If you watched the whole thing, the best part is 6:40 when his liney chirps about whether or not he needs video on the goal (after the earlier no goal when he thought it was in at first look)
‘Game management’ at the root of NHL’s officiating issues
- Thread starter cbcwpg
- Start date
If you watched the whole thing, the best part is 6:40 when his liney chirps about whether or not he needs video on the goal (after the earlier no goal when he thought it was in at first look)
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
txpd
Registered User
Not really. Capitals are second to last in the league in power play opportunities with 73. They are 16th in times short with 89. If they were trying to even it up, they should try harder. The only way that is game management is if the league thinks the Caps dont need any help to score.
rumrokh
THORBS
- Mar 10, 2006
- 10,108
- 3,285
There are always going to be outliers and teams at the top and bottom of the heap. Game management doesn't mean every game or every team's season is perfectly even. The reality is that, for years, score effects predict penalties drawn when the game is tied, but that goes out the window when a goal is scored.
theVladiator
Registered User
- May 26, 2018
- 1,090
- 1,183
I think it's a fair point that it's naive that everything can be magically solved by swapping for "better refs". If the league wanted to fix game management, they would have, and I think in the end it all comes down full circle to us fans. NHL (and their employees - the referees) are simply doing what they think would be most palatable to the average fan. Based on that, I suspect that the real answer is that most of the fans respond positively to game management tactics, and do not mind inconsistency all that much. So, fans are happy as long as their teams also sometimes benefit from makeup calls. Even on HFBoards this discussion topic is a minor blip.
That said, it doesn't follow that existing refs should not be replaced if we want the situation to change. After all, if the current refs were selected based on the performance metrics we do not like, there is likely a better set of refs out there based on the performance metrics we would like to see instead.
That said, it doesn't follow that existing refs should not be replaced if we want the situation to change. After all, if the current refs were selected based on the performance metrics we do not like, there is likely a better set of refs out there based on the performance metrics we would like to see instead.
This rests on the assumption that people in authority positions make good, logical decisions. Which has been shown to be false across numerous disciplines, but if the NHL were actually basing decisions on the predicted fan response, you'd think they would have broadcast their games on a channel people actually watch for the last 15 years.
Realgud
Jersey ads are a disgrace
theVladiator
Registered User
- May 26, 2018
- 1,090
- 1,183
That's funny, but just because I think it's reasonable to assume NHL followed fans preferences here (or when they chose to call more obstruction and open up the game), doesn't mean it somehow should be the primary factor in all decisions. For broadcast rights, it's obviously all about benjamins.
So, I am sure if you threw a few billion bucks NHL's way, they'd say "ah screw the fans" and let you ref all the games you want
txpd
Registered User
I know what it means. When the opposition has 5, 6, 7 power plays, someone of which are of the ticky tack variety while the Capitals dont get one til late in the 3rd period and this happens with some regularity its not about it being an outlier. Lets be honest. The Capitals have a roster deep with offensive skill and the idea that they arent drawing penalties is ridiculous. We are not talking about a top team in the middle. We are talking about the bottom. The Caps are 3rd in GF/g and 2nd to last in power play opps. That doesnt add up.
dukeofjive
Registered User
This game management and the loser point is how the league can claim there is so much parity in the nhl.
Anglesmith
Setting up the play?
I guess something that should be pointed out is that this isn't solely on the refs. This is the decision of the league and everyone involved in it.
When there are uneven penalty numbers, then everyone complains from players to GMs to media and fans, putting pressure on refs to get back to the game management tactics.
When there are uneven penalty numbers, then everyone complains from players to GMs to media and fans, putting pressure on refs to get back to the game management tactics.
Crease
Chief Justice of the HFNYR Court
- Jul 12, 2004
- 24,082
- 25,508
Game management is a hockey thing, not just an NHL thing. It was prevalent 30 years ago when I first started playing the game, and at every level whether travel, high school, juniors, or college. The zebras that reach the NHL do it probably because they’ve been doing it forever, not by some directive from the league.
Except there's overwhelming evidence that teams which commit more infractions also draw more calls. There's even more overwhelming evidence that teams which are losing suddenly stop committing infractions and draw more calls.
That's not what you'd expect if the better teams draw more infractions and commit fewer.
Game management isn't game fixing, but it is point shaving.
Last edited:
LMFAO
Registered User
- May 20, 2010
- 5,501
- 2,935
Like if team A scores 2 quick goals in the first period, you know for sure the refs will call a phantom penalty against team A so team B has a chance to get back in the game.
Also if team A has 3 consecutives power play the refs will then call a phantom call on them right after.
Also if team A has 3 consecutives power play the refs will then call a phantom call on them right after.
To be fair to the Players, GMs, Media and Fans they've been trained if not outright told that there is SUPPOSED to be an even number of calls viz game management. If that bargain isn't held up they can feel somewhat slighted.
Only once that doctrine is dumpstered can people actually accept uneven penalties. If the WWE started booking shoot matches that weren't very interesting or ended quickly fans would be pretty upset as that wasn't what they paid for.
In no way am I trying to compare WWE and NHL officiating. I know the WWE refs are going to consistently apply their rules.
Game management doesn't really explain to me how blatant attempts to injure are going uncalled while stick waves near a player's hands are getting called super tight. Even things like what constitutes an icing seem to be up in the air this year. It feels as though the entire officiating corps has dropped in caliber significantly.
I’ve been watching NHL hockey for about 40 years now, and it’s always been this way. I’m not saying it’s right or wrong, only that it’s not a new phenomenon.
Bluto
Don't listen to me, I'm an idiot. TOGA! TOGA!
- Dec 24, 2017
- 1,439
- 2,179
A game as fast as hockey will always lead to imperfect officiating, and most rules in hockey have always been sort of up to the official. All that said, I'm not one to complain about officiating unless the officiating was inconsistent throughout the game. If you are going to let them play through some scrap, then you can't change your mind and call the game tighter when the score is 2-1 with 2 minutes left. It goes the other way as well, if you are going to call the game tight, you can't loosen up when the score is 2-1 with 2 minutes left.
I think that is the main frustration that hockey fans have. The perception that the game is called differently depending on what the clock says.
I think that is the main frustration that hockey fans have. The perception that the game is called differently depending on what the clock says.
Sure. But don't for one second expect that the fans of the one penalty team wouldn't be up in arms and creating outrage threads on here. I'm not surprised people hate game management on the surface, but I would pay to see the reactions if refs did start to pile up penalties against one team.
Anglesmith
Setting up the play?
TheOtherOne
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2010
- 8,274
- 5,270
Trouble is the vast majority of calls are "borderline".
You have always been able to hook a little, but hook a little too much and you get called. You have always been able to make a little contact with a non-puck-carrier, but make a little too much contact and you get called. You have always been able to grab a little bit, but grab too much and you get called.
There are probably a hundred plays a game that the refs could call and have a decent argument for. But mostly, they don't, and that's normal. That allows them to pick and choose when they feel a penalty is warranted, for "fairness" purposes or game management or whatever reason.
You have always been able to hook a little, but hook a little too much and you get called. You have always been able to make a little contact with a non-puck-carrier, but make a little too much contact and you get called. You have always been able to grab a little bit, but grab too much and you get called.
There are probably a hundred plays a game that the refs could call and have a decent argument for. But mostly, they don't, and that's normal. That allows them to pick and choose when they feel a penalty is warranted, for "fairness" purposes or game management or whatever reason.
IceNeophyte
Registered User
- Nov 14, 2017
- 10,000
- 7,310
That teams that commit more infractions draw more calls gives evidence to game management by refs.
Yes. It is not the behavior you'd expect if the better teams committed fewer infractions and drew more.
Of course they'd be up in arms. They've been trained to believe penalties should be even because that's current doctrine. The NHL has gone out of its way to ingrain the expectation of net penalties.
IceNeophyte
Registered User
- Nov 14, 2017
- 10,000
- 7,310
We aren't really talking about infractions committed here, but infractions called (either way). Let's say the Sharks are a heavily penalized team.....they might commit 12 infractions that are legitimate penalties. As the penalty differential mounts, maybe the refs don't raise the hand on two clear trips, a couple holds, and an interference. So there were 7 PKs for SJS during the game. Maybe Colorado committed 4 legitimate infractions. The refs don't see one of them, so 3 are penalized. In addition, a touch on the side of a puckhandler with the stick is called a hook and a phantom hooking is called. Refs are satisfied with a 7 to 5 balance on PP chances.
The fact that the Sharks have a high number of infractions committed increases the odds that the refs will call soft or barely existent penalties against Colorado. This is what I'm talking about.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
Game 4 Carolina Hurricanes @ New York Islanders - Carolina leads series 3-0Wagers: 7Staked: $3,851.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
