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

[Optimist Prime]

1 hour ago, Goal_thecup said:

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

That Island air makes for some mighty good thinking.

 

I drink an I know things. 

[XxNaslundxX]

41 minutes ago, coolboarder said:

With the technology we have now, why couldn't they even buzz it in for too many men?  It is fairly easy to track and buzz it in and ref should wear the earpiece and use their judgment.  That is given them a better tool so that they do not miss too many men calls for other teams.  It should be a black and white type that go along with black and white call with over the glass penalty.  Rest of other penalties are very subjective and their visual interpretation are different from other ref on the same play.   

I like this idea because eliminates something critical that the reffs even need to think about, thus being able to focus more on the play then counting the guys skating away from it. 

[Canuckle]

21 minutes ago, -dlc- said:

So that's acceptable? Needs no attention or review?

 

And if they "miss" things for one team (only) it really slants a game. They missed a few things that the Canucks were penalized for but the Rangers were not.

 

Acceptable or unacceptable, it is what it is. NHL hockey is simply a game played in the grey-- it's the entire nature of the sport.  That's all I can really say.

[-dlc-]

1 minute ago, Canuckle said:

 

Acceptable or unacceptable, it is what it is. NHL hockey is simply a game played in the grey-- it's the entire nature of the sport.  That's all I can really say.

Things progress over time and the NHL is included in that. So no...it's not simply a game played in the grey and that's the entire nature of the sport. They're constantly changing things to make it more black and white. Clearly defined. But they're inconsistently doing so, which is where the problem lies.

 

If you trip a guy...it's a penalty. Or supposed to be.

[testycal]

I need to be enlightened on the call.  Was it a knee being extended to trip him or did Petey just get pushed over ie the other player too the man or perhaps in between, did the other player stick his back-end out and in the process his leg tripped Petey? Or a combination?

 

 

[Canuckle]

17 minutes ago, -dlc- said:

Things progress over time and the NHL is included in that. So no...it's not simply a game played in the grey and that's the entire nature of the sport. They're constantly changing things to make it more black and white. Clearly defined. But they're inconsistently doing so, which is where the problem lies.

 

If you trip a guy...it's a penalty. Or supposed to be.

 

But it is the nature of the sport. There are probably 100 times a game things could get called that don't. And calling games 100% to the rulebook would be boring as hell. Might as well watch novice hockey at that point. Somethings evolve, yes. But we can't always find black and white answers with a black and white approach to  "missed calls" -- The NHL game (and frankly hockey in general) would literally cease to be the game it is... especially in 3 on 3 overtime and exponentially so in the playoffs in the NHL.

 

A trip isn't always a trip. A hit in the numbers isn't always a hit from behind. We can analyze and interpret a million things in a million ways... doesnt make it the right answer though, especially if we aren't looking at the context and  metaethics of the particular game in question as @Gawdzukes was alluding to their previous post. There's simply more to this than "an infraction is always penalty."  The answer is almost always: It depends.

Edited October 30, 2023 by Canuckle

[Pure961089]

Thought this was so true. Man I thought the Canucks were in bad shape with the OEL trade but the Flames are in for a world of hurt. The next 8 years are gonna be brutal. Thanks Treliving. 

 

 

 

[-dlc-]

1 minute ago, Canuckle said:

 

But it is the nature of the sport. There are probably 100 times a game things could get called that don't. And calling games 100% to the rulebook would be boring as hell. Might as well watch novice hockey at that point. Somethings evolve, yes. But we can't always find black and white answers with a black and white approach to  "missed calls" -- The NHL game (and frankly hockey in general) would literally cease to be the game it is... especially in 3 on 3 overtime and exponentially so in the playoffs in the NHL.

 

A trip isn't always a trip. A hit in the numbers isn't always a hit from behind. We can analyze and interpret a million things in a million ways... doesnt make it the right answer though, especially if we aren't looking at the context and  metaethics of the particular game in question as @Gawdzukes was alluding to their previous post. There's simply more to this than "an infraction is always penalty."  The answer is almost always: Maybe.

When isn't a trip a trip?

[Canuckle]

Just now, -dlc- said:

When isn't a trip a trip?

The action of a trip is a trip but when I say that I mean not all trips are  infractions.  Context; subjectivity; a game played in the grey.

[Huggy Bear]

1 hour ago, Canuckle said:

Dismissing and handwaving the reality of the NHL game is why you don't see "the evidence." The evidence is the way the entire game is played itself.

 

Yes, 8 messages ago we settled on agree to disagree but you kept on replying after.  Apparently not actually agreeing to disagree? Lol.

 

But yes. We can leave it here.  Have a good day.

I’ll give you the last word on the subject. Thanks for the conversation - cheers buddy.

[-dlc-]

5 minutes ago, Canuckle said:

The action of a trip is a trip but when I say that I mean not all trips are  infractions.  Context; subjectivity; a game played in the grey.

So what trips aren't infractions? You're trying to make it grey but I'm not convinced that it is.

[JIAHN]

I have been thinking about this discussion all day............

 

The thing is............

 

I love my team, and I hate the other teams

But I love talent in general

But we are playing hockey, if no mistakes happen, it's zero - zero and no one gets past center

 

I hate when the other team, scores, throws an elbow, trips, fights, cross checks, etc

But if we take that out of the game, by making reffing so good (aka AI)

We take the emotion out of it...............that is boring

 

IMO, I think everyone on these boards, would love to watch @-dlc- watch a game

In a terrible reffed game against the Canucks.......

You may not be able to take your children, but LOL, it would be worth the game cost

 

My point is not to pick on Deb, but to illustrate the emotion in the game

and what it draws out in, what would be normally a well adjusted, mature person

 

I love it, and I guess, I would rather have that, and have a less clinical game

than to watch a vanilla game, which is refed to the point of boredom

 

So, in saying that, Go ahead bitch, complain, scream, and shout

Voice your opinion, like we are experts.....

and get ready for the next game to do it all over again! LOL

 

Love it!

[Silent Man]

1 minute ago, JIAHN said:

I have been thinking about this discussion all day............

 

The thing is............

 

I love my team, and I hate the other teams

But I love talent in general

But we are playing hockey, if no mistakes happen, it's zero - zero and no one gets past center

 

I hate when the other team, scores, throws an elbow, trips, fights, cross checks, etc

But if we take that out of the game, by making reffing so good (aka AI)

We take the emotion out of it...............that is boring

 

IMO, I think everyone on these boards, would love to watch @-dlc- watch a game

In a terrible reffed game against the Canucks.......

You may not be able to take your children, but LOL, it would be worth the game cost

 

My point is not to pick on Deb, but to illustrate the emotion in the game

and what it draws out in, what would be normally a well adjusted, mature person

 

I love it, and I guess, I would rather have that, and have a less clinical game

than to watch a vanilla game, which is refed to the point of boredom

 

So, in saying that, Go ahead bitch, complain, scream, and shout

Voice your opinion, like we are experts.....

and get ready for the next game to do it all over again! LOL

 

Love it!

Wow, just wow.

[qwijjibo]

Calls get missed going both ways. It happens EVERY game. People are fine with it when it benefits the Canucks.  Rather than blaming the refs for the loss maybe look at the 1 for 6 powerplay.  

[Lemon Face]

31 minutes ago, -dlc- said:

When isn't a trip a trip?

We dont talking here about implementing rules.Talk should be about one sided calls.Big clubs vs small,big players against rookies.Refs should protect game of hockey,not play gods

[Pure961089]

Summing up the Canucks Defence over the last few years

 

 

 

[Canuckle]

3 minutes ago, -dlc- said:

So what trips aren't infractions? You're trying to make it grey but I'm not convinced that it is.

 

Think about how many things happen in a given game that go uncalled. Not even major blatant things but everything. I know you're educated on the sport here. Think in terms of a puck battle with multiple players in corner and all the sneaky shit guys do.  Stick holding, cross checking, holding, tripping, cup checking, lol.  etc. Damn near all of it could be called if taking a hard black and white approach to the game.

 

Sometimes X action, while prohibited in the rule book, isn't actually an infraction; the context of the situation is important.

 

Are we saying these ones over here  are ok because it's a battle? Are all these all not 100% penalty worthy? A black and white approach says they are and they should sit in the box for it.

 

But what do we usually say when 50 calls a game happens, "Jesus christ ref. Put the whistle away and let them play!"

 

Either we accept that things purposely (and sometimes not purposely) get called as 'part of the game" or we don't. We can't have it both ways here.

 

If those actions (and uncalled infractions) aren't ever ok, then none of them are, and then we're talking about a vastly different game that isn't NHL hockey with men competing against men. And I mean that in the most literal sense of the term.

[Ds4quality]

4 minutes ago, qwijjibo said:

Calls get missed going both ways. It happens EVERY game. People are fine with it when it benefits the Canucks.  Rather than blaming the refs for the loss maybe look at the 1 for 6 powerplay.  

So much perimeter play. They need to move the puck much faster and shoot from in close. They have to start getting shots on goal too, so many shots on the powerplay were wide, blocked, or in the crest. 

 

But props to Rangers pk, they had sticks and bodies in every passing seam

[-dlc-]

7 minutes ago, Canuckle said:

 

Think about how many things happen in a given game that go uncalled. Not even major blatant things but everything. I know you're educated on the sport here. Think in terms of a puck battle with multiple players in corner and all the sneaky shit guys do.  Stick holding, cross checking, holding, tripping, cup checking, lol.  etc. Damn near all of it could be called if taking a hard black and white approach to the game.

 

Sometimes X action, while prohibited in the rule book, isn't actually an infraction; the context of the situation is important.

 

Are we saying these ones over here  are ok because it's a battle? Are all these all not 100% penalty worthy? A black and white approach says they are and they should sit in the box for it.

 

But what do we usually say when 50 calls a game happens, "Jesus christ ref. Put the whistle away and let them play!"

 

Either we accept that things purposely (and sometimes not purposely) get called as 'part of the game" or we don't. We can't have it both ways here.

 

If those actions (and uncalled infractions) aren't ever ok, then none of them are, and then we're talking about a vastly different game that isn't NHL hockey with men competing against men. And I mean that in the most literal sense of the term.

You've written a wall of text but have failed to answer a simple, direct question. 

 

So again: what trips aren't infractions?  You've completely avoided answering that.

[The Duke]

As a random thought, we have a pretty good schedule to start the year.  
 

Only the one back to back and some nice time to settle in with a few practices. 
 

Nice to see we haven’t squandered it either.

[The Duke]

15 minutes ago, Pure961089 said:

Summing up the Canucks Defence over the last few years

 

 

 

For some reason I felt this should be Hronek.  

I know Hughes has taken it up a step this year but he’s always been great. Even alongside a lot of those flubs. I’m fully convinced the previous management could have made the exact same trade for Hronek and he’d still be on the IR with a setback to his shoulder recovery or whatever. 
 

Who was drafted with the Hronek 1st, too? It’s someone pretty good but you never hear about them. We’re living in a different world.

Edited October 30, 2023 by The Duke

[Ds4quality]

So I guess we'll be over .500 heading into November that's pretty good. 

[RWJC]

MUST check out this video as it’ shows a very convincing way to deal with crap reffing.
Still can’t believe this occurred:

 

 

Edited October 30, 2023 by RWJC

[Gawdzukes]

1 hour ago, -dlc- said:

So what trips aren't infractions? You're trying to make it grey but I'm not convinced that it is.

 

Don't you notice that lots of minor infractions go uncalled unless they negate a scoring chance or create a scoring chance? Especially when they put the whistles away in the playoffs.

[Barn Burner]

11 hours ago, JayDangles said:

What I'm saying is buddy wants the reffs to answer publicly simply to make him feel better. To help him through his emotions when things don't go our way.

 

It won't actually change the outcome of the game that already happened.

I don't care about making me feel better or anyone else, but the refs, like anyone else, should be held accountable.  

 

Having said that, it's not something that I'm going to dwell on. Overall, back-to-back game, with the backup goalie, the team played a real solid game. 

 

Let's keep up the hard work.