NHL referee expectations

Ok I've been mulling the best way to post this tread for a while now and I'm sure there's some serious posters here on this board that have definite opinions. The point of this thread is to expose the remainder of the folks on this board to the concept that a referee is there for a purpose and it might not necessarily be to enforce the rules as written.

Being an American brought up in the concept that nobody is larger than the law combined with rec leagues and lawyers galore it's very simple to assume that a referee is there solely to enforce rules as written. Anyone that's ever watched a NBA game or a MLB umpire with any sort of knowledge knows that concept is complete and utter bull****. Anyone that ever tried to insinuate that concept to an NFL game is an idiot.

The window that Kerry Fraser has brought out through his "cmon refs" articles is the closest thing that any of the major sports has ever come to insinuating largely that the referee's are there to "control" the game. The concept of this control is so combustible that it's not even funny. The question of how vs why is not even compatible on any level depending on who you talk to.

So I put it to our resident experts if it's even possible to codify what the hell the ref's are supposed to do these days. Lets cut out the 70's and early 80's bench line brawl circus acts and try to identify just what it is going on on the ice. I know there is a shanaban component that the ref's might fall back on, but lets be honest they don't like being shown up, and least of all by the league. The fact that the league can't ban asshats that can't discern a hit that earns a 25 game suspension and call it during a game shows the uphill battle the NHL has been fighting all this time.

What is it we as fans want and expect for the game?

Myself I want to return much of the control to the officials on the ice and I'd prefer there be a senior referee designated. Make a god and allow all to defer to him. I think ambiguity has hurt the product. I also think that directives to control hooking/holding/obstruction could be enforced highly if there was a lead referee that had to eat the results. I also would encourage liberal use of 10 minute misconducts with the elimination of the instigator. As much as we complain about the concept of retribution, I feel the ref's should have the chance to end the shenanigans before they need an answer. This is my own beer league experience talking but if ref's cooled off the pro's as much as they cooled us off you wouldn't need the instigator. (*Note bad ref's **** this up all the time though)

I would love to see a Player review of referee performance as part of the cba myself.

One of the best things they can do is incorporate video review on for the on ice officials, screw the war room. The on ice official should be reviewing the goal/non-goal calls.

What do I expect, the refs to call the game fairly and evenly.

I expect they will miss calls, make bad calls, and not always make the call we want them to make. They are human, and it is part of the game. It will always happen no matter what system is in place.

I would like to see a more proactive review of referees though, because we saw some horrible officiating this past Spring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shoot2scor

What do I expect, the refs to call the game fairly and evenly.

---

Not that I disagree with your other points but what does this statement mean? Fair to who? The rulebook, both teams, the fans, the individual players? Evenly can imply make up calls and equal PP time to some. Consistently might have been a better term but with the subjectivity of the position the only time we see consistency is with some of the calls that get people most angry such as the automatic 5 and games on boarding hits with injury.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jammer06

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shoot2scor

What do I expect, the refs to call the game fairly and evenly.

---

Not that I disagree with your other points but what does this statement mean? Fair to who? The rulebook, both teams, the fans, the individual players? Evenly can imply make up calls and equal PP time to some. Consistently might have been a better term but with the subjectivity of the position the only time we see consistency is with some of the calls that get people most angry such as the automatic 5 and games on boarding hits with injury.

---

To the rulebook and the teams, if that happens it trickles down. It means no double standards. It means it it is a hook on one team, it is a hook on the other team. Consistency is a good word for it. How many times have you watched a red wing game over the years and they get away with a lot more then the other team because of who they are. I do not want to see equal PP time unless it is warranted. This is not socialized hockey. Teams should be penalized according to the rulebook and to the way they are playing. Evenly and fairly like you said can be summed up well with consistency. I don't mind when some stuff is let go as long as it is being let go for both teams.

Now, the homer in me is hoping that because the Kings are now champs, they will get the benefit of doubt that I have seen other cup winners get ( of course that goes against what I was saying :-)).

Oh, and I have no problem with the automatic 5 and game misconduct for boarding with an injury. There is no place in the game for boarding and it should bs punished severely. That has nothing to do with fair or equal, it is bad for the sport can cause serious injuries and if one team does it, it should bs punished.

If you expect a referee to act and think like a robot then you're crazy. If you pick one person out at random I'll bet you that they have a person that they favor at work and one that they wish would get fired. The fans just need to learn that this is just a game and unless the team is connected to your job/company tomorrow you will wake up and the sun will still shine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kingsfan626

If you expect a referee to act and think like a robot then you're crazy.

---

This brings up another point which I didn't even want to get into too early but for the most part the ref's have to deal with the element of the players emotions and determine if and when such emotions run afoul of the rulebook. All ref's have pretty thick skin but you're not going to have any two of them view player emotions the same way particularly if they are trying to keep games from turning into circuses. In that sense what would be a penalty if a ref senses players are looking for an excuse might not be if the ref doesn't have that same feeling of impending theatrics. All of which are impossible for any off ice observer to objectively review.
This facet of the ref's responsibilities generally runs afoul of any effort to keep calls consistent from game to game even with the same referees.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shoot2scor

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jammer06

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shoot2scor

What do I expect, the refs to call the game fairly and evenly.

---

Not that I disagree with your other points but what does this statement mean? Fair to who? The rulebook, both teams, the fans, the individual players? Evenly can imply make up calls and equal PP time to some. Consistently might have been a better term but with the subjectivity of the position the only time we see consistency is with some of the calls that get people most angry such as the automatic 5 and games on boarding hits with injury.

---

To the rulebook and the teams, if that happens it trickles down. It means no double standards. It means it it is a hook on one team, it is a hook on the other team. Consistency is a good word for it. How many times have you watched a red wing game over the years and they get away with a lot more then the other team because of who they are. I do not want to see equal PP time unless it is warranted. This is not socialized hockey. Teams should be penalized according to the rulebook and to the way they are playing. Evenly and fairly like you said can be summed up well with consistency. I don't mind when some stuff is let go as long as it is being let go for both teams.

Now, the homer in me is hoping that because the Kings are now champs, they will get the benefit of doubt that I have seen other cup winners get ( of course that goes against what I was saying :-)).

---

Consistency is the key. Growing up i pitched for 3 or 4 travel ball clubs and the most annoying thing to me was an inconsistent strike zone. To throw the same pitch in the same location 2 times in a row and have 1 be a ball and 1 be a strike pissed me off to no end. Watching the likes of ovechkin consistently leave his feet when delivering a hit and its not called, ever. But then another player throws a hit and leaves his feet immediately after impact and its all the sudden called is bull****. Or watching the vancouver diving team do their thing for 60 mins without ever being called is infuriating.

Until you have put on a shirt and called a game with a bunch of beer league ****wits, you all have no idea what you're talking about.

I spent 7 years doing it, and in the end I was well thought of as an official, but so burned out I stopped playing for the better part of 2 years.

They'll still be unable to find the eye chart on the wall...let alone the wall itself...