This really is great.
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)
This really is great.
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)
Yup, see this all the time when watching games. Especially if one team takes a couple penalties in a row, you just know that a call on the other team is coming. Just a matter of time before the refs start evening things up.
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.
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.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.
I prefer International.What are peoples thoughts on NHL reffing vs International (Tournament) reffing? Which do you think is better?
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.
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.
I think this is absolutely true. Better teams draw more infractions and commit fewer. You see it all over the place, fans of inferior teams decrying "cheating refs" when the fact is their opponent simply played cleaner hockey. These kinds of teams are rewarded and kept in games by calls that are made not because there was a worthy infraction, but to balance the officiating. And their fans cry for even more.
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.
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.Agreed. Game management is terrible. If one team makes 12 infractions and another 1, call them like that to reflect what's actually going on. Don't call them equally, or with only a 1 penalty differential.
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.
That teams that commit more infractions draw more calls gives evidence to game management by refs.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.
That teams that commit more infractions draw more calls gives evidence to game management by refs.
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.
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.Yes. It is not the behavior you'd expect if the better teams committed fewer infractions and drew more.