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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Le Grec

Registered User
Jun 28, 2011
3,615
1,074
I’ll finish by saying two things:

1) It’s amazing how many people disagree with me wanting context and the full discussion before making up my mind.

2) How many people post about me instead of about my post.

Have a great day, enjoy your righteous indignation.

The context is all there, what more do you want? I mean seriously, the context is all in the title of this thread. Tell me in what context could he be innocent?
 

Pavel Buchnevich

Drury and Laviolette Must Go
Dec 8, 2013
57,228
23,101
New York
The problem isn't that he did it, that has kind of been the thing for the last 100 years or so for the NHL "refs" and the management "accountability". The problem is that he openly said it - and that the NHL can't bury it. This kind of thing is openly going on in the NHL, NBA, NFL, MLS and so on. That's why I don't say American sports leagues are actual sports leagues. They are entertainment industries, with a whole other purpose than the sport. The sport is merely the product to gain maximum profit however you can. Managing - or even fixing - games is an easy step for people like these. Artificial manipulation of an outcome is their whole thing, since that will give them more profit.

They could just as well sell tennis shoes or bombs. Or they could trade cattle and give circus shows - which they ironically do.

I think you're right. I'm sure plenty of others do it, and because they don't get caught on a mic saying it, they don't get punished. First guy to get caught on a mic saying it gets sacked. The next guy to do it probably won't get sacked because he probably won't have said it on a mic. I still would say that there should be significant punishment for anyone who does this, so I'm more judging this by the standard of what they should do, not how they regularly apply this.
 

S E P H

Cloud IX
Mar 5, 2010
30,722
16,243
Toruń, PL
I love the fans logic in this thread....

"NHL doesn't have the balls to fire him, they're going to protect them like they always have. Bush league!!!"

Peel then proceeds to get fired...

"Well, he's just one problem of a systemic issue! Bush league!!!"
 
  • Like
Reactions: SlimCharles

MikeGrier99

Registered User
May 20, 2017
850
880
Game managing is virtually rigging games. It means what you're watching isn't pure hockey. If a team is down a goal in the third and the refs artificially give them more chances to get back into the game, that's a rigged game in my opinion. I'm extremely doubtful that they pick in advance who they want to win the cup or something like that. But they pull strings no doubt, and the truth is that NHL hockey has been a product for a while now. They don't care about the integrity of the sport, it's about creating an outcome that makes the most money for the owners. It's pretty obvious that a league with billions of dollars floating around, that is run by someone like Bettman, would do this kind of stuff. The world in general is turning in this direction as well.
 

Paperbagofglory

Registered User
Nov 15, 2010
5,557
4,730
I fully get your joke, but I think people have to be careful with using the term fixed here, right? Because there’s a difference between a game being fixed and poorly officiated due to game-management.

They both lead to fishy results and a lack of fairness. Its hard to differentiate them sometimes because a ref can be a horrible game manager and botch the entire game, we can't read his mind, we don't know if its intentional or hes just really bad at his job. Because of that distinction people have a hard time seeing them as different things.
 

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
84,982
137,355
Bojangles Parking Lot
I’ll finish by saying two things:

1) It’s amazing how many people disagree with me wanting context and the full discussion before making up my mind.

2) How many people post about me instead of about my post.

Have a great day, enjoy your righteous indignation.

A big part of the issue is that you're asking for a level of evidence that you know can't possibly be provided, and you're entrenching into that demand.

You have been given all the existing evidence. All of it is consistent with a single interpretation: Peel deliberately made a soft call for the pure sake of ensuring that Nashville had to kill a penalty early in the period, and said so out loud.

Still, you're ignoring the that evidence and demanding standard of nonexistent absolute proof. While there is always the possibility that everything is being misinterpreted -- perhaps Tim Peel waits till post-retirement and gives us an alternate explanation that makes perfect sense and, against all apparent odds, somehow doesn't involve him making a deliberate soft call for the sake of creating a Nashville PK -- that is also a possibility that exists in the very small minority of likelihood.

Taking that contrarian stance is not a rational high ground. We can reserve the right to adjust our opinions in the event that new evidence is introduced, while still basing our current judgment on the evidence that is actually available to us.
 

KeithIsActuallyBad

You thrust your pelvis, huh!
Apr 12, 2010
71,822
30,733
Calgary
I love the fans logic in this thread....

"NHL doesn't have the balls to fire him, they're going to protect them like they always have. Bush league!!!"

Peel then proceeds to get fired...

"Well, he's just one problem of a systemic issue! Bush league!!!"
Firing him is simply sweeping the problem under the rug. NHL deserves zero credit for doing the bare minimum.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SouthNash and Mitts

Paperbagofglory

Registered User
Nov 15, 2010
5,557
4,730
Game managing is virtually rigging games. It means what you're watching isn't pure hockey. If a team is down a goal in the third and the refs artificially give them more chances to get back into the game, that's a rigged game in my opinion. I'm extremely doubtful that they pick in advance who they want to win the cup or something like that. But they pull strings no doubt, and the truth is that NHL hockey has been a product for a while now. They don't care about the integrity of the sport, it's about creating an outcome that makes the most money for the owners. It's pretty obvious that a league with billions of dollars floating around, that is run by someone like Bettman, would do this kind of stuff. The world in general is turning in this direction as well.

If they are doing it to make the game more entertaining then they fail, because there is a lot of boring hockey out there. Keeping a boring game close still makes it a boring game. I don't care if its 2-1 or 2-2, the product sucks it makes the drama associated with the game irrelevant. They need to ask the NBA advice on how to manufacture better drama.
 

PenguinSuitedUp

Registered User
Oct 2, 2019
697
920
They both lead to fishy results and a lack of fairness. Its hard to differentiate them sometimes because a ref can be a horrible game manager and botch the entire game, we can't read his mind, we don't know if its intentional or hes just really bad at his job. Because of that distinction people have a hard time seeing them as different things.
Fully agree and neither should be in the sport. But I mostly just want obstruction and interference to get called so we can see McDavid put up a 70 goal season.:naughty:
 

Simplicity

Registered User
Dec 23, 2017
253
156
I fully get your joke, but I think people have to be careful with using the term fixed here, right? Because there’s a difference between a game being fixed and poorly officiated due to game-management.
Is there though? Fixes don't involve changing or deciding the winners of games anymore. You can very easily bet on first goal, etc. This call clearly impacts that. While it is not match fixing, it is fixing and shocking to see anyone backing this referee.
 

MikeGrier99

Registered User
May 20, 2017
850
880
If they are doing it to make the game more entertaining then they fail, because there is a lot of boring hockey out there. Keeping a boring game close still makes it a boring game. I don't care if its 2-1 or 2-2, the product sucks it makes the drama associated with the game irrelevant. They need to ask the NBA advice on how to manufacture better drama.

No they need to respect the sport, and call hockey the way it's supposed to be. They also need to dump the loser point, and give a bit more cap flexibility so teams don't have to sell off their players all the time. They don't respect the game of hockey, they just want to squeeze every dollar out of every situation. Manipulating the game is what ruins everything in the first place. They've tinkered with the game so many times, with shit results, it's a joke.
 

The Macho King

Back* to Back** World Champion
Jun 22, 2011
48,610
28,847
I fully get your joke, but I think people have to be careful with using the term fixed here, right? Because there’s a difference between a game being fixed and poorly officiated due to game-management.
I don't think there is. Game management is just fixing by another name. The difference - to the extent there is one - is you're not necessarily care *who* wins, but you do care that the game is close. So you're influencing the outcome - but just doing so in a way that's agnostic to the ultimate victor.

This is why anyone who gets on spreads in hockey are just throwing money away.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->