The Ditch part deux

or maybe they haven't had enough.

 

good point

 

The officiating will never be perfect, as long as there's one call that doesn't get called followed by another that appears to be of a less infraction, there'll always be outcry from fans all around. That non-call on cooke for the highstick on karlsson, and then the call that he had on cooke was a little amusing. Karma kicks back with the tying goal and the OT win, in the end, you make your own luck.

Having said that, the league has to really sit down and go over all the rules, and really decide what's getting called and not getting called. If this means having classroom sessions with officials during the off-season with countless hours of video, then so be it.

 

amen. not sure how much it will help, but u gotta try.

 

Even if it helps 20%, this will be a big step, planting the seeds and the refs having a clear understanding of what the rules are in 2013 will go a long way.

 

You're right skinny, the inconsistency w/ in the game is what drives people nuts. Another thing is the refs interpretation of what constitutes roughing and what is fair game, inconsistent among the refs.

 

i figured if Cooke won the deathmatch he could somehow elbow a single lion in the temple and end its career. If Torres won he might blindside an unsuspecting lion. A pride would make it nice and easy.

 

Clearing the man in front of the net that's screening your goalie can be called (roughing, cross-checking) every single time, but in reality, nobody knows for sure if its going to get called or not.

 

another thing that sucks, other than hypocrites like me complaining....

when a player has his stick broken by a low stick check, always a call. I guess that i like its a black/white thing... but a completely innocent stick check gets 2 mins w/ the composite sticks.

 

It's actually funny, how such an innocent thing like that gets called, and yet you see so often the ones that are 10x's worse not getting the attention from the refs, lol.

Matty, you're not a hypocrite, I think you speak for the many that want to see the game improve, and realizing a problem is the first step, nothing wrong with that, not offering solutions, then that would be futile.

 

I've been saying this since I started watching the sport. Said the same about every other sport I've watched as well. I think this is one of those gripes that will NEVER go away as long as humans call games. If they can use Sedin or Datsyuk DNA to engineer officials, there's hope.

I think the attention it gets because of blogs, multiple replay angles, the money involved, etc. is what pumps the volume up. It's always drove people nuts.

I really think people need to get over it, again, I think it starts with the loudmouths calling games and analyzing them. As halo mentioned, it's low hanging fruit for many of them. LA had 5 bad mistakes with the puck in game 3 yet it seemed all the focus from them and their fans was about the officiating. How about start bitching at the team to deal with the inconsistency and quit playing such a conservative and chicken shite brand of hockey. A couple more goals drastically eliminates the chance for an official to influence the outcome of the game. When a team is one bounce or one call away from winning or losing so regularly, they're setting themselves up for these issues.

It's just annoying. Teams shooting 80% of the time from bad angles, and keeping 3 back , non-aggressive forechecks for so many shifts, etc. What the hell do the players and coaches think is going to happen? Why are fans surprised?

 

See I don't think its the style of play that causes all the bitching and moaning, its just what we deal w/ today. As you mentioned the blogs, replays etc.. so many people have the ability to speak their minds so theyer heard, for better or worse. for worse. Its now acceptable to bitch about things where as in years past, when men were men, you would be shunned for being such a puzzy.

 

i disagree on roughing. here's the rule:

crosschecking, absolutely - or interference. but imo, rarely is roughing appropriate in this scenario.

argh, don't get me started. if i were a coach, i'd not allow my players to use a composite stick on the PK, and i'd lobby against their use period.

 

So many times in front of the net, there's exchanges between the goalie/d-man with the other player in front of the net, you'll see quick jabs being exchanged back and forth, and sometimes when there's no retaliation, so often its not called. In some cases the refs will go with off-setting minors, in most cases they won't call anything, and sometimes they'll call it because they're looking for some make-up call.

 

Hockey's not alone in their neglect for the refs. In football, its a part-time job, a bunch of lawyers usually close to retirement, working on the weekends, and they had to pull teeth last year for a minimal increase. In baseball, mlb doesn't even have an umpiring school itself. They get paid peanuts compared to what some scrub gets, and they don't get respected, and they are now fighting back, and showing they won't get pushed around anymore.

 

To clarify, I was saying that I would think the style of play should draw more haterizing from fans rather than the officiating. The play doesn't cause bitching, I agree. The style magnifies the mistakes of the officials. I'm saying teams put the officials in a position to have more impact than they should and the "disasters, controversies, and crimes against the sport" are magnified indirectly because of that style of play.

lol, that's what cracks me up. What's so tough about whining over and over again about something you know is going to happen? The occassional emotional outburst is fine, but it's getting out of hand...and I'm not even talking about the fans. We read about the "pussification" of the game from people crying and whining with a subjective perspective (like what I'm doing now, talking about those people) about relatively insignificant details from a subjective perspective.

It's getting to the point that I'm going to give Sutter a compliment for not contributing to the whine-a-thon. He's been about as good as any coach or player so far this postseason. That hurts to say.

 

Making it all about the officials doesn't do the game any good, what does the game good, is to make efforts in the off-season to define the calls.

 

lulz, i had no idea the actually definition of roughing was use of hands.
but what would you call if player A kicks player B in the gut?

with ya on that. for a regular player (non-A/NHL) astronomical prices, its ludicrous. at the NHL level I don't have an issue as long as the player doesn't lose touch.

 

Going to the composite stick theme, wouldn't it be a mistake to make such a drastic equipment change?

Most of the league spent their time at the JR levels (or before) using them. Forget the performance advantages and disadvantages, I just don't think it's as simple for a hockey player to make a drastic stick change as it would be to make drastic change in golf clubs for a pro golfer for example. That sport saw a very similar transition before hockey.

If wooden sticks had more superior characteristics to composites, I'm sure a few more players would be using them. Just like fishing or golf, it's just a matter of time before the idea that wooden sticks are superior is completely debunked. I'm sure there are a few players that might be better off with wooden sticks, but most of those types are bad at NHL hockey.

I think the entire league uses composites now. A few players used a wood stick or blade until recently but I think they have all switched now and I don't recall reading about any prospects using all wood. I'll have to do some homework. Anybody know of a player that still uses a wooden blade at least?

 

John Scott extended.....Hooray.