PGT - Canucks-3: NYRefs-4: Shit happens.

[Barnstorm]

6 skaters on the ice, 4 awfficials…still can’t get it right. 

Something has to change.

 

[Rocket-68]

1 hour ago, Joe King said:

I think the refs are hesitant to call a penalty in overtime making it a 4 on 3.

I think any overtime goal should have a quick review. And if the goal is scored because of a light infraction it should be called back and the face off in the guilty teams end. But definitely call major infractions like boarding and head shots.

Penalties in OT result in adding a player to the side that drew it. Still, point is taken on having to make split second decisions.

 

Not sure if this was covered elsewhere but I don't think penalties can be reviewed on the basis of "should have been called". However, a sane solution would be to have "could have called penalties" reviewable in situations like OT that lead to a goal. Unfortunately, that is a can of worms that the NHL probably doesn't want opened. 

Edited October 29, 2023 by Rocket-68

[PhillipBlunt]

14 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

The ref is literally staring at Petey and watching him get tripped up. Either he is blind, which is probably true, or he ignored it and said fuck it, I’ll let the Rangers go down and score. 
 

He had a lot on his mind at the time. 

2 minutes ago, Barnstorm said:

6 skaters on the ice, 4 awfficials…still can’t get it right. 

Something has to change.

 

It’s a fast paced game, don’t ya know. 

[tas]

18 minutes ago, Rekker said:

Crap, biased officiating and a bullshit suspension literally cost this franchise a cup. There needs to be accountability and if the leugue refuses to do it, then the fans can complain about it all they want imho.

sure, by all means, complain away. see where it gets ya. 

[PhillipBlunt]

12 minutes ago, Huggy Bear said:

Dont think there’s much whining in here. A pretty good conversation on the state of reffing, with good points on both sides.

Exactly. Let them have their gifs. 

[JayDangles]

27 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

Not enough whining ...

 

Agreed.

The players can move on, the coach can move on... the 95% of fans on Facebook can move on...

But most on cdc can't. You'd think after a night of rest most would be able to let it go.

I'm just here for the whining now.

[bishopshodan]

If you're surprised about the refs, that kinda says something about you. It's been this way for a while. 

 

Realy good showing by the boys. When we win the cup we will also have to beat team ref along the way.

 

Challenge accepted. 

[Barnstorm]

1 minute ago, PhillipBlunt said:

He had a lot on his mind at the time. 

It’s a fast paced game, don’t ya know. 

I’m still waiting for “ they’re the best of the best”.

[Huggy Bear]

6 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

Whine harder! Come on ... Get Huggy with it. 

the Dr. is out. Please leave a message.

[PhillipBlunt]

5 minutes ago, JayDangles said:

Perhaps you need the tiny violin now?

 

Seems your hurt feelings are causing you to overlook a great game played by the guys.....pal

Not at all. I loved the game the Canucks played. They were easily the better, stronger, stiffer team. 
 

No hurt feelings here. Maybe try again when you actually have a point. 

Just now, Barnstorm said:

I’m still waiting for “ they’re the best of the best”.

Totally ignoring the standard set by officials at the IIHF. 

[tas]

17 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

The ref is literally staring at Petey and watching him get tripped up. Either he is blind, which is probably true, or he ignored it and said fuck it, I’ll let the Rangers go down and score. 
 

or, he assessed the play differently in real time? it could have easily been seen as petey just being muscled rather than tripped. 

 

again, I never said it was a good call or that the officiating was great. I just said making them speak publicly would never accomplish anything positive. 

[Dr. Crossbar]

3 minutes ago, Huggy Bear said:

the Dr. is out. Please leave a message.

 

Lol ... having whine for breakfast. 

[JayDangles]

1 minute ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Not at all. I loved the game the Canucks played. They were easily the better, stronger, stiffer team. 
 

No hurt feelings here. Maybe try again when you actually have a point. 

I've made great points, you just don't want to let it go. There 82 games in a season played by 32 teams. The vast majority of the time the refs do a hell of a job.

You want to hold them accountable for the exception, not the rule. Which as I said, will only result in zero refs wanting to do that job. Won't change a damn thing on the ice. 

Let it go.

 

[tas]

2 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Not at all. I loved the game the Canucks played. They were easily the better, stronger, stiffer team. 
 

No hurt feelings here. Maybe try again when you actually have a point. 

Totally ignoring the standard set by officials at the IIHF. 

YMMV I guess but in my experience iihf officials have been terrible. i haven't watched international tournaments in a few years, but historically they were godawful enough that people would accuse them of being on the take. 

[Huggy Bear]

There was a good conversation available there that has devolved into taking sides and labelling each other.

 

@Dr. Crossbar I’m usually with you on battling unnecessary negativity/whining, but people are suggesting changes that could improve officiating.

 

Not every post is spewing venom/complaining about the outcome. 

 

 

[Dr. Crossbar]

1 minute ago, Huggy Bear said:

There was a good conversation available there that has devolved into taking sides and labelling each other.

 

@Dr. Crossbar I’m usually with you on battling unnecessary negativity/whining, but people are suggesting changes that could improve officiating.

 

Not every post is spewing venom/complaining about the outcome. 

 

 

 

You are taking me way too seriously. Lighten up. 

[EdgarM]

12 hours ago, Canuckfanforlife82 said:

Tired of feeling like teams who are supposed to contend just get calls go there way regardless. It's unfair. Doesn't make sense when you're trying to sell the game. Yes. Rangers are good but they don't need help. How come these refs aren't made accountable. That was blatant. It's a penalty but I just don't feel like calling it. What??? That's your job. In a normal job if you aren't doing it you get disciplined or are fired. Having said that, it is an amazing feeling to finally care about hockey again. The boys are working hard. They didn't give up.

For those who weren't around in 94', this is how it felt like after Game #7. We should have Won, similar to last night.

[Huggy Bear]

2 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

You are taking me way too seriously. Lighten up. 

Seems like you’re antagonizing posters like Deb and PB who are making points I’m interested in.

 

Its derailing a convo I was interested in. Maybe back off a little with antagonizing people. You’re not troll hunting, you’re starting shit.

 

 

Edited October 29, 2023 by Huggy Bear

[stawns]

28 minutes ago, Goal_thecup said:

No.  (Duh)

So, game management is acceptable then, no?

40 minutes ago, Silent Man said:

This is true, but NHL should at very least try to do something about it .

At least to show that they are concerned.

What is it you think they should do?  There's not a pool of officials out there better than the ones already in the NHL 

[Ghostsof1915]

11 minutes ago, Barnstorm said:

I’m still waiting for “ they’re the best of the best”.

Should be picture of Ron McLean saying that....

[PhillipBlunt]

2 minutes ago, JayDangles said:

I've made great points, you just don't want to let it go.

You’ve made points. They really didn’t hit the mark, unless the mark is to excuse poor job performance. 

2 minutes ago, JayDangles said:

There 82 games in a season played by 32 teams. The vast majority of the time the refs do a hell of a job.

Ah, I see the crux of your “great” points. To defend the officials. 

2 minutes ago, JayDangles said:

You want to hold them accountable for the exception, not the rule.

Wrong. I want them to be accountable as an officiating body in totality. Your myopic view of the situation prevents you from seeing that. 

2 minutes ago, JayDangles said:

Which as I said, will only result in zero refs wanting to do that job.

You don’t think there’s a line miles long of people waiting to get a plumb job as a ref in the NHL? Sorry your assertion here is so off the mark it must be satirical. 

2 minutes ago, JayDangles said:

Won't change a damn thing on the ice. 

Let it go.

And that’s how the NHL likes it to be. No accountability and total protective measures against any and all criticism. 

[Elias Pettersson]

6 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Not at all. I loved the game the Canucks played. They were easily the better, stronger, stiffer team. 

 

[stawns]

44 minutes ago, Huggy Bear said:

My post literally started with “they can’t get them all right.”  That is accepting human fallibility.

 

“Putting the whistles away in OT,” is not human fallibility. It’s calling the same rules inconsistently at different parts of the game.

 

Opening up video reviews to more calls also accepts human fallibility, and improves consistency.

 

Seems like you’re in autopilot defending the refs, and didn’t take the time to read or understand my post.

 

 

 

How long do you want games to be?  I'd bet the players would rather deal with questionable calls (or non calls), than long stoppages that stop the flow of a game 

[stawns]

1 hour ago, spook007 said:

Probably not, but then the way games are being refereed should be maybe be changed...

Its was not a hard penalty to spot... so slashing can be called/missed or interferences etc... but a blatant incidents that decides a hockey game is poor...

 

It took two replays (1 from each angle to clearly spot the trip).... They have people sitting watching the game on monitors everywhere, so there really is no excuse for not getting calls like these correct... 

 

To say poor decisions are ok because other refs aren't any better, doesn't make sense... 

I don't think the refs were poor in general, although the 5 on 3 because of the too many men was a bit dodgy at best..... although correct'ish by the letter of the law

Maybe an ot rule for review, but they can't have multiple stoppages in a game.......games are already far too long with reviews, commercial breaks etc.

[Huggy Bear]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

How long do you want games to be?  I'd bet the players would rather deal with questionable calls (or non calls), than long stoppages that stop the flow of a game 

how much longer did games get when they added review for offsides?