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

[-dlc-]

1 minute ago, RupertKBD said:

while the second was because of too many men on the ice. Both of those are automatic calls.

 

Are they though?

 

They didn't call the Rangers when they had 7 guys out there. They SHOULD BE. Which is sort of what we're arguing.

[Goal_thecup]

29 minutes ago, Huggy Bear said:

Having the game decided by the wrong call ruins the experience. A review last night would vindicate the Rangers win, and satisfy the Canucks, and their fans. 

 

 

I haven't caught up with y'all yet, I'm still back on about page 20, but up to there, I have been reading the arguments and enjoying the discussion.

As evidenced by my inclusions of the Otto and Hull debacles (even if I did mix them up, or not?), I believe these incidents are a travesty.

 

Like others, I am concerned with killing the golden goose with over-examining the cracked shells left by the golden chick. lol

In other words, there should be no delay in the event (GWG in OT), the call, and the celebrations.

 

They need something that makes the correct decision almost immediately; this is not to be confused with the "needs to be good enough to overturn the ref's call" bs; it just needs to be right, and right away*.  Effed if I know how to do that.  Maybe its in the next 5 pages lol.

*somewhat quicker than asap.

[Canuckle]

52 minutes ago, Huggy Bear said:

You were claiming everything would be reviewable, when only GWG OT goals were being discussed.

 

Yes, because it's the same thing. Making missed, subjective infractions reviewable doesn't make the game better. It makes it worse given the reality of how the game itself is played. Why even have 3 on 3 hockey at that point.

 

Do you how many penalties in overtime SHOULD be called already?? Lol. Not even just the egregious ones-- The whole damn format is "let the boys play."

 

Frankly, the proposition itself is a joke.

 

59 minutes ago, Huggy Bear said:

You keep repeating that more coaches challenges will change the very fabric of hockey. It’s hyperbolic, slippery slope nonsense. The facts are that last year there were 208 challenges last season, and over 2/3rds were overturned. There is no evidence that this removed physicality from the game. Correcting 148 erroneous calls added integrity to the game. That’s the exact opposite of what you’re saying. What evidence do you have to support your opinion?

 

There no evidence that a coaches challenge is needed for subjective missed calls either.  In fact all the evidence points against it given what the game of hockey is itself... especially in OT, as yes I repeat again and will continue repeating because the answer is the same.

[RupertKBD]

6 minutes ago, -dlc- said:

 

Are they though?

 

They didn't call the Rangers when they had 7 guys out there. They SHOULD BE. Which is sort of what we're arguing.

 If they see them, yes. The point being, they aren't subjective calls.

[Rekker]

7 minutes ago, -dlc- said:

 

Are they though?

 

They didn't call the Rangers when they had 7 guys out there. They SHOULD BE. Which is sort of what we're arguing.

Zing. Remind me to never mess with you Deb.

[4petesake]

27 minutes ago, Goal_thecup said:

Me too, but Petey was spittin' nails with his mouth and laser strikes with his eyes.

Anybody got that clip?

 

You can see it on the Tocchet after hours thingy at 46 seconds.

Pissed Petey means business.

 

 

 

 

 

[Rekker]

Just now, RupertKBD said:

 If they see them, yes. The point being, they aren't subjective calls.

Debs on a mission Rupert, she's gonna take this one. Maybe best to go watch football, lol.

[RupertKBD]

Just now, Rekker said:

Debs on a mission Rupert, she's gonna take this one. Maybe best to go watch football, lol.

 

People are welcome to "be on a mission". That doesn't change facts.

[Goal_thecup]

3 hours ago, Optimist Prime said:

Being a big fan of tech, and how it has changed the game in National Defense, I wonder if there is a seamless (very little added time to a game broadcast) integration that the league is missing. 

 

Very basic concept: the war room at league HQ's has direct line via earbud to the head ref, backup to the timekeeper obviously for consistency purposes. A situation like OT and late game scoring that define the outcome are monitored in real time by special referee's at the war room: if the ref's miss a penalty like, say, Petey being tripped: they don't make the ref stop the game, but instead keep a flag on it in case of a goal. In the event the control of the puck changes teams, then that flagged event is wiped off the board. Seems simple enough to me: then when the goal happened last night, the war room would have the flagged event noted and a review is automatic.

The war room special refs would instanty start work on deciding if the trip was a penalty or if it was incidental contact, then if a defining moment like a goal occurs, the answer is almost completed in its analysis by the special refs, earbud findings to the head ref on the ice, and carry on like normal.

 

I know that is close to how they do it now, but not exactly. 

 

I'm still on page 20 but, this sounds like it would work.

That Island air makes for some mighty good thinking.

 

[Shift-4]

[Goal_thecup]

4 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

 

You can see it on the Tocchet after hours thingy at 46 seconds.

Pissed Petey means business.

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks.  You're good for Pete's sake!  I'll say that.

[RupertKBD]

3 minutes ago, Shift-4 said:

 

My feeling as well.

 

We get screwed by a missed call and it's time to re-write the rule book.

 

It's happened before and it's going to happen again. Might as well get comfortable with the idea.....

[Barnstorm]

Dollars to donuts says you won’t see any blatantly poor officiating in todays “ Bettman’s Battle for the Basement”

event.

They will have  been told that under no circumstances are they to sully his little pet project. Too many eyes watching to allow that.

[Shift-4]

Just now, RupertKBD said:

 

My feeling as well.

 

We get screwed by a missed call and it's time to re-write the rule book.

 

It's happened before and it's going to happen again. Might as well get comfortable with the idea.....

 

One more PP goal by the good guys and there is no discussion. Canucks had plenty of opportunity to win the game. Seize that opportunity. If you sit around expecting the refs to get it right all the time you forever get to whine from the loser column.

[Canuckle]

13 minutes ago, -dlc- said:

Hitting and battles that fall within the boundaries would be fine...it's the stuff that crosses the line. You're making a scenario that just isn't so...boring? I find it boring when a play ends on a note like it did rather than an exciting battle where the best team wins. Not the one that gets an advantage.

 

There's a happy medium to be struck between what you're portraying and what some are suggesting would help the league with credibility and fairness.

But we have to think about this in actually existing reality. Look, I would like to see fairness as well, but think about what overtime is and how the players play. The battles, picks, grabbing, hooking, battling for position. 95% of the shit they do to eachother 3 on 3 could easily be called. And when OT kicks in, the time when they want to "let the boys play" we suddenly scrutinize over every little thing that could overturn a goal? That's the realistic outcome here. And  "crosses the line" is already subjective enough even in regulation just based on how the game itself is played.

[Goal_thecup]

16 hours ago, Jaimito said:

 

 

 

Thanks @Jaimito.  I reposted it here so people can check out The Spitting Lasers Death Stare of Elias Fucking Pettersson!

Only a short 46 seconds in! 

Get some!  While its hot. 

Petey Death Stare.  Wilting NHL official. 

FREE!

[Gawdzukes]

5 hours ago, RupertKBD said:

Late to the party (as usual ) and I'm not going to read through the thread, so apologies if I'm just repeating what has already been said....

 

I'm going with the "glass half full" opinion after this one.

 

Yes, I think the zebras missed the call on the takedown of Petey, but this is the NHL and we all know how reluctant referees are to cal penalties in OT. If I had to bet on it, I'd wager they wish they had made the call, after they saw the result, but as Rickey says, "it's all water under the fridge"....

 

Bottom line: The Canucks had several excellent chances and pretty much dominated OT. Iggy was just too good last night.

 

The good news is, they got a point out of a game where they trailed late. They got it against a top tier opponent and they did so with their backup goalie. Another plus is the extra point the Rags got doesn't really hurt the 'Nucks in the standings. Yes, the extra point would have been nice to get, but there's no guarantee it would have happened, had they gone to a shootout. The way Shesterkin was playing, it would have been tough....

 

I'll take the point....

 

I like this approach. Despite the controversial missed call our team has been great and so far the season is an absolute pleasure. We should be happy as a fanbase. Still got a point and tied for 5th overall.

 

5 hours ago, Canuckle said:

 

Doesn't matter when it is. If we're talking about a game like hockey being called 100% to the rule book, the game would be dead as we know it. Hockey comes packaged with subjectively missed calls in damn near every facet of the game and would call into question the entire intregity of the game itself.

 

I think Pettersson was tripped, too. But some things in this sport aren't reviewable for good reason.

 

You are spot on this topic my good sir. You could literally call many penalties on every shift of hockey if you're looking for it. As a result the game is and needs to be "continually managed" at the referee's discretion. You have to accept that you're going to be on the wrong side of calls sometimes

 

4 hours ago, JIAHN said:

So, I am the ref.

 

I am watching Petersson, then out of the corner of my eye, I see a spear or some interference, and I watch out of the said "corner of my eye", and out of the other corner of the other eye,  Petersson goes down. Wait, I say, did I see that? Am I sure? Oh. those other guys are jawing, oh, ok, they are separating, good, oh, the fans are booing, I must have missed something, I guess I will see it later, oh, shit! I got to get going, Friggin turn over............

 

All happing in a split second.............yes, some very obvious things get missed..........and it sucks, when they happen to our team

 

 

 

 

 

Great post and shows strong insight. For anyone that's ever refed they will tell you how hard it is. I didn't actually watch the game live but when I watched the play after the fact I could easily understand the ref not calling it. I have seen that same play not called a thousand times before. Petterson makes un unorthodox move tricking the defender and gets tripped up in the process. I assume the ref interpreted it as incidental contact and probably didn't want to call a penalty in OT in the offensive zone. Then they come back and score on it. Ugggg well that doesn't look so good lol.

 

I understand those that ask the posters that are so critical if they have ever refed. It's a fair question since if they did maybe they would be more understanding of how easy it is to get it wrong

 

3 hours ago, Canuckle said:

The entire game of hockey is players trying to gain advantage on each other legally and illegally with things being missed and/or purposefully uncalled. I ask, would it even be NHL hockey if it wasn't?

 

Exactly. All game long it's judgement after judgement. They could probably call 50 penalties a game if they went strictly by the book.

 

3 hours ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

That's not a bad idea. Have a secondary team of officials off the ice. Penalty gets called on the ice or off. I'd be open to trying that. 

 

Yeah I think it's got some merit. The World Cup of rugby showcased it very well. To be honest I do like the human factor and invariability though. It's one of the things that keeps it unique and is a game within the game.

 

3 hours ago, Messier_Sucks said:

 

Last year alone there were nearly 100 goals overturned due to offside. That's a substantial number. 

 

 

 

 

Wow, that's kind of insane. Never knew it was so much. They definitely need to get that automated like in soccer. 

 

In soccer they did a study on the linesman calling offsides and it was shown that the human eye doesn't actually have the shutter speed capacity to simultaneously focus on when the passing player releases the ball and also measure whether the receiving player is ahead or behind the last defender.

 

Similarly if one could only imagine the pace at which the NHL is played, the constant cheating from defenders, the # of infractions made behind the plays, and the aggressive nature of the game, is it that much of a stretch to admit and understand the difficult nature of refereeing an NHL game.

 

3 hours ago, Huggy Bear said:

yeah, I can appreciate perspectives informed by experience, but simply asking ‘have you ever reffed a hockey game’ isn’t a replacement for a solid argument. It’s just edging for credibility. @stawns I’d love to hear your reply to my last post, arguing for OT reviews on GWG. Please explain your position based on your experience reffing. 

 

great point

 

You were claiming everything would be reviewable, when only GWG OT goals were being discussed. Who’s not following logic here? it’s okay to admit you missed something or didn’t actually read the post in question.
 

You keep repeating that more coaches challenges will change the very fabric of hockey. It’s hyperbolic, slippery slope nonsense. The facts are that last year there were 208 challenges last season, and over 2/3rds were overturned. There is no evidence that this removed physicality from the game. Correcting 148 erroneous calls added integrity to the game. That’s the exact opposite of what you’re saying. What evidence do you have to support your opinion?

 

That’s a fantastic idea @Gawdzukes. Maybe when offsides becomes automated, we can add these jobs to keep linesmen employed. There will always be some subjectivity to calls, even with video reviews. Well done, sir.
 

 

 

Thanks. Yeah I think some eyes in the sky would definitely help and might be an answer to some of the main concerns. Like I said earlier I don't mind the subjectivity too much myself. It's part of the game for me and is often a factor good or bad. Like you said in a couple posts we have to start somewhere.

 

As far as the "have you ever refereed" comments some have posted I don't think they are coming from a spiteful place at all but more so as an honest question to help garner some insight. For someone who has played for many many years and thought I knew the sport inside and out I couldn't believe how humbling and hard it was to be on the other side of the whistle, and this was when I first started out refereeing 12 year olds in tournaments. I couldn't believe how often I got absorbed into watching the play and missed either a penalty or who committed it, or where the faceoff was supposed to be. Sometimes I was forced to take the word of the fans screaming at me and had to side with the loudest. 

Edited October 30, 2023 by Gawdzukes

[Huggy Bear]

3 minutes ago, Canuckle said:

 

Yes, because it's the same thing. Making missed, subjective infractions reviewable doesn't make the game better. It makes it worse given the reality of how the game itself is played. Why even have 3 on 3 hockey at that point.

 

Do you how many penalties in overtime SHOULD be called already?? Lol. Not even just the egregious ones-- The whole damn format is "let the boys play."

 

Frankly, the proposition itself is a joke.

 

 

There no evidence that a coaches challenge is needed for subjective missed calls either.  In fact all the evidence points against it given what the game of hockey is itself... especially in OT, as yes I repeat again and will continue repeating because the answer is the same.

It’s not the same. Every call is not the same as trying it for about 60 OT calls/non-calls each year. 
 

You keep avoiding the question of how video calls (including subjective non-calls of goalie interference that can happen in 3 on 3 OT) have ANY connection to the physicality or integrity GPG the game. 

 

You also haven’t acknowledged that 68%of challenges calls are overturned, which has improved the integrity of the game. That includes subjective non calls for goalie interference. 
 

The evidence that coaches challenge is needed is in the fans and media reaction to last nights’s OT, and the pages of conversation you’re participating in.

 

If you keep avoiding questions, and can’t provide evidence, we can’t really debate this issue.  Think we had the right idea with agree to disagree.

 

[King Heffy]

12 minutes ago, Canuckle said:

But we have to think about this in actually existing reality. Look, I would like to see fairness as well, but think about what overtime is and how the players play. The battles, picks, grabbing, hooking, battling for position. 95% of the shit they do to eachother 3 on 3 could easily be called. And when OT kicks in, the time when they want to "let the boys play" we suddenly scrutinize over every little thing that could overturn a goal? That's the realistic outcome here. And  "crosses the line" is already subjective enough even in regulation just based on how the game itself is played.

It's sad that the league starting to hold refs accountable for their refusal to conduct themselves appropriately is no longer a realistic outcome.  We're getting close to a point where gambling may be the cause of a lawsuit that will result in the league being forced to fix the issue by a judge.  The current situation cannot be allowed to continue.

[Goal_thecup]

3 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

They do this with soccer.  Offsides and if the ball crossed the goal line are all automated with technology.  It doesn't take long to review this.  Another great example is tennis.  They have the technology to see the ball right away if it is in or out.  Players can't do anything now.  I remember when John McEnroe used to flip chairs and scream at the officials for balls being out or in.  Now it's reviewed in a matter of seconds.

 

Tyey should have the same technology for hockey and they can show it on the jumbotron right away for everyone to see...

Oh-oh, there you go, reminding me of the great Conners McEnroe battles, man that was fun.

I played a lot of tennis in those days; I love the one on one nature of the game.

You could hardly get on the courts in those days and I used to gate-crash the clubs.

Those 2 would swear at each other, the refs, throw shit around, point at the line and rant away.

[Ballisticsports]

16 hours ago, MikeyD said:

Last game I applauded the refs. Tonight was an absolute disgrace. So many missed obvious calls and then they have the gall to call that cheap too many men penalty and then to not call the obvious trip when the guy literally drags his skate in the biggest arc possible...

 

Undeserved two points for New York. 

That is why i was against your game management comment

 

When you said

"As much as we hate it, sometimes game management is necessary to keep the game under control and that phantom call on Hoglander potentially halted a stupid play from happening from a Blues player and the outcome of the game wasn't altered at all". 

 

We shouldn't be ok with it, just because we overcame it and were feeling good

 

 

I don't like game management used on Any team , (A penalty is a penalty, regardless of the period, score or team and how you keep the game and players honest) and I want the players to decide a game, as to why we watch the game

 

[coolboarder]

7 hours ago, Bob Long said:

 

nope. The problem right now is ref's "game manage" because they don't call all that stuff, but figure they have to call some. But they insert themselves into the flow of the game.

 

7 hours ago, stawns said:

They have to, otherwise 95% of the game would be special teams if they call every infection they see.  The game is already. Hugely over officiated.......there's nothing more boring than special teams hockey

Remember in 2010-11, they called every penalty regardless of score and time, it was the best year of hockey ever for all teams.   Nobody recalled a bad refereeing in that year except for the final where they shallowed their whistles.  I think we should go back to that standard.

[Goal_thecup]

3 hours ago, JIAHN said:

I  missed the game last night and thought I would read the last few pages of this thread to catch up.....................God! My mistake!

 

I hate refs, but in saying that, the Refs and Linesmen, have to watch alot of things in a game, 12 legal players, the odd illegal player who is going to the bench, and decides to be part of the action, the bench itself, and the stands. All of this is done in real time. 

 

Not to mention the refs own position, which way he is looking, any distractions, what player has the puck, etc...........

 

You would think all this should not matter, but the truth is, "You" could not do it, and make good call even 10% of the time. Remember, these are the cream of the crop, the worlds best, and we sit and judge them from the comfort of the stands, where we see the lead up to the incident, or the comfort of our own home, where we get the added benefit of instant replay.

 

The time is coming where AI might be incorporated into the game, and there will be very few, if any mistakes. (This could cause 4 1/2 games! ) Anyways, when this happens, the game will be very vanilla, and clean, but it will take time to get there, and to be honest, I am not sure it will be a better game.

 

Just remember in the NFL there could be holding in the line, every play, whistles constantly blowing, and to clean it up, would result in an extremely depleted  group of quarter backs...........how does this apply to the NHL?.........well, for anyone playing junior or above, they will tell you of the small holds, intentional interference, baby spears, gloves in the face, and countless other things, that if a ref blew his whistle on, would make the game painful to watch............

 

All this being said.............sure go ahead and whine.............I do! 

Good stuff Jan, haven't seen you for awhile.

[stawns]

5 minutes ago, coolboarder said:

 

Remember in 2010-11, they called every penalty regardless of score and time, it was the best year of hockey ever for all teams.   Nobody recalled a bad refereeing in that year except for the final where they shallowed their whistles.  I think we should go back to that standard.

They've never called "everything".  The game would be unwatchable if they did

[Canuckleheads Fan]

Each team gets a challenge for missed calls on things like kicking motion and offside leading to a goal, how is this different? It should be added to the rule that any missed call, including a penalty on a play that turns into a goal should be open to challenge. If linesmen can miss an offside call, refs can miss a trip, or a hook causing an odd-man rush, etc. Something like this, especially in OT where a player going down would almost inevitably turn into a odd-man rush, should be open to challenge. 

Edited October 29, 2023 by Canuckleheads Fan