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.

Idea: How To Fix The Reffing

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-27-2004, 02:19 AM
  #1
Volchenkov
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,940
vCash: 500
Idea: How To Fix The Reffing

Its actually a rather simple idea. You take the officials off the ice. You have 4 officials with a whole bunch of TVs, and when any of them see a penalty, they signal the linesman on the ice, who raises his hand and blows the whistle. This way you can have guys who are fat and can't skate and its much easier to train refs. Additionally, its easier to see things when you can see the whole ice. To make sure that nothing gets missed, you keep one ref on the ice as well.

Volchenkov is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 02:22 AM
  #2
BCCHL inactive
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country:
Posts: 10,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volchenkov
Its actually a rather simple idea. You take the officials off the ice. You have 4 officials with a whole bunch of TVs, and when any of them see a penalty, they signal the linesman on the ice, who raises his hand and blows the whistle. This way you can have guys who are fat and can't skate and its much easier to train refs. Additionally, its easier to see things when you can see the whole ice. To make sure that nothing gets missed, you keep one ref on the ice as well.
The only respectful response I have to this, is who will break up fights and scrums with only one official on the ice?

BCCHL inactive is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 02:26 AM
  #3
Douggy
Registered User
 
Douggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: London, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volchenkov
Its actually a rather simple idea. You take the officials off the ice. You have 4 officials with a whole bunch of TVs, and when any of them see a penalty, they signal the linesman on the ice, who raises his hand and blows the whistle. This way you can have guys who are fat and can't skate and its much easier to train refs. Additionally, its easier to see things when you can see the whole ice. To make sure that nothing gets missed, you keep one ref on the ice as well.
Communication is one of the keys to effective officiating. The people in charge of the game would have no way of comunicating with the players in your scenario.

Douggy is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 02:29 AM
  #4
Verbal Kint*
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Bunny Vatican
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,132
vCash: 500
Interesting idea, perhaps have three linesmen (really two linesmen and one ref-representative). The linesmen call teh offsides and stuff and when the refs from above call something the players talk it over with the refresentative (sorry, bad pun).

Verbal Kint* is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 02:29 AM
  #5
electric
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Back from Italy
Country: Canada
Posts: 770
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
The only respectful response I have to this, is who will break up fights and scrums with only one official on the ice?
No one will

electric is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 02:42 AM
  #6
Steve L*
Registered User
 
Steve L*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southampton, England
Country: England
Posts: 11,548
vCash: 500
Id settle for them calling the game by the rules rather than by their particular agenda that night.

Steve L* is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 03:01 AM
  #7
Volchenkov
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
The only respectful response I have to this, is who will break up fights and scrums with only one official on the ice?
that's what the linesmen are for. I never said to take the linesmen off the ice.

Volchenkov is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 03:23 AM
  #8
BCCHL inactive
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country:
Posts: 10,561
vCash: 500
Well, you should have said so in your scenario...which is still out to lunch.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve L
Id settle for them calling the game by the rules rather than by their particular agenda that night.
Unfortunately you still do not understand that the rules are subject to the referees' judgment. That is what officiating is.

BCCHL inactive is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 03:38 AM
  #9
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 28,360
vCash: 500
Why stop there (refs on the ice)? Who needs players on the ice? Let's just have a few coaches (or better yet kids) up in the press box, using their toggle switches to control players' images on the ice. Then, forget paying customers. Just bring in some fake crowd noise.

Make it all virtual. No need for the human element at all.

***

Oh, by the way, great offsides call late in the third period of tonight's NYR/Florida game. Linesman caught Nedved over the line early by less than a foot.

Thought I'd mention it in repsonse to the absurd whining that goes on here nightly. As if officials should be expected to be perfect or that they even need to be.

Sports is life or death for some, I suppose (gamblers in particular).


Last edited by Trottier: 01-27-2004 at 04:51 AM.
Trottier is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 04:25 AM
  #10
stardog
Registered User
 
stardog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,988
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trottier
Why stop there (refs on the ice)? Who needs players on the ice? Let's just have a few coaches (or better yet kids) up in the press box, using their toggle switches to control players' images on the ice. Then, forget paying customers. Just bring in some fake crowd noise.

Make it all virtual. No need for the human element at all.

***

Oh, by the way, great offsides call late in the thrid period of tonight's NYR/Florida game. Linesman caught Nedved over the line early by less than a foot.

Thought I'd mention it in repsonse to the absurd whining that goes on here nightly. As if officials should be expected to be perfect or that they even need to be.

Sports is life or death for some, I suppose (gamblers in particular).
That would be called taking it to the extreme. His idea was not nearly as ridiculous as you make it sound.

Noone ever said ref's needed to be perfect. Noone expects that. But it is fine to expect a certain level of competence which alot of fans, justifiably, feel is not happening in todays NHL.
If you feel the officials are doing a good, competent job, say so. No need to ridicule those of us (the vast majority) that do not feel that way.

stardog is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 04:31 AM
  #11
Hockeycrazed07
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Buena Vista, VA
Posts: 2,361
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Hockeycrazed07 Send a message via AIM to Hockeycrazed07 Send a message via Yahoo to Hockeycrazed07
Better yet, if you think you can do it better than the NHL refs do, then get out on the ice and do it.

~Crazed.

Hockeycrazed07 is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 04:31 AM
  #12
Lobstertainment
Oh no, my brains.
 
Lobstertainment's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,372
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Lobstertainment
I remember McKensie had an Idea where you keep one ref on the ice and hav another in direct communication with him who's monitering the game and could then make penalties on missed calls, an eye in the sky, you'd still have one Ref on the ice and another who can see everything.

Lobstertainment is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 04:47 AM
  #13
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 28,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stardog
That would be called taking it to the extreme.

It's called "sarcasm," used as a form of humor in this case.

His idea was not nearly as ridiculous as you make it sound.

Says you.

Noone ever said ref's needed to be perfect. Noone expects that. But it is fine to expect a certain level of competence which alot of fans, justifiably, feel is not happening in todays NHL.

Justifiable, yes. To the extreme that it is taken by some, no. And the suggestion here is that you scan the more-than-a-few recent posts regarding how refs who error in making a call(s) should be fined, suspended, lose their jobs, etc.

If you feel the officials are doing a good, competent job, say so. No need to ridicule those of us (the vast majority) that do not feel that way.

First, the "vast majority" argument may work with those not confident of their own opinions. Doesn't work here. Second, I respect the opposite point of view. Third - again - using sarcasm (which, among other definitions includes irony and cynicism) to make a point is neither a new methodology in debating a point, nor is it intended here as ridicule.

PS - Reviewing my original post, nowhere did I ridicule the thread starter. And, if you will notice, the complaint about the habitual ref complainers was separate from the first part of the post, i.e., it was intended as a separate thought. For there is a growing number of us (albeit, not the vast majority ) who are getting burned out by the board being dominated by complaints about this perceived bad call or that perceived bad call against my team.



Last edited by Trottier: 01-27-2004 at 04:59 AM.
Trottier is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 05:18 AM
  #14
stardog
Registered User
 
stardog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,988
vCash: 500
It's called "sarcasm," used as a form of humor in this case.

Perhaps it was, but as a reader it came across as a form of ridicule, and it is easy to see why.

Says you.

I thought that was obvious. And if your above point, that it was sarcasm used as a form of humor holds water, then why are you saying right here that it is a ridiculous idea?


Justifiable, yes. To the extreme that it is taken by some, no. And the suggestion here is that you scan the more-than-a-few recent posts regarding how refs who error in making a call(s) should be fined, suspended, lose their jobs, etc.

That would be lumping all fans into the same category. You said that the whining here is absurd. And that posters here expect the officials to be perfect. That leaves little room for any interpretation how you feel, to which I pointed out that it IS in fact not absurd, and alot of the times justifiable.
I read and post all the time. I see what people say and I dont need anyone to point out to me that there is a correlation of ref bashing commensed when a given team loses a game.
To me that is homerism, yet it still holds some merit.


First, the "vast majority" argument may work with those not confident of their own opinions. Doesn't work here.

Ok enough with the ego trip. I didn't use that as a basis for my argument and it doesn't even concern me. The only reason it is mentioned was not to refute you but to amplify that there is a problem, seen by many.

Second, I respect the opposite point of view. Third - again - using sarcasm (which, among other definitions includes irony and cynicism) to make a point is neither a new methodology in debating a point, nor is it intended here as ridicule.

I dont need a lesson is debate101 or common falacies in argument. I have a view. If you dont like it fine. We can discuss it. I am neither ignorant nor incompetent. I know what sarcasm is and I am sure you are intelligent enough to know that it doesn't always come across as one may intend on a web page.
If you meant no harm or ridicule then I accept that.



PS - Reviewing my original post, nowhere did I ridicule the thread starter. And, if you will notice, the complaint about the habitual ref complainers was separate from the first part of the post, i.e., it was intended as a separate thought. For there is a growing number of us (albeit, not the vast majority ) who are getting burned out by the board being dominated by complaints about this perceived bad call or that perceived bad call against my team.

Again, I felt that by giving the original poster a sarcastic remark, was meant to amplify how stupid you thought his point was, which is in fact ridiculing him. If you didnt think so then how come you said "says you" when I mentioned that his point wasnt that far fetched as you made it seem?

Certainly it is annoying reading all sorts of homer posts and the like. But again, it doesn't take away from the original point of this thread that there is an obvious problem with the officiating. Do you agree there or disagree?

stardog is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 05:20 AM
  #15
DJ Spinoza
Registered User
 
DJ Spinoza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 12,908
vCash: 500
Why don't they just let all four guys on the ice be able to make calls? Linesmen can't call penalties, right?

DJ Spinoza is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 05:49 AM
  #16
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
 
Psycho Papa Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cesspool, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
Well, you should have said so in your scenario...which is still out to lunch.




Unfortunately you still do not understand that the rules are subject to the referees' judgment. That is what officiating is.
Interesting how that judgement changes from one period to the next and the rules seem to become non-existant in OT. Hockey is the only major sport that calls games in this manner.

Psycho Papa Joe is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 05:59 AM
  #17
stardog
Registered User
 
stardog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,988
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho Joe
Interesting how that judgement changes from one period to the next and the rules seem to become non-existant in OT. Hockey is the only major sport that calls games in this manner.
Agreed. Wholeheartedly agreed.

stardog is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 06:22 AM
  #18
Spankatola Jamnuts*
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ...sucka?
Country: United States
Posts: 10,982
vCash: 500
You can't pretend that the policy is to "let the players decide the game" when the system depends on the judgment of the officials. Refs thrust their own biases into nearly every play because of the stupid, vague way NHL rules are enforced. Or rather not enforced.

Spankatola Jamnuts* is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 07:22 AM
  #19
Volchenkov
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho Joe
Interesting how that judgement changes from one period to the next and the rules seem to become non-existant in OT. Hockey is the only major sport that calls games in this manner.
Umm, basketball also suffers from variable fould calling depending on the reputation of the players involved.

Volchenkov is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 07:28 AM
  #20
BCCHL inactive
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country:
Posts: 10,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrKnowNothing
Why don't they just let all four guys on the ice be able to make calls? Linesmen can't call penalties, right?
Linesmen can call penalties....here is everything linesmen can do:

http://nhl.com/hockeyu/rulebook/rule36.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho Joe
Interesting how that judgement changes from one period to the next and the rules seem to become non-existant in OT.
It's called Game Management. I have explained it many times here, and nobody seems to want to understand it, so I will not explain it again. If you want to know what Game Management is, contact your local minor hockey association to find out when their next officiating clinic is.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho Joe
Hockey is the only major sport that calls games in this manner.
So what? Last I checked, hockey is hockey, football is football, baseball is baseball, etc.

BCCHL inactive is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 08:07 AM
  #21
wolfen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: seattle
Country: Germany
Posts: 1,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
Game Management. I have explained it many times here, and nobody seems to want to understand it, so I will not explain it again.
maybe some people here have understood your explanations of game management, but don't agree with you that it is the best way to ref a hockey game.

it's pretty condescending to assume that anyone who disagrees with you must be doing so because they don't understand what you're saying.

wolfen is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 08:46 AM
  #22
BCCHL inactive
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country:
Posts: 10,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfen
maybe some people here have understood your explanations of game management, but don't agree with you that it is the best way to ref a hockey game.

it's pretty condescending to assume that anyone who disagrees with you must be doing so because they don't understand what you're saying.
It's not disagreeing with me, they're disagreeing with those who created the fundamentals of hockey officiating, and a lot of those people who made the system were former elite hockey players.

I will use Paul Stewart as an example. I've even seen the most diehard ref-baiters commend Stewart. He made the NHL for short while, and as a goon to boot....and he became one of the NHL's best referee of all-time...and not because he enforced the rules, but because he applied the rules with good judgment (aka: He managed games) better than most other referees.

For those who know Game Management and don't like it....lets hear what you would do, and how you would do it......without comparing to the way other sports are officiated. What do you think would suit hockey better than the way the current system is?

And just for the record, I have heard fans whine when something is let go late in a close game because it had nothing to do with the play, using the "a penalty is a penalty" excuse.....and I have heard people whine about a penalty for taking a scoring chance away in the same late, close game situation, using the "let the players decide the game" excuse. So lets not have any whining on the issue. Lets have some educated answers here.

BCCHL inactive is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 09:25 AM
  #23
stardog
Registered User
 
stardog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,988
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
It's not disagreeing with me, they're disagreeing with those who created the fundamentals of hockey officiating, and a lot of those people who made the system were former elite hockey players.

I will use Paul Stewart as an example. I've even seen the most diehard ref-baiters commend Stewart. He made the NHL for short while, and as a goon to boot....and he became one of the NHL's best referee of all-time...and not because he enforced the rules, but because he applied the rules with good judgment (aka: He managed games) better than most other referees.
That's great Van, but Paul Stewart is one referee. How many could you cite as the example of a good official compared to how many could an edjucated fan cite as an incompetent one?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
For those who know Game Management and don't like it....lets hear what you would do, and how you would do it......without comparing to the way other sports are officiated. What do you think would suit hockey better than the way the current system is?
Why can't we compare officiating in differing sports. They both have the same job, albeit different sports. I see no reason to not compare the many sports officials, as IMO the NHL is clearly the worst.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
And just for the record, I have heard fans whine when something is let go late in a close game because it had nothing to do with the play, using the "a penalty is a penalty" excuse.....and I have heard people whine about a penalty for taking a scoring chance away in the same late, close game situation, using the "let the players decide the game" excuse. So lets not have any whining on the issue. Lets have some educated answers here.
I have heard not only fans "WHINE" but coaches, players, GM's, Announcers, reporters,league officials etc. about the lack of officiating in the game.
Certainly there is going to be a level of complaining after a tough loss where the ref blew a call or two, yet that does not diminish the outcry of all of these people. There is a problem with the NHL officials Van. You would like to be an official, so just as you can say we are whining, I can say that you are being an apologist and are biased.
Furthermore, why would I want to take a class (as you have said in a previous thread)? I am a hockey fan. It is my job to support my team in every way that I can.
It is not my job to fix the problems of the league, nor would I want it to be. They pay people to do that(and they aren't earning thier money). It is not my job to take classes on becoming an official just as it isn't anyones job who loves and discusses movies to take an acting/directing course.
As a consumer of the league I have every right to voice my displeasure as does any fan.
If you are serious about "not having any whining on the issue" and discovering "edjucated solutions" then I am all for that. But only if you are willing to be open on this discussion and not blindly in favor of the NHL officials.
I am certain with the knowledgable amount of hockey minds on these boards, we can come up with some solid solutions.
Perhaps we could even sign a petition and make some noise with this, given the sheer amount of people here.
But it is going to take both sides to help fix this problem, and with your knowledge of how officials are susposed to call a game, you could really help.
But you first have to admit that there is a problem and I do not know if you think there is one.

stardog is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 12:49 PM
  #24
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
 
Psycho Papa Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cesspool, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
It's called Game Management. I have explained it many times here, and nobody seems to want to understand it, so I will not explain it again. If you want to know what Game Management is, contact your local minor hockey association to find out when their next officiating clinic is.

So what? Last I checked, hockey is hockey, football is football, baseball is baseball, etc.
I know exactly what game management is. IMO the games aren't being managed particularly well. It's called consistency and the players knowing exactly what they can do and can't do on the ice. If you're going to let them play, let them play, but the whole game not just the third and OT. If you're going to call every infraction, no matter how small, do it in the first, second, third and OT. Is that too hard to understand? If you aren't being taught to call the game consistently, that is a problem with teaching and you aren't being taught particularly well and it explains why reffing sucks so bad.

Another problem is expansion and the two ref system. Pre-expansion the NHL only needed 10 referees on any given night. Now the NHL needs 30. The quality of those 20 extra referees is no where near the quality of the top 10. We have situations where some refs don't even know the rule book, let alone how to interpret the rules. Many can't keep up with the speed of the game.

Psycho Papa Joe is offline  
Old
01-27-2004, 01:14 PM
  #25
Motown Beatdown
Need a slump buster
 
Motown Beatdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Indianapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 8,563
vCash: 500
I got a novel idea. If a ref cant do his job, you fire him.

Really, IMO one ref should stay between the blue lines and only call the neutral zone infractions. The other ref skates the entire length of the ice. And call the infractions in the offensive zones. That way call might be a little more consistent. The neutral zone refs all not allow to make call except for majors in the offensive zone.

Motown Beatdown 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 03:52 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.