Referees, power plays and ''let them play''

[topnotch]

Because Hjalmarsson put himself into his own crease. Perry is turning to get the puck that is coming from behind the net. Perry establishes body position with his right shoulder and Hjalmarsson bumps into Crawford. If you watch any team dump the puck into the corner and chase it down these plays happen all the time but there isn't a goalie present obviously. My guess is that the ref saw Hjalmarsson enter his own crease and Perry didn't really make a blatant move to hit him into the goalie other than putting his shoulder in front of him and turning toward the approaching puck.

Hjalmarsson wasn't in the crease when Perry hit him. He was skating right at the top of the line. And it doesn't matter. Perry can't check Hjalmarrson into Crawford. If that isn't regular interference then it's goalie interference.

Crawford should have been penalized.

Silferberg's penalty was weak but holding a player who's beaten you, and who is that far away from the called is called more frequently; you just can't grab jersey when the opposing player is skating away. It's too apparent. Hossa had a weak holding call in game 3 which resulted in a Ducks goal.

 

[xxgt465xx]

Hjalmarsson wasn't in the crease when Perry hit him. He was skating right at the top of the line. And it doesn't matter. Perry can't check Hjalmarrson into Crawford. If that isn't regular interference then it's goalie interference.

Crawford should have been penalized.

Silferberg's penalty was weak but holding a player who's beaten you, and who is that far away from the called is called more frequently; you just can't grab jersey when the opposing player is skating away. It's too apparent. Hossa had a weak holding call in game 3 which resulted in a Ducks goal.

I disagree on the Perry play completely but whatever. Its not goalie interference EVER on that play, because Perry never made contact with Crawford and he never interfered with Hjalmarsson. Putting your shoulder/upper body in front of a guy, when both are taking lines to the approaching puck, is not interference. The ref isn't going to call a penalty when the Hawks players line to the puck is ridiculously close to his goalie like that.

In terms of the Silfverberg play, yes I know he grazed the jersey ever so slightly with his fingers, but my gripe is that why is that the only point of the game where it was a penalty? The answer is that the Ducks were up by a goal with 8 minutes left in the game. And that is an extremely terrible reason for it to be a penalty.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

I disagree on the Perry play completely but whatever. Its not goalie interference EVER on that play, because Perry never made contact with Crawford and he never interfered with Hjalmarsson. Putting your shoulder/upper body in front of a guy, when both are taking lines to the approaching puck, is not interference. The ref isn't going to call a penalty when the Hawks players line to the puck is ridiculously close to his goalie like that.

In terms of the Silfverberg play, yes I know he grazed the jersey ever so slightly with his fingers, but my gripe is that why is that the only point of the game where it was a penalty? The answer is that the Ducks were up by a goal with 8 minutes left in the game. And that is an extremely terrible reason for it to be a penalty.

Agreed that the ref won't make that call against Perry unless there is a greater force contact, but to flat out say that's not interference is wrong. It is. However, it doesn't reach the threshold of a penalty to be called.

The bolded however is where you lose ALL credibility in your ability to argue what should or should not be a penalty called.

 

[xxgt465xx]

Agreed that the ref won't make that call against Perry unless there is a greater force contact, but to flat out say that's not interference is wrong. It is. However, it doesn't reach the threshold of a penalty to be called.

The bolded however is where you lose ALL credibility in your ability to argue what should or should not be a penalty called.

Then how do you explain why Beleskey being bear-hugged wasn't a penalty when the game was tied? Because the officials didn't see it? No, they choose to ignore things sometimes.

Please read part I bolded from your statement. Like what did you just conjure up in your head? If its not deserving of a penalty then I will refer to it as "not interference". Its also why I said earlier that if the puck were to have gone in simultaneously with that contact they would have probably called no-goal due to incidental contact but its not deserving of an interference penalty. You are allowed to pinch people off using the net like Perry did.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Then how do you explain why Beleskey being bear-hugged wasn't a penalty when the game was tied? Because the officials didn't see it? No, they choose to ignore things sometimes.

Please read part I bolded from your statement. Like what did you just conjure up in your head? If its not deserving of a penalty then I will refer to it as "not interference". Its also why I said earlier that if the puck were to have gone in simultaneously with that contact they would have probably called no-goal due to incidental contact but its not deserving of an interference penalty. You are allowed to pinch people off using the net like Perry did.

Perry wasn't using the net, he was using Crawford.

Second, how do you know what the official saw or did not see when it comes to that Belesky play? Maybe he was tracking the puck up to the point?

My god, get rid of your bias....it's not a freaking conspiracy

 

[xxgt465xx]

Perry wasn't using the net, he was using Crawford.

Second, how do you know what the official saw or did not see when it comes to that Belesky play? Maybe he was tracking the puck up to the point?

My god, get rid of your bias....it's not a freaking conspiracy

What bias? I have seen it applied in almost every series. NHL officials seem to have this idea that they are only deciding games when they call penalties in a tie game, but they call super marginal crap when a team is down in the final 10 minutes. I don't need any bias to see that stuff.

And in the NHL they have a two referee system, so if they missed that then somebody COMPLETELY blew their assignment which is pretty bad for the Conference Finals in the NHL.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

What bias? I have seen it applied in almost every series. NHL officials seem to have this idea that they are only deciding games when they call penalties in a tie game, but they call super marginal crap when a team is down in the final 10 minutes. I don't need any bias to see that stuff.

And in the NHL they have a two referee system, so if they missed that then somebody COMPLETELY blew their assignment which is pretty bad for the Conference Finals in the NHL.

What Bias? Wow...I think that tin foil has finally bled into your brain....

If you think the ONLY explanation for that call was that the Ducks were up by one....

That's biased... I can't believe I have to explain that....

 

[xxgt465xx]

What Bias? Wow...I think that tin foil has finally bled into your brain....

If you think the ONLY explanation for that call was that the Ducks were up by one....

That's biased... I can't believe I have to explain that....

Would you be happier if I just said that the officiating in the final 10 minutes was extremely poor, in general?

It doesn't matter who is up with 10 minutes left. The refs do this in EVERY SERIES. When you can sit there and watch these games and basically assume that the trailing team will get a power play on the slightest bit of anything, including what has happened all game long, then its a pretty unfortunate situation. I got ripped pretty hard in my reviews so I think the NHL officials would have to endure a bit of criticism. Just because you officiate doesn't mean you have to protect these guys weird decisions with such ferocity.

 

[Hawksfan2828]

You gotta either call everything or only the most blatant penalties.

This is the playoffs and reffs can't be calling guys for trivial nonsense that happens every 2 seconds...

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Would you be happier if I just said that the officiating in the final 10 minutes was extremely poor, in general?

It doesn't matter who is up with 10 minutes left. The refs do this in EVERY SERIES. When you can sit there and watch these games and basically assume that the trailing team will get a power play on the slightest bit of anything, including what has happened all game long, then its a pretty unfortunate situation. I got ripped pretty hard in my reviews so I think the NHL officials would have to endure a bit of criticism. Just because you officiate doesn't mean you have to protect these guys weird decisions with such ferocity.

Wanna a venture a guess as to why you think the TRAILING team would get a power play other than it's a conspiracy?

 

[xxgt465xx]

You gotta either call everything or only the most blatant penalties.

This is the playoffs and reffs can't be calling guys for trivial nonsense that happens every 2 seconds...

My point exactly. What was more blatant about Silfverberg's "hold" that wasn't blatant on the hold in front of the net in the final seconds or Crawford taking a two-hander to Beleskey's upper body because he was throwing a ***** fit?

 

[xxgt465xx]

Wanna a venture a guess as to why you think the TRAILING team would get a power play other than it's a conspiracy?

Because NHL officials try to "balance out" games with really ticky-tack calls. In these playoffs I have seen some extremely weird spots where officials basically make an obvious call in these crucial spots, but they don't want that to affect the game so they even it up with some really weird call on the other team. Or they just let it go completely because there isn't even a shadow of something to call on the other team.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Because NHL officials try to "balance out" games with really ticky-tack calls. In these playoffs I have seen some extremely weird spots where officials basically make an obvious call in these crucial spots, but they don't want that to affect the game so they even it up with some really weird call on the other team. Or they just let it go completely because there isn't even a shadow of something to call on the other team.

I said without your conspiracy theory...

How about because more often than not, the TRAILING team is PRESSING HARD, therefore they will have possession more, therefore the team that is LEADING will be reaching out more to stop them....

Naw...never crossed your mind in your 5 years of officiating...

 

[Hawksfan2828]

My point exactly. What was more blatant about Silfverberg's "hold" that wasn't blatant on the hold in front of the net in the final seconds or Crawford taking a two-hander to Beleskey's upper body because he was throwing a ***** fit?

IMO, some of that is warranted, and the reffs won't call it because they missed calls previously.....

Sometimes guys get what they deserve....

IMO, Stoner should be serving a suspension right now, but he's not and that is just part of hockey.

 

[xxgt465xx]

I said without your conspiracy theory...

How about because more often than not, the TRAILING team is PRESSING HARD, therefore they will have possession more, therefore the team that is LEADING will be reaching out more to stop them....

Naw...never crossed your mind in your 5 years of officiating...

The NHL is a different beast, my friend. There are MILLIONS, like ridiculous amounts of millions, of advertising dollars involved and I am not one to discount that at any point. Ive seen my share in this life, both in hockey and outside the game, that I don't trust everything is completely kosher or just an honest mistake. If you are the opposite then good for you.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

The NHL is a different beast, my friend. There are MILLIONS, like ridiculous amounts of millions, of advertising dollars involved and I am not one to discount that at any point. Ive seen my share in this life, both in hockey and outside the game, that I don't trust everything is completely kosher or just an honest mistake. If you are the opposite then good for you.

Whatever bud, to each his own...it just boggles my mind that you actually believe what you spout...

 

[xxgt465xx]

IMO, some of that is warranted, and the reffs won't call it because they missed calls previously.....

Sometimes guys get what they deserve....

IMO, Stoner should be serving a suspension right now, but he's not and that is just part of hockey.

I can tell you 100% without bias that the reason he isn't suspended is because there was no injury. Thats a precedent the NHL has set in those circumstances throughout the entire league. So you as a hockey fan should be able to deduce in your head that when Kruger stays in the game, no suspension will be levied against Stoner. Now would anyone really care that Stoner got suspended? Probably not. He has shown to be a complete liability in the final period and OT with his love for icing the puck or passing the puck right through the slot so you guys are probably lucky that he is still playing.

 

[xxgt465xx]

Tin foil hat...keep wearing it proudly...

Watch these games with sports bettors. They factor who is reffing these games, what team is at home (not always for line match ups. I guess thats my tin foil hat), etc. Those guys are some of the sharpest sports people and they know it happens so they just factor it into their decisions.

BTW, how funny would it have been if the puck had gone in as Crawford was trying to hack Beleskey's head off?

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Watch these games with sports bettors. They factor who is reffing these games, what team is at home (not always for line match ups. I guess thats my tin foil hat), etc. Those guys are some of the sharpest sports people and they know it happens so they just factor it into their decisions.

BTW, how funny would it have been if the puck had gone in as Crawford was trying to hack Beleskey's head off?

Wow, you really just don't get it,

You know why they factor in who refs? It's because refs call different games, you might get two guys that call everything, and if a team has a 25% PP rating, vs 12% PP rating, it's an edge,

Wow...really? You really don't get that? Or are you just going to dismiss everything that doesn't conform to your bias?

 

[Caeldan]

Wow, you really just don't get it,

You know why they factor in who refs? It's because refs call different games, you might get two guys that call everything, and if a team has a 25% PP rating, vs 12% PP rating, it's an edge,

Wow...really? You really don't get that? Or are you just going to dismiss everything that doesn't conform to your bias?

This is exactly what needs to be fixed and why refs actually do influence the outcome of games by 'letting them play'.

Call it by the book, and the players will learn.
Add a third set of eyes in the sky, allow on-ice officials to make use of video replay during their silly little huddle sessions (which often times creates a wrong call), and generally just work on improving officiating so that it's not actually a storyline for the game.

Then we'll be letting the players play and decide the game.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

This is exactly what needs to be fixed and why refs actually do influence the outcome of games by 'letting them play'.

Call it by the book, and the players will learn.
Add a third set of eyes in the sky, allow on-ice officials to make use of video replay during their silly little huddle sessions (which often times creates a wrong call), and generally just work on improving officiating so that it's not actually a storyline for the game.

Then we'll be letting the players play and decide the game.

Never gonna fix that and keep a human element, it's just a fact of life, what you think is a penalty is going to be different than what I think, especially if the play is on the border or border line, there is a reason why they are called borderline calls.

So you either get rid of ALL borderline calls or you don't. Once you figure out how to get rid of ALL borderline calls, let me know...

 

[xxgt465xx]

Wow, you really just don't get it,

You know why they factor in who refs? It's because refs call different games, you might get two guys that call everything, and if a team has a 25% PP rating, vs 12% PP rating, it's an edge,

Wow...really? You really don't get that? Or are you just going to dismiss everything that doesn't conform to your bias?

Im just going to reiterate what the guy above me said. The bolded text is a HUGE problem because the same referee teams don't ref the whole series. Its confusing for players and fans alike.

Not to mention, it seems they call EVERYTHING on the borderline against the Ducks, but those borderline calls that the Hawks commit don't get called. There is something wrong there. And you keep claiming human error, but not everybody takes that as an acceptable defense for what we have seen, but you obviously do.

 

[Brainiac]

The NFL is the same and did it for "more scoring," like the NHL wants more of too.

If the NHL wants scoring, then just needs to start calling more interference calls and more major boarding/charging calls. The later would probably help with this CTE issue as well...

Exactly.

And what people don't seem to understand, is that it will not lead, in the long term, to games being decided on the PP. The players will adapt and we'll just have a cleaner game, where skilled players can lead the show, as it should be.

 

[Caeldan]

Never gonna fix that and keep a human element, it's just a fact of life, what you think is a penalty is going to be different than what I think, especially if the play is on the border or border line, there is a reason why they are called borderline calls.

So you either get rid of ALL borderline calls or you don't. Once you figure out how to get rid of ALL borderline calls, let me know...

I have zero attachment to the human element of officiating. It's the worst part of the game imo.

If we could automate it completely, I'd be all for it.

In the meantime, we should look to minimize the number of calls made in the interests of game management and maximize the use of the rulebook.

 

[xxgt465xx]

Exactly.

And what people don't seem to understand, is that it will not lead, in the long term, to games being decided on the PP. The players will adapt and we'll just have a cleaner game, where skilled players can lead the show, as it should be.

Not only this, but when they do get called, there could be less argument over it. Even now the players are confused at how the hell something didn't just get called in certain situations. And some people seem to be ok with the referee just saying "I didn't see it" or "I was out of position" but I do not accept it.