IS there a solution to the NHL's ref problem?

[5minutemajor]

I note that apparently three out of the first four replies didn't even read the OP.

The quotes were just so bad in content that they needed to be explicitly omitted by us repliants. Hence, it appeared as we never read those, when we actually did.

 

[nturn06]

This. Super fast game, cant see everything, guys embellishing, refs are moving too and trying not to get hit by a body or puck while staying in position. Not an eviable gig at all. At BEST, you are a non-issue, and at worst, you are getting death threats by some fat ass clown who probably can't even skate.

Calls are missed, bad/wrong calls are made, but its part of the game. Move along.

One change I would like to see is to make all potential embellishments reviewable. Actually, having someone in the TV booth watching only for this, and sending the info to the ref would probably clear the game.

 

[Matty Sundin]

have refs get a herring for a terrible officiated game and suspend them. They need to be held accountable but they won’t. They even fine players and coaches for hurting their feelings calling them out even if it’s justified.

 

[easton117]

The solution is to make chatGPT the referees

Bad reffing won't be an issue when a rogue AI kills everyone

They start dishing out two minutes of bee stings for hooking you’ll never see a stick off the ice again!

Get creative here!

 

[Empoleon8771]

There is no reffing problem in the NHL beyond game management. Fans are just babies.

 

[Blackjack]

A number of the newer ones are not NHL level such as Luxmore.

Some veteran officials such as Sutherland thrive on allowing games to escalate out of control for the ability to exert power via misconducts.

The majority are adequate and merely stuck in a tough position due to game management expectations. That lack of consistency is what causes the majority of criticism.

Speaking just for myself, I have much less of a problem with a bad call that is made in good faith than knowing that a bad call is coming because of the score or the balance of previous calls.

I would get rid of video review entirely, I would have the refs review all the calls from each game on video and make continuous efforts to improve, with emphasis on consistent standards regardless of score or prior calls.

It will never happen, for the same reason that we’ll never get rid of three point games: both inflated point totals and bad refereeing help mediocre coaches and GMs keep their jobs. And they keep heat off the owners.

 

[Oleksiak]

Let teams give a veto list of refs they don't trust to work their games. If a ref appears on too many for him to be scheduled, replace him. Otherwise, the only way to get the league to start holding problem refs accountable is when a judge forces it to.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Get rid of Bettman, they're doing exactly what the league wants them to do. Why would they be held accountable and punished ?

Connect the dots for those of us who are slower than the rest of the class, please.

What exactly does the league want the refs to do?

 

[TrufleShufle]

Connect the dots for those of us who are slower than the rest of the class, please.

What exactly does the league want the refs to do?

Stir up controversy to make hockey more like a reality show, get a broader audience in the states.

 

[Viqsi]

Should be technological solutions in the not very distant future. AI connected to all the angles and ice level interactions, no bias or human emotion, every angle available instantly. Rulebook in RAM.

The actual article covers that; I just can't quote the whole thing.

 

[Dieseloil]

The teams with the best PP’s are the ones being cheated. But I get it, money talks and the owners don’t want those teams having that advantage so they came up with game management.

 

[Oleksiak]

Connect the dots for those of us who are slower than the rest of the class, please.

What exactly does the league want the refs to do?

Look up the Colin Campbell emails. There's written proof of his corruption and he is still employed.

 

[kwichang]

Should be technological solutions in the not very distant future. AI connected to all the angles and ice level interactions, no bias or human emotion, every angle available instantly. Rulebook in RAM.

Agree RefGPT AI officiating is a future solution. But, I’d think we need helmet sensors to let AI determine whether something was an intentional dive

 

[Bounces R Way]

Take one official off the ice and put him in between the boxes with an iPad would be my suggestion.
or make the officials available to the media after games.
or have every call reviewed by a 16 person jury in real time in which fans can bet on the result. Bam another revenue stream

 

[dukedukowski]

The refs are obviously doing exactly what the league wants them to.
There's no problem.

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

Unpopular opinion: There is no officiating problem, just a problem of crybaby fans with 6 angles of HD slo-mo replays, social media to go cry on and an inability to accept that their favorite team wasn't good enough.

This.

Refs definitely f*** up but the inability of adults to recognize their own biases is sad and quite frankly, a bit frightening.

On every damn call, whatever has happened within the game, there is post after post echoing in the darkness on one team’s thread about a “joke” of a call. Meanwhile, the other team’s board is saying it’s a great call.

But fear not, both sets of fans will get together later and talk about a “refereeing problem” and be in full agreement.

 

[Chainshot]

Connect the dots for those of us who are slower than the rest of the class, please.

What exactly does the league want the refs to do?

Closer games hold TV viewer attention later into a match. I would also point to the heavy advertising with gambling firms as concerning if the league is giving direction on game management. That could be deemed point shaving and lead to gaming commission investigations.

 

[Blackjack]

There is no reffing problem in the NHL beyond game management. Fans are just babies.

And by game management you mean making calls based on the score, or balance of previous calls, rather than on merit? That’s a huge problem!

Connect the dots for those of us who are slower than the rest of the class, please.

What exactly does the league want the refs to do?

As much as I hate the league I actually don’t think it’s malicious here. I think it’s just incompetent. Compare it to baseball where home plate umpires used to have pet strike zones, like their own little brand or something. MLB didn’t want it that way, they just didn’t give a shit. Eventually people got so fed up with it that they instituted the reviews they have now. They don’t have any automation, but they DO get their calls reviewed after the game. The pet strike zones are gone. Players will still argue a call, but you don’t see the broad frustration there is with the NHL.

Take one official off the ice and put him in between the boxes with an iPad would be my suggestion.
or make the officials available to the media after games.
or have every call reviewed by a 16 person jury in real time in which fans can bet on the result. Bam another revenue stream

What this ignores is that many calls are marginal. At what point does a hook become egregious enough to call? What about a trip? I don’t want every marginal infraction to get called, I just want a consistent standard that isn’t affected by score or prior calls.

This.

Refs definitely f*** up but the inability of adults to recognize their own biases is sad and quite frankly, a bit frightening.

On every damn call, whatever has happened within the game, there is post after post echoing in the darkness on one team’s thread about a “joke” of a call. Meanwhile, the other team’s board is saying it’s a great call.

But fear not, both sets of fans will get together and talk about a “refereeing problem” and be in full agreement.

That’s not really what happens at all though. Fans complain much more about the consistency of calls. They almost always refer back to a previous call that was more/less egregious than the call that just was/wasn’t made.

But it’s much easier to just call people babies and pretend there’s no problem.

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

The idea that you can get this shit “right

And by game management you mean making calls based on the score, or balance of previous calls, rather than on merit? That’s a huge problem!



As much as I hate the league I actually don’t think it’s malicious here. I think it’s just incompetent. Compare it to baseball where home plate umpires used to have pet strike zones, like their own little brand or something. MLB didn’t want it that way, they just didn’t give a shit. Eventually people got so fed up with it that they instituted the reviews they have now. They don’t have any automation, but they DO get their calls reviewed after the game. The pet strike zones are gone. Players will still argue a call, but you don’t see the broad frustration there is with the NHL.



What this ignores is that many calls are marginal. At what point does a hook become egregious enough to call? What about a trip? I don’t want every marginal infraction to get called, I just want a consistent standard that isn’t affected by score or prior calls.

You don’t want them all called, but you want a “consistent” standard. Ok, in quantifiable or otherwise in words that can be stated, tell me what that line or standard is. And then tell me how that line can be enforced and executed during a game with consistency in which referees have constantly differing angles and ability to see a play.

 

[WTFMAN99]

I feel like the NHL has it's hands in this and tells the refs to manage the games, I wouldn't care if the game was called by the book but if it's genuine?

Okay, the game is fast, call it by the book and there is a 3rd ref with a birds eye view of the rink that is on the headset with the refs.

 

[NorthStar4Canes]

Unpopular opinion: There is no officiating problem, just a problem of crybaby fans with 6 angles of HD slo-mo replays, social media to go cry on and an inability to accept that their favorite team wasn't good enough.

I'm not so sure it's unpopular. There's a wide swath of society that crybabies their way through life via social media, dissecting every imperfection, shocked and indignant when they find out the world is an imperfect place. They're always loud, good at nothing except demanding someone else fix it, and nowadays can easily find kindred spirits in misery.

The larger segment knows bad/missed calls go with the territory. Always has, always will because, as you say, hockey isn't played in HD slo-mo with 6 different angles and a replay function.

 

[Aqualung]

I’d prefer it if they called the rule book and not manage the game as they admittedly do based on game flow.

 

[Blackjack]

You don’t want them all called, but you want a “consistent” standard. Ok, in quantifiable or otherwise in words that can be stated, tell me what that line or standard is. And then tell me how that line can be enforced and executed during a game with consistency in which referees have constantly differing angles and ability to see a play.

Yes, a consistent standard is a reasonable ask. For example, maybe I want a hook called if it, in the judgement of the ref, materially affects the play.

You enforce that by measuring the balance of calls to ensure that they’re not doing game management. You do video review with the refs and identify bad/missed calls in a continuous effort to improve.

I already stated that I’m okay with a ref missing a call, so not sure what angles and ability to see have to do with it.

 

[Adele Dazeem]

Billions of dollars are being made from gambling. They won't get rid of game management for that reason.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Going by this article, it seems pretty hopeless, all things considered.

The solution lies in better general training, greater emphasis in "zone of control" for each referee, targeted training on what should and shouldn't be called, and communication of all of that with coaches and players to help find a "reasonable" standard for what should and shouldn't be called - and then consistent enforcement of that standard, with ongoing instruction for everyone involved. I might even argue for creating consistent officiating crews so that you know as an official, you're going to have the same guys or small group of guys when you work instead of it being a more or less open draw and you could land with any of all of the various referees and linesmen. That last part alone would allow for building of trust, feeling out each other's strengths and weaknesses and being able to better target improvement for everyone involved.

Beyond that? Life isn't fair. The officiating will never be perfect, no matter how hard everyone wishes in one hand and shits in another. Quit bitching about what you want to have, deal with what you do have and make the best of that, and hope for better as things go forward.