“There wasn’t much but I wanted a penalty against Nashville” UPD Tim Peel early retirement PART 2

[SnuggaRUDE]

I disagree. Starting with the first scenario, the home team has last change advantage and the potential to create mis-matches. I don't know exactly what the number should be, (and there are other more vague home team advantages that could play into it as well) but I would expect in that scenario the number to be less than 50%.

I am a bit surprised that the math guys have apparently not taken such factors into consideration.

Better teams can create mismatches. Better teams are more likely to be winning than poorer teams. Why then is it more likely that team takes a penalty if they're winning?

If the advantage of last change leads to fewer penalties why doesn't the advantage of being the better team?

 

[bambamcam4ever]

I disagree. Starting with the first scenario, the home team has last change advantage and the potential to create mis-matches. I don't know exactly what the number should be, (and there are other more vague home team advantages that could play into it as well) but I would expect in that scenario the number to be less than 50%.

I am a bit surprised that the math guys have apparently not taken such factors into consideration.

The biggest home advantage in all sports is fans affecting the refs' decision-making, pressuring them into making a call, which reveals the general inadequacies of referees' judgement.

Other sports have a similar effect from home field advantage, but you make a good point about the unique rules benefitting the home team in hockey. Although based on that chart, I can't see the impact being more than a fraction of a percent.

 

[Perfect_Drug]

Except thats not at all how reffing a sport works

Im guessing youve never once laced up skates to ref an ice hockey game.

Nope never have.

And from the sounds of it, probably for the better considering the amount of Kool Aid you guys are drinking.

 

[Paperbagofglory]

Matthew Tkatchuk: “It’s tough because it’s how the game is. We talk about it in between periods if we’ve got four power plays. The best ones manage it the best way. They have such a hard job and he’s such a great ref, probably the best I’ve had the privilege of dealing with in the NHL. And for it to kind of end like that, I thought the punishment didn’t fit with what he deserved. I just wish him the best. The great ones are personable out there and honest when you’re talking to him. We’re definitely going to miss him a lot.”

You know how some people have redeeming qualities even if they are kind of an ass? Well Matthew does not seem to fit that description.

So in this description of a ref, a player is talking about him more like a buddy rather than an impartial rule enforcer.

 

[ItsFineImFine]

Matthew Tkatchuk: “It’s tough because it’s how the game is. We talk about it in between periods if we’ve got four power plays. The best ones manage it the best way. They have such a hard job and he’s such a great ref, probably the best I’ve had the privilege of dealing with in the NHL. And for it to kind of end like that, I thought the punishment didn’t fit with what he deserved. I just wish him the best. The great ones are personable out there and honest when you’re talking to him. We’re definitely going to miss him a lot.”

You know how some people have redeeming qualities even if they are kind of an ass? Well Matthew does not seem to fit that description.

So in this description of a ref, a player is talking about him more like a buddy rather than an impartial rule enforcer.

He's such a troll.

Anyways, I'll want to keep a closer tab on penalties during the offseason but I don't think we're getting any changes here till Colin Campbell is gone and Walkom as well. I think Bettman maybe feels junior to Campbell or something? I dunno but that's the only explanation I can think of for Bettman continuing to employ that dinosaur when he costs the league money by promoting dead puck hockey.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

I was not sure whether to reply to this or leave it be since you are asking the questions and then answering them yourself. Seems to me like you are just fine having this discussion all on your own.
I prefer to deal with facts to. Not a fan of conspiracy theories. I did not say anything that even inclined to the fact that there are orders from the top to influence the games.
I understand what you are saying. I just dont understand why you are replying with all of this to my posts directly or what i said to irritate you.
Are we not to speak of this incident at all? Are we obliged to dedicate a paragraph to the ins and outs of being a ref and how tough of a job it is every time we post about this subject?

Re-read my remark. Try to follow along. In asking the question you did, others logically follow. My comments are more directed at the 77 people here who SWEAR TO GOD the NHL gives orders to referees to do various things in-game, it happens in every other league as well, and it's so obvious to anyone paying attention no one should think about calling any of that into question by (gasp!) asking for a little proof, especially when the accusers have no evidence to back anything up. If you want to take that as a shot at you, I can't control what you think.

I'm fine if people want to discuss the incident. I think Peel should be shit-canned for it. If someone wants to armchair criticize how officiating is done, fine. I think it would be helpful to have some actual first-hand experience at it to understand what's needed and some of the split-second decisions that have to be made when you don't have clear views on a play, instead of pretending it's as easy as putting together a 3-piece Lego set designed for kids age 2-5. If someone prefers not to do that, fine - then don't get pissed when I or anyone else criticize their ignorance of how officiating works.

Again, if you want to take that as a shot at you, I can't control what you think.

Donaghy said the league was giving suggestions to refs to affect the outcome of games. The NBA also purposefully leaked the Donaghy story to the NY Post since the FBI was going to have him wear a wire to implicate other corrupt refs. The NBA knew they had other refs fixing games, so they effectively killed the plan so they wouldn't be uncovered

Oh, yeah, right. It was a grand conspiracy and when the NBA leaked the story to the Post, the FBI read it and said whoa, that's the story? Well, that's enough for us - never mind, boys, we've got all the goods we need, let's shut 'er down and write this up for the brass in D.C. and get to the bar for happy hour!

C'mon. Seriously. Donaghy was questioned by the FBI, he couldn't provide proof, the FBI wasn't convinced he was telling the truth. There's no 7-dimensional strategy there. There's "better" proof the NFL fixed the Super Bowl in 2002 to make sure the Patriots won, and 19 years later not one person who might have known about it has coughed up anything to show the league directed it. At some point, you gotta admit the "grand conspiracy" didn't exist.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

The NHL has to realise, if refs are "Managing" games, they are literally a half a step away from "fixing" games.

This literally does not mean what you think it means. Not to mention, if there was game-fixing going on we all should be able to point to scores of games where it took place and you can bet your sweet ass Vegas sportsbooks would have picked up on it long ago.

Well? Anyone?

 

[archangel2]

Future NHL ref here

 

[bambamcam4ever]

Re-read my remark. Try to follow along. In asking the question you did, others logically follow. My comments are more directed at the 77 people here who SWEAR TO GOD the NHL gives orders to referees to do various things in-game, it happens in every other league as well, and it's so obvious to anyone paying attention no one should think about calling any of that into question by (gasp!) asking for a little proof, especially when the accusers have no evidence to back anything up. If you want to take that as a shot at you, I can't control what you think.

I'm fine if people want to discuss the incident. I think Peel should be shit-canned for it. If someone wants to armchair criticize how officiating is done, fine. I think it would be helpful to have some actual first-hand experience at it to understand what's needed and some of the split-second decisions that have to be made when you don't have clear views on a play, instead of pretending it's as easy as putting together a 3-piece Lego set designed for kids age 2-5. If someone prefers not to do that, fine - then don't get pissed when I or anyone else criticize their ignorance of how officiating works.

Again, if you want to take that as a shot at you, I can't control what you think.


Oh, yeah, right. It was a grand conspiracy and when the NBA leaked the story to the Post, the FBI read it and said whoa, that's the story? Well, that's enough for us - never mind, boys, we've got all the goods we need, let's shut 'er down and write this up for the brass in D.C. and get to the bar for happy hour!

C'mon. Seriously. Donaghy was questioned by the FBI, he couldn't provide proof, the FBI wasn't convinced he was telling the truth. There's no 7-dimensional strategy there. There's "better" proof the NFL fixed the Super Bowl in 2002 to make sure the Patriots won, and 19 years later not one person who might have known about it has coughed up anything to show the league directed it. At some point, you gotta admit the "grand conspiracy" didn't exist.

The FBI was trying to covertly investigate if there were other crooked refs. The NBA leaking the Donaghy story killed any further investigation since the other refs obviously aren't going to talk freely once they realized the FBI was looking into NBA refereeing.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

The FBI was trying to covertly investigate if there were other crooked refs. The NBA leaking the Donaghy story killed any further investigation since the other refs obviously aren't going to talk freely once they realized the FBI was looking into NBA refereeing.

If only there were other means by which a law enforcement agency could undertake an investigation into some person or entity other than by wiring guys up to see if anyone else is singing like a canary. Well, maybe one day someone will figure out a new way by which information can be obtained from those sources.

 

[Paperbagofglory]

If only there were other means by which a law enforcement agency could undertake an investigation into some person or entity other than by wiring guys up to see if anyone else is singing like a canary. Well, maybe one day someone will figure out a new way by which information can be obtained from those sources.

The point was the league was a whistleblower and warned the other refs that they were getting investigated. The Donagny situation was not just simply about placing a few bets, there were mobsters and bookies involved. The man went to jail and it wasn't simply for making a few bets.

 

[Pez68]

Future NHL ref here

LMAO!

 

[Ted Hoffman]

The point was the league was a whistleblower and warned the other refs that they were getting investigated. The Donagny situation was not just simply about placing a few bets, there were mobsters and bookies involved. The man went to jail and it wasn't simply for making a few bets.

If only the FBI knew how to investigate those people. Meanwhile, I'll repeat: Donaghy was interviewed and found not to be reliable enough to be trusted, whether he was wearing a wire or not, whether the NBA leaked a story to the ticker in Times Square and flew a banner over the heartland of America.

All Donaghy had to have was some kind of proof. Letters, e-mails, details of phone calls, ... anything. He had nothing. He had his gut feelings and "I heard" claims that couldn't be verified by information he supplied.

Seriously, this isn't difficult to understand.

 

[BlueOil]

Someone try to tell me it's not rigged.

Please make excuses for this meme officiating.

hands down it was a trip, but you're only really mad because all five boston guys stared at the ref while perron scored and it ended up being the game winner. terrible missed call and even worse outcome for boston and their fans from not playing until there was a whistle.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

If only the FBI knew how to investigate those people. Meanwhile, I'll repeat: Donaghy was interviewed and found not to be reliable enough to be trusted, whether he was wearing a wire or not, whether the NBA leaked a story to the ticker in Times Square and flew a banner over the heartland of America.

All Donaghy had to have was some kind of proof. Letters, e-mails, details of phone calls, ... anything. He had nothing. He had his gut feelings and "I heard" claims that couldn't be verified by information he supplied.

Seriously, this isn't difficult to understand.

Criminal enterprises are usually smart enough to not put evidence of their crimes in writing.

Mob bosses don't email their hitmen detailing how they want to take out a guy.

 

[Statto]

I don’t have an issue with certain types of game management, but it has to be applied evenly. So for example if it’s a game where recent history has seen a number of bad cheap shot, brawls and fights then it’s fine for the ref to say to both coaches and captains before the game that he will throw the book at both sides for any such incidents. That’s something that happens in hockey and other sports all the time.

However, the management of the game by trying to even out the number of power play for each side and things like that is unacceptable in anyway. Even if it is to balance off a bad call. Human nature means that referees may want to make up for a bad call, but it doesn’t mean they should do it. Fixing a bad call, with another bad call makes zero sense as apart from anything else over time things will mostly get evened out anyway.

The other way game management is acceptable is if the league publicly does something like zero tolerance. However that doesn’t mean they can quietly abandon the policy during a season.

The league must ensure 3 things:
1. All decisions on how penalties will be called must be shared publicly. So we know the exact instructions given to referees.
2. Work on the principle that a penalty is a penalty, game to game. If they want play-off game called differently they need to publish a play-off version of the rule book.
3. Both teams are treated in a consistent way, regardless of the game situation, score and previous encounters.

Human error and unconscious bias will always be unavoidable. So if a player constantly disrespects an official he’s probably going to get called more often, even if the ref doesn’t intend to do so, but if he’s being a tool he probably deserves it...

 

[King Woodballs]

Guy has been a shitty ref for years and years. About time he left the game.
That being said. I am willing to bet most if not all the refs have said or done the exact same thing.

The NHL has a bad officiating problem for years that many have talked about.
This might finally force the nhl into doing something about it once and for all.

 

[Anaheim4ever]

Lol it's kinda funny it happened with Nashville because for a long time they've been top 3 in diving and flopping that goes uncalled by the refs.

 

[bdub24]

NSH is gonna raise a banner for getting this guy to retire early.

 

[stealth1]

I don’t have an issue with certain types of game management, but it has to be applied evenly. So for example if it’s a game where recent history has seen a number of bad cheap shot, brawls and fights then it’s fine for the ref to say to both coaches and captains before the game that he will throw the book at both sides for any such incidents. That’s something that happens in hockey and other sports all the time.

However, the management of the game by trying to even out the number of power play for each side and things like that is unacceptable in anyway. Even if it is to balance off a bad call. Human nature means that referees may want to make up for a bad call, but it doesn’t mean they should do it. Fixing a bad call, with another bad call makes zero sense as apart from anything else over time things will mostly get evened out anyway.

The other way game management is acceptable is if the league publicly does something like zero tolerance. However that doesn’t mean they can quietly abandon the policy during a season.

The league must ensure 3 things:
1. All decisions on how penalties will be called must be shared publicly. So we know the exact instructions given to referees.
2. Work on the principle that a penalty is a penalty, game to game. If they want play-off game called differently they need to publish a play-off version of the rule book.
3. Both teams are treated in a consistent way, regardless of the game situation, score and previous encounters.

Human error and unconscious bias will always be unavoidable. So if a player constantly disrespects an official he’s probably going to get called more often, even if the ref doesn’t intend to do so, but if he’s being a tool he probably deserves it...

I agree with a lot of what you said. Trying to make sure penalties are even is an issue and shouldn't happen.

The problem is that the league and to an extent fans LOVE PARITY. This whole mindset that all teams must stay in the playoff race as long as possible is the dumbest thing that has happened in hockey. A salary cap is fine and should do more then enough for parity.

Where it stops with me is calling games to try to keep them close and the point system. Trying to artificially create parity has made the game worse. People want to see dominate teams. If your team is out by December sucks to be you. The answer is to get better.

 

[mad4comp]

At least now we have concrete proof that the league+refs manage games on a nightly basis. Can't really argue this point and just say things like "Well refs miss calls from time to time"...

Does the league/refs think people come to watch them "manage" the game?

Makes you wonder about all the playoff series and refs balancing out calls and not calling obvious penalties.

I wonder what the players union thinks of this.

 

[mad4comp]

They can't fire Peel. Or else the referees union will file a grievance, and then all of the league's dirty laundry will come out in that grievance (including evidence that shows the NHL instructs their referees to manage games in a certain way).

The NHL doesn't want that coming out because that is the type of scandal that will make the league look fixed and rigged to the public.

The problem with that is, this situation already makes it look rigged. If refs can call penalties when they feel like it... then it's obviously rigged.

 

[jcs0218]

The problem with that is, this situation already makes it look rigged. If refs can call penalties when they feel like it... then it's obviously rigged.

Yes, this situation does make things look rigged.

But if they were to fire Peel and he took them to grievance court, imagine the type of information that could come out?

For all we know, there could be e-mails sent to all referees, telling them to rig games.

I think the NHL wants to avoid that.

 

[barilko05]

That is actually how I feel about Baseball too. Hurry up, get to the base! Out. An hour later, we have a batter. 5 minutes go by, swing, strike! Adjust. Wait. 5 minutes, go by, and a ball! At least with football every play is a big impact play and after 3 plays, significant yards that lead to your team scoring valuable points will have been gained or a big defensive play that sees a turnover in possession happens. In baseball, 10 minutes can go by and you will have had one insignificant out occur, if lucky.

While I enjoy a good fast paced hockey game, a ballgame is a different animal. Methodical... strategic...one on one9 batter vs pitcher...many more things to consider rather than just "shoot puck get cheque". Each sport is great in its own unique way (IMO of course) but not all are for everyone. To each his own.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Criminal enterprises are usually smart enough to not put evidence of their crimes in writing.

Mob bosses don't email their hitmen detailing how they want to take out a guy.

You're not making the point you think you are here.