the idea, though it'd have to be decided what exactly you can challenge (much like football). Would being able to challenge a penalty make any sense? I don't think it would (unless MAYBE if it were a major or a serious infraction). I don't wanna see challenges with two mins left in the game because of a slash that was perhaps a little weak as far as one team was concerned. This is the human element of the game and i think that should be left up to the refs.
The goal that Ehrhoff scored (that was in fact offside), i'd have no problem with a challenge! Things like that would be okay with me but not every little infraction! |
| n/a |
Posted - 02/10/2011 : 04:38:45
I actually think that the refs in hockey are among the poorest in all major sports. I don't know if it's a trickle down effect from the poorest judge of all (Colin "the dartboard" Campbell) or if it's a systematic thing or politics or what. But I don't think the refs in hockey are all that good at what they do, no.
#1 for me is TALK AMONGST YOURSELVES TO GET A CALL RIGHT.
How often do you see the ref who made a slashing call 50 feet away, while the ref right beside the play is never talked to or consulted afterward? It's asinine . . .
#2 biggest thing they could do is give each team two challenges per game, where a missed/blown call could be challenged for review, and it could be overturned. Hey, we get it that mistakes are made . . . if we can correct them, why not?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| T-RAV |
Posted - 02/10/2011 : 04:29:01
So if this is the best that a human can do, where is the harm in the "challenge" option??
I don't like the idea of changing every little aspect of the game, but when it happens so fast that the human eye cannot keep up, where does that leave us? Would you rather see them add more refs and linesmen? (rhetorical)
Clearly it is redundant for me to argue this, but most Leafs fans would disagree with you that "no team gets an undeserved amount of penalties".
DO NOT TAKE THIS OUT OF CONTEXT!
Most penalties are deserved, undoubtedly, but TML are the most hated franchise in North America, and not just by fans.
"If we succumb to a dream world, then we will wake up to a nightmare" - Jimmy Carter
Peace and Respect |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 02/09/2011 : 08:53:36
Beans, i couldn't agree more. You nailed it when you mentioned the fact that pretty much EVERY angle is covered by a camera.
T-RAV, a great example of this is the Vancouver / Chicago game you referenced. I didn't see the game, though i was listening to most of it on the radio. The announcers, when broadcasting, mentioned immediately that the Chi goal had been called off for goaltender interference. While they may have a bit of bias or "homer" influence, they both thought it was a good call....until they saw a reply. Their exact words (after a commercial break) were "Well, after seeing the replay, it appears the Canucks got away with one"!
I wasn't listening on the radio when the "offside" goal went in but i did see a hilight later. For those who didn't see it, i believe it was Ehrhoff who came off the bench and joined the play in the Chi end, just as the puck was coming out towards the blue line right near mid ice. He skated in and one timed a puck that was very near the line. Back of the net! Anyway, i watched the slo mo replay and even then couldn't tell if it was completely out of the zone. For the record, the linesman was in as good a position as he could possibly be AND, there was little IF ANY complaint from ANY Chi player including their bench who were right there in perfect view! So, i rewound my PVR and paused it. By hittting the pause button repeatedly, it advances it frame by frame and i was able to see that it did in fact look as though the whole puck came out. Even then, it's a little blurry but it did look to me as though it was out.
What i'm getting at is these officials don't have the access to replays or "frame by frame" advancement of such replays. Unless they decide to institue a rule whereby a team can challenge (been discussed before) OR go to reviewing more than just whether a puck crossed the line, the refs will continue to make some errors. However, as Beans mentioned, with the speed of the game, the size of the players, etc, these guys do a pretty darn good job. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 02/09/2011 : 06:46:39
As always, mine is the unpopular opinion but I believe the refs in the NHL do pretty good job considering the structure. I think it would greatly benefit the game if there was a system where the refs could 'huddle' and discuss calls much like the NFL.
However, I think people might believe the refs get worse each year because the TV coverage gets better and better. There isn's an angle on the ice that is not covered by a camera and each of us watching at home or even in the mid to upper levels of the area get the luxury of an overhead view and instant slo-mo replay. The ref does not get that.
If you ever have a chance to watch a game from ice level, specifically behind one of the nets, you will see very quickly that the game is significantly faster than you see on TV. Also, put a couple of nets, 4 officials, and 12 players often inside the offensive zove, and tell me how any mortal can see through all of that. Calls will get missed. It's the same in every sport in the world.
Considering the challenges, I think the refs do a fine job. Each team gets their fair and unfair shakes. No team gets it more than others and no team gets an undeserved amount of penalties. People will often say 'what if' this call was made or not made and what the outcome of the game 'could have' been. In the end, there are very few NHL games that are significantly impacted by the refs. |
|
|
