HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Will the ref lose his job?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-14-2004, 07:00 PM
  #26
Winston Wolf
Registered User
 
Winston Wolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Oahu, HI
Posts: 7,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rye&ginger
2004: Kovalev is slashed, its clearly a penalty, and it directly leads to an OT goal for the offending team.
Are you serious? No way in hell was that a penalty. It was just a lame attempt to draw a penalty by Kovalev.

Winston Wolf is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 07:23 PM
  #27
Sammy*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rye&ginger
2004: Kovalev is slashed, its clearly a penalty, and it directly leads to an OT goal for the offending team.
Do you even know spell hockey?. Have you ever even seen that replay?
That was not even close to a penalty.

Sammy* is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 07:42 PM
  #28
Bandwagoner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 249
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy
Do you even know spell hockey?. Have you ever even seen that replay?
That was not even close to a penalty.
Maybe the problem he has watched the replay too many times, the refs don't have the "replay" luxury. But I still agree, that is not a penalty.

Bandwagoner is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 07:54 PM
  #29
BCCHL inactive
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country:
Posts: 10,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandwagoner
Maybe the problem he has watched the replay too many times, the refs don't have the "replay" luxury.
This is a huge contributor to fans everywhere complaining about officiating. I'll sit and watch a game with some friends, and when they question a call, they all say, "lets see a replay", and upon that replay, they judge whether or not they think the referees suck....obviously failing to realize that the referees see from one angle at full speed with no replays.


Here is part of an interview with linesman Randy Mitton...

HockeyRefs.com: What is your opinion of the two referee-two linesmen system? Do we really need it?

Mitton: In my opinion the two-referee system is the best because the speed of the game has increased so much over the years. Sure there is going to be criticism, but, people forget how much there was with only one referee. Also, when you consider how much had to cover for the referees it makes sense to me that we stay with two. It also allows the linesmen to do their jobs, which is becoming increasingly difficult due to the speed of the game and the technology with TV cameras that are exposing more mistakes that the officials make.

BCCHL inactive is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 08:03 PM
  #30
Winston Wolf
Registered User
 
Winston Wolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Oahu, HI
Posts: 7,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandwagoner
Maybe the problem he has watched the replay too many times, the refs don't have the "replay" luxury. But I still agree, that is not a penalty.
Maybe on other plays, but in this certain circumstance it just becomes more and more obvious that it wasn't a penalty each and every time you watch it.

Winston Wolf is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 08:13 PM
  #31
Snakeeye
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Calgary
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Albino
It's Souray's responsibility to play smart defense. You can't go around skating with your head down assuming your teammates will not be in the way. Yes, Kovalev is partly to blame, but he supposedly has the slash as an excuse. Souray should have played smarter. Add to it that Souray was making dumb decisions all night, and it isn't too far-fetched to believe that he wasn't thinking straight on that play.
Souray should have played smarter indeed. How DARE he not pay attention to a guy embellishing an "injury" skating into his path.

Snakeeye is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 08:17 PM
  #32
Sammy*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyers guy
Maybe on other plays, but in this certain circumstance it just becomes more and more obvious that it wasn't a penalty each and every time you watch it.
No kidding. I doubt I have never seen an attempt at drawing a penalty that was that blatantly a fake. The guy barely touched the back of Kovy's pants.

Sammy* is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 08:30 PM
  #33
BCCHL inactive
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country:
Posts: 10,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy
No kidding. I doubt I have never seen an attempt at drawing a penalty that was that blatantly a fake. The guy barely touched the back of Kovy's pants.
He did get Kovalev on the glove, but it wasn't even a love tap.

The tape job Kovalev had on his hand today was pretty weak.

BCCHL inactive is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 09:04 PM
  #34
ZombieMatt
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
That was not a clear penalty.

No ref in the playoffs calls that tap a penalty in overtime.

ZombieMatt is offline  
Old
04-14-2004, 10:24 PM
  #35
Sammy*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
He did get Kovalev on the glove, but it wasn't even a love tap.

The tape job Kovalev had on his hand today was pretty weak.
No Van, he was referring to the disgraceful display Kovalev put forth in '94 in the playoffs.
Talk about Karma, this latest Riberio/Kovalev disgrace is the definition of it.

Sammy* is offline  
Old
04-15-2004, 12:09 AM
  #36
gb701
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakes
Im not a Habs fan, and I thought there should have been a penalty there. The slash looked like it was above the glove on the wrist and that would have hurt like hell.. Kovalev should have done a "Ribeiro".
The picture today of Kovalev's "injury" shows tape down on the knuckles. The tap (which is what it was - hardly a "slash") was on the gloves not the wrist.

I have no idea why Kov thought he could draw a penalty in that situation - or maybe he just has a very low pain threshold. A 6 year old has hit my hands harder playing shinny in the backyard.

Between crappy tending, and dives and quitters, Montreal is managing to look about as bad as I have ever seen them - despite playing some pretty good hockey against a team that was supposed to dominate them. Too bad.

gb701 is offline  
Old
04-15-2004, 01:32 AM
  #37
Gibsons Finest
Beast
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon/Brandon
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,352
vCash: 500
In Kovalev's defense, getting hit in an unprotected area with a stick hurt like hell. It looked like it was above the padding, and that would hurt. That happened to me a couple years back, and it really did hurt.

While come may argue he should've continued the play, he likely couldn't have, as when you get slashed on the bone, there's so much pain that any slight movement is nearly unbearable. So he tried to get out of the way, and Souray skated heads down into him.

So Kovalev wasn't likely faking anything, rather embellishing a lesser injury. But, yeah, it hurts like a b*tch when the bones gets slashed. And not that Souray's in the wrong, but he shouldn't blame Kovalev when he could've avoided colliding with him by keeping his head up, which is something he should be doing anyway.

Gibsons Finest is offline  
Old
04-15-2004, 02:23 AM
  #38
Crosbyfan
Registered User
 
Crosbyfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 7,651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyers guy
Maybe on other plays, but in this certain circumstance it just becomes more and more obvious that it wasn't a penalty each and every time you watch it.
So Green's "nonslash" swing of the stick at the hands was the right play then? Tf that is legal that is the "correct" play, swing at the hands if you cannot engage otherwise. Not defending Kovalev one way or the other but if chopping to the hands is legal then that is what should be done and any "accidental" damage to the player would just be an unintended bonus.

Personally I think the refs had "established" that anything less than malicious was legal unless it directly stopped or lead to a scoring chance. What Green did was below the threshold only because it was overtime. Something the refs won't call unless the player seems hurt. So Kovalev "must" embellish unless he doesn't want a penalty called. The "correct" plays for Kovalev should have been playing/protecting the puck while embellishing or dropping to a "Full Robiero" with all the necessary fetal position convulsions. Nothing in between.

Sad game.

Crosbyfan is offline  
Old
04-15-2004, 02:39 AM
  #39
Ol' Dirty Chinaman*
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: I'm bottled fizzy wa
Posts: 1,926
vCash: 500
Were any slashing calls made during the game ?

If yes, then it should have been a penalty.

If not, then it should not be a penalty.

Consistency, it needs to be hammered into the refs.

Ol' Dirty Chinaman* is offline  
Old
04-15-2004, 03:48 AM
  #40
BCCHL inactive
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country:
Posts: 10,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ol' Dirty Chinaman
Were any slashing calls made during the game ?

If yes, then it should have been a penalty.

If not, then it should not be a penalty.

Consistency, it needs to be hammered into the refs.
It's not that simple.

The question would be if there were any slashes that minute called during the game.

BCCHL inactive is offline  
Old
04-15-2004, 03:53 AM
  #41
Swedish Bolt Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: win it again
Posts: 1,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
That's like comparing apples to oranges. Each sport has its own way of officiating. Hockey has always been like this.




It wasn't wrong. The referees judged the play to not be a penalty. That is well within their rights as referees. You might not agree with their judgment, but that's all it is....a disagreement between you and the officials. It wasn't wrong.

So lets see Player A takes his stick and 2handed swings it towards the head of player B and the ref sees it but doesnt call it. that is just a disagreement between you and the refs "flum excuse for blowing a game (game management)"


I and many many many more find it disturbing that a the level of officiating goes down the toilet and the whizzles gets put away for anything but murder in OT. that is NOT letting the players decide the outcome of the game, that is letting the inmates run the asylum

Swedish Bolt Fan is offline  
Old
04-15-2004, 03:56 AM
  #42
Swedish Bolt Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: win it again
Posts: 1,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ducksflytogether
In Kovalev's defense, getting hit in an unprotected area with a stick hurt like hell. It looked like it was above the padding, and that would hurt. That happened to me a couple years back, and it really did hurt.

While come may argue he should've continued the play, he likely couldn't have, as when you get slashed on the bone, there's so much pain that any slight movement is nearly unbearable. So he tried to get out of the way, and Souray skated heads down into him.

So Kovalev wasn't likely faking anything, rather embellishing a lesser injury. But, yeah, it hurts like a b*tch when the bones gets slashed. And not that Souray's in the wrong, but he shouldn't blame Kovalev when he could've avoided colliding with him by keeping his head up, which is something he should be doing anyway.
Next time Souray skates with his head down i am sure a Stevens impersonator will line him up and clean his clock

Swedish Bolt Fan is offline  
Old
04-15-2004, 08:47 AM
  #43
Higgy4
Registered User
 
Higgy4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toledo, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 7,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ol' Dirty Chinaman
Were any slashing calls made during the game ?

If yes, then it should have been a penalty.

If not, then it should not be a penalty.

Consistency, it needs to be hammered into the refs.

So if a slashing penalty is called lets say...in the first minute of the 1st period, then EVERY slash should be called the rest of the game.

Well then...get ready for a loooooooooooooooong game. Slashing in hockey is like holding in football. Its everywhere.

There are different kinds of slashes. All of you should know this by now. A slash like the one Green landed on Kovalev in double OT is not a penalty in my book. Doesnt bother me at all that no penalty was called. I am not a fan of either team here, I dont care who wins. I agree 100% with the non-call.

Higgy4 is offline  
Old
04-15-2004, 09:33 AM
  #44
JV
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: na
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,482
vCash: 500
The only bizarre thing about the play was that Kovalev couldn't find the will to play the puck to a teammate, to kick or it, or push it with one hand on his stick and then get off the ice. Had he done that, nobody would be complaining about the "slash" unless it had broken a bone.

If Kovalev and Souray don't manage to give the puck to Murray for a clean break, Green's stickwork would hardly have attracted much attention.

If there's no turnover, Bruins fans would have had much more to complain about if a penalty were called than Habs fans would for a no-call. It's only because of how Souray and Kovalev managed to turn it into the most important play of the game that anyone's talking about it at all. But that's not the fault of the refs.

JV is offline  
Old
04-15-2004, 05:37 PM
  #45
Winston Wolf
Registered User
 
Winston Wolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Oahu, HI
Posts: 7,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crosbyfan
Not defending Kovalev one way or the other but if chopping to the hands is legal then that is what should be done and any "accidental" damage to the player would just be an unintended bonus.
I'm not sure you've seen the play if you describe the motion as "chopping." It was more like "tapping." Green hardly even made contact.

Winston Wolf is offline  
Old
04-15-2004, 09:14 PM
  #46
rye&ginger
Registered User
 
rye&ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
That's like comparing apples to oranges. Each sport has its own way of officiating. Hockey has always been like this.

The premise of sport officials in general is to hold up the rules of the game. Hockey doesnt do that. Just because it always been like that doesnt mean its not a problem. Maybe we should go back to not allowing women to vote if being a stick in the mud is acceptable.

rye&ginger is offline  
Old
04-15-2004, 09:40 PM
  #47
Crosbyfan
Registered User
 
Crosbyfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 7,651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyers guy
I'm not sure you've seen the play if you describe the motion as "chopping." It was more like "tapping." Green hardly even made contact.
I'm not sure you've seen the play if you describe the motion as "tapping." It was more like "chopping."

Crosbyfan is offline  
Old
04-15-2004, 10:29 PM
  #48
BCCHL inactive
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country:
Posts: 10,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rye&ginger
The premise of sport officials in general is to hold up the rules of the game. Hockey doesnt do that. Just because it always been like that doesnt mean its not a problem.
The premise of hockey officiating is to apply the rules as the referee sees fit, so long as he keeps the game fair and safe for both teams.

Ask coaches and players what they would rather have....the system that has always been there, or every single possible infraction being called. I guarantee the majority says the former.

BCCHL inactive is offline  
Old
04-16-2004, 01:11 AM
  #49
rye&ginger
Registered User
 
rye&ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,156
vCash: 500
You forgot to add the infractions being called in a conistent manner, which is what I am asking for. Not call everything and anything.

The main point I had was the last part of my first post, about the advantage rule. This could make up for some of the consistency issues in hockey and lead to fewer critical errors by officals. We want the players to make those.

rye&ginger is offline  
Old
04-16-2004, 01:25 AM
  #50
Higgy4
Registered User
 
Higgy4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toledo, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 7,548
vCash: 500
Officiating is always going to be to blame for whichever team loses.

Here's a suggestion. We all know that the officiating is always going to be debateable. So...get over it. Its almost always bad BOTH WAYS. So the game still comes down to whichever team plays better.

Seriously...get over it.

Higgy4 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:31 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.