Sportsnet: Babcock not happy with refs

[TLeafsFan]

Some of the responses here are hilarious.

Lose the biased glasses. The refs didn't do their job properly Saturday and Babcock called them out for it.

A cross check is a cross check and interference is interference. IF there's 'embellishment' you send that guy to the box too. But you still call the initial infraction embellishment or not.

 

[TLeafsFan]

Hmmm, looks like another Kadri thread got prematurely closed again so I'll just stick this here.

 

[imapylon]

Refs missed a couple of calls there for sure....it would've been so sweet to throw a bit of a wrench into the Bruins playoff hopes and improve our chance of another 1st in this year's draft

 

[imapylon]

Yup. Totally dude

Some of the responses here are hilarious.

Lose the biased glasses. The refs didn't do their job properly Saturday and Babcock called them out for it.

A cross check is a cross check and interference is interference. IF there's 'embellishment' you send that guy to the box too. But you still call the initial infraction embellishment or not.

 

[Gallagbi]

Have you ever been a referee in a competitive a game?

Yes. Also a coach and player. Though this has nothing to do with my hockey background.

Like I said earlier, your position is bizarre. The refs are either missing legit calls against Kadri or they're missing embellishment calls. Neither reflects well on the official. Why not hold them to a higher standard? One where they perform the duties they are paid to?

 

[ShaneFalco]

26 and still needs to work on strength and shot........

As another poster mentioned

Much has been made about him playing against the other team's top lines often. Has he been doing a good job of it though? I'd say he's done ok but he's also a -14 on the season, 2nd worst among Leaf forwards. There are better options around the league if you want a shutdown center.

And I think looking forward, Kadri's biggest obstacle on the Leafs is just that: his role, or place, on the team.

To be a Cup contender the Leafs are going to need to draft another high-end top 6 center. Kadri's not a 1st line center - I think most of us can agree on that. Nylander might be. But they'll need more depth up the middle to be one of the really good teams.

So where does that leave Kadri? Maybe the wing is his ultimate landing spot. He's going to be too expensive as a 3rd line C in a few years when (hopefully) the Leafs have Nylander + someone else occupying the two top spots.

But how much do you pay a top 6 winger who most likely sits between 40-50 points a season? Over $5M a season on a long term deal? Not in my mind.

I think Kadri will be dealt in the summer. Not because he's not a good player but because of his contract demands and long-term role on the team. The Leafs have been hyping him up just like they did with Phaneuf. I don't think that's a coincidence.

 

[LeafsLegendAkiBerg]

Eh, Kadri's embellishment was drawing a lot of penalties but refs have caught on. Unless he "cleans" up his game, this'll happen to him. Kadri's been a relatively effective player this year but with the embellishment penalty from the Calgary game and the non-calls he's getting now are no longer helping the team.

 

[mcleex]

Some of you are gonna be disappointed when Kadri is brought back.
This guy is part of the solution here. He won't be shipped out in the summer

 

[Pookie]

Yes. Also a coach and player. Though this has nothing to do with my hockey background.

Like I said earlier, your position is bizarre. The refs are either missing legit calls against Kadri or they're missing embellishment calls. Neither reflects well on the official. Why not hold them to a higher standard? One where they perform the duties they are paid to?

Well then as an official you surely realize that perfection is unattainable.

If the standard is that everything is to be called, games would go on forever. Every slash. Every hook. Every interference. Every 3 step charge. Every chirp (to player or ref) earns an unsportsmanlike misconduct.

Refs let things go. They are also paid to ensure games are entertaining. What's a penalty in the 1st period isn't one in the 3rd. And what's a penalty early in the season may not be one later on if the memo from GM says so.

Babcock is singling out individual plays in a 60 minute game. Which is clearly biased to his team's benefit. And this, to a biased crowd, resonates.

Honestly, you could remove Babcock and the Leafs and insert any team name into it and their fan base would rally around it.

A ref used discretion to let a call go against a player who has developed a reputation for embellishment. Even if the player played honourably, refs let call go all the time based on what I said above.

There's a story there?

 

[Bluelines]

Yes. Also a coach and player. Though this has nothing to do with my hockey background.

Like I said earlier, your position is bizarre. The refs are either missing legit calls against Kadri or they're missing embellishment calls. Neither reflects well on the official. Why not hold them to a higher standard? One where they perform the duties they are paid to?

And you call a perfect game every time, you don't miss one thing? How bizarre it is to be a perfect ref.

They are performing their duties, they see they have a player who cheats and will not tolerate him cheating anymore. Kadri has a lot of mending fences to do if he wishes to get off the cheaters list.

 

[Bluelines]

Eh, Kadri's embellishment was drawing a lot of penalties but refs have caught on. Unless he "cleans" up his game, this'll happen to him. Kadri's been a relatively effective player this year but with the embellishment penalty from the Calgary game and the non-calls he's getting now are no longer helping the team.

I think your last line is really germane to what we do with him, are the negatives outweighing the positives?

 

[Gallagbi]

Well then as an official you surely realize that perfection is unattainable.

Agreed which I note earlier. That's not Bluelines point though as he isn't claiming these calls were oversights. He's saying bias prevented the right call from being made.

If the standard is that everything is to be called, games would go on forever. Every slash. Every hook. Every interference. Every 3 step charge. Every chirp (to player or ref) earns an unsportsmanlike misconduct.

Refs let things go. They are also paid to ensure games are entertaining. What's a penalty in the 1st period isn't one in the 3rd. And what's a penalty early in the season may not be one later on if the memo from GM says so.

The issue is how things are being handled within that standard.


That interference non-call late in the second is a great example. The previous 3-4 minutes leading up to the Erickson trip was another.

A ref used discretion to let a call go against a player who has developed a reputation for embellishment. Even if the player played honourably, refs let call go all the time based on what I said above.

Its been multiple calls, which was Babcock's point.

Now officials are supposed to handle the game, everyone does it a little different. But if they can't call the game correctly, based on their own standard, that's a huge problem. This was the case Saturday.

 

[Gallagbi]

And you call a perfect game every time, you don't miss one thing? How bizarre it is to be a perfect ref.

They are performing their duties, they see they have a player who cheats and will not tolerate him cheating anymore. Kadri has a lot of mending fences to do if he wishes to get off the cheaters list.

Calls are missed. It happens. You're stating the calls were witnessed and their bias impacts their judgement to make an incorrect call.

That's an issue.

 

[Bluelines]

Calls are missed. If happens. You're stating the calls were witnessed and their own bias impacts their judgement to make an incorrect call.

That's an issue.

That bias was created because of Kadri's long history of cheating, its not liek the refs said hey lets go after him because we just want to. If I take a dollar from you every day for a year, and day 366 you're missing a dollar, are you going to assume I took it or someone else? You're going to assume its me because I created a bias in your opinion. I;ve established a history, same thing goes for Naz, in plays that are borderline, Naz will no longer get the benefit of the doubt.

If I was to guess why this lack of call against Kadri has happened all of a sudden its because he was in a pack of recent videos distributed to the refs by the league.

 

[Eb]

Didn't read the whole thread but do people think the play on Rielly at the end of Boston game was penalty?

 

[LeafsLegendAkiBerg]

Didn't read the whole thread but do people think the play on Rielly at the end of Boston game was penalty?

I don't know, it's a bit of an awkward play. The push from Eriksson definitely caused Reilly to fall into the boards awkwardly but it also wasn't much of a shove and I'm not sure it was intentional. It also resulted in a goal. If I were the ref I might have called a penalty on Eriksson to negate the goal but even it up when Kadri jumped in. I don't feel too upset about the play... but maybe I'm just happy we lost.

 

[New Leaf]

Yes.

We see it all the time, players will turn to get hit from behind and draw the penalty.

I think it is time the players putting themselves in these situation should be suspended until they learn to put their own health ahead of getting the call.

See, this post is crazy. They're not doing it to get hit from behind. They're doing it because they're turning with the puck. Maybe they're naive and believe that another human being wouldn't want to destroy their neck, but they're not doing it to get hit from behind. I've been around hockey my whole life as a player and a ref and I have never seen a play that seemed like someone was intentionally trying to get hit from behind.

Plus you want someone to get suspended for getting hit from behind when every hit is preventable? Insane.

 

[Gallagbi]

That bias was created because of Kadri's long history of cheating, its not liek the refs said hey lets go after him because we just want to. If I take a dollar from you every day for a year, and day 366 you're missing a dollar, are you going to assume I took it or someone else? You're going to assume its me because I created a bias in your opinion. I;ve established a history, same thing goes for Naz, in plays that are borderline, Naz will no longer get the benefit of the doubt.

If I was to guess why this lack of call against Kadri has happened all of a sudden its because he was in a pack of recent videos distributed to the refs by the league.

A huge part of their job is to not let bias get in the way of how they call the games.

 

[Pookie]

A huge part of their job is to not let bias get in the way of how they call the games.

Yes but what you call bias they might call context.

A player known for diving won't get the benefit of the doubt.

Just like baseball umps will give good hitters the benefit of the doubt on close strike calls but won't afford the same leeway to a rookie who is hitting .125.

If Kadri had a rep for staying on his feet... Didn't the mic pick up a "stay on your feet Kadri" comment a few games back? ... he might get the call.

 

[New Leaf]

Yes but what you call bias they might call context.

A player known for diving won't get the benefit of the doubt.

Just like baseball umps will give good hitters the benefit of the doubt on close strike calls but won't afford the same leeway to a rookie who is hitting .125.

If Kadri had a rep for staying on his feet... Didn't the mic pick up a "stay on your feet Kadri" comment a few games back? ... he might get the call.

Both of those examples are refs doing their job poorly.

 

[LeafsLegendAkiBerg]

A huge part of their job is to not let bias get in the way of how they call the games.

True, but the refs are human and don't have the benefit of viewing replays during the game. If the refs are trying to minimize the "mistakes" they make, they'll likely note players who embellish and be less likely to call those penalties unless they're really blatant.

Think of it this way: the refs could make every call for a known diver and in retrospect only 1 of those 10 penalties were "legit." On the other hand the ref could ignore those 10 calls and only miss the one "legit" one. In this situation the latter is probably the "best' option.

The better option might be for the NHL to step in and punish players much more harshly for embellishment. I know they fine players, but I almost never hear about that happening. But then... I guess the problem is that sometimes there's a fine line between a dive and a player who just happens to loses their balance at the right time.

 

[diceman934]

26 and still needs to work on strength and shot........

As another poster mentioned

Much has been made about him playing against the other team's top lines often. Has he been doing a good job of it though? I'd say he's done ok but he's also a -14 on the season, 2nd worst among Leaf forwards. There are better options around the league if you want a shutdown center.

And I think looking forward, Kadri's biggest obstacle on the Leafs is just that: his role, or place, on the team.

To be a Cup contender the Leafs are going to need to draft another high-end top 6 center. Kadri's not a 1st line center - I think most of us can agree on that. Nylander might be. But they'll need more depth up the middle to be one of the really good teams.

So where does that leave Kadri? Maybe the wing is his ultimate landing spot. He's going to be too expensive as a 3rd line C in a few years when (hopefully) the Leafs have Nylander + someone else occupying the two top spots.

But how much do you pay a top 6 winger who most likely sits between 40-50 points a season? Over $5M a season on a long term deal? Not in my mind.

I think Kadri will be dealt in the summer. Not because he's not a good player but because of his contract demands and long-term role on the team. The Leafs have been hyping him up just like they did with Phaneuf. I don't think that's a coincidence.

There are not a lot of better options league wide...

Are you his agent...his contracts demands have always been fair...as for them hyping him up there is no need his play on the ice speaks for its self.

 

[Gallagbi]

Yes but what you call bias they might call context.

A player known for diving won't get the benefit of the doubt.

Just like baseball umps will give good hitters the benefit of the doubt on close strike calls but won't afford the same leeway to a rookie who is hitting .125.

If Kadri had a rep for staying on his feet... Didn't the mic pick up a "stay on your feet Kadri" comment a few games back? ... he might get the call.

The umpire example is a great overview of a person doing their job poorly based on reputation rather than what they see.

It doesn't matter what you call it, context or bias, if an official isn't capable of making accurate calls they should be dealt with.

 

[ShaneFalco]

There are not a lot of better options league wide...

Are you his agent...his contracts demands have always been fair...as for them hyping him up there is no need his play on the ice speaks for its self.

Because he hasnèt proven anything, which is why heès on a show-me contract.
His play ion the ice speaks to a good 3rd line C
But people see what they want to see with Kadri

 

[diceman934]

Well then as an official you surely realize that perfection is unattainable.

If the standard is that everything is to be called, games would go on forever. Every slash. Every hook. Every interference. Every 3 step charge. Every chirp (to player or ref) earns an unsportsmanlike misconduct.

Refs let things go. They are also paid to ensure games are entertaining. What's a penalty in the 1st period isn't one in the 3rd. And what's a penalty early in the season may not be one later on if the memo from GM says so.

Babcock is singling out individual plays in a 60 minute game. Which is clearly biased to his team's benefit. And this, to a biased crowd, resonates.

Honestly, you could remove Babcock and the Leafs and insert any team name into it and their fan base would rally around it.

A ref used discretion to let a call go against a player who has developed a reputation for embellishment. Even if the player played honourably, refs let call go all the time based on what I said above.

There's a story there?

Please....spare me the story....
If you watched the game you would have seen two very obvious calls that were not called...

There is a story because they happened in clear view and the refs made a decision not to call them based on who they were against.