Ridiculous Goal/Refereeing

[groovejuice]

Nhl is by far the weakest reffed league in north America. Inconsistent calls are the norm and every team is affected by it.

I'm not sure how much you watch other pro sports in NA, but from my viewpoint, NBA, MLB, and NFL are as well, all symptomatic of questionable calls that stick, on an absurdly regular basis.

The following is purely speculation on my part, based on decades of watching pro sports.

I see the reasons as multifold.

1. There is intentional bias, which exists, but is rare. This could be a bias for or against certain teams, players or coaches

2. There is unconscious bias, which is marginally more prevalent. An example would be having heard from colleagues or in the media that a particular team dives alot

3. Incompetence. This can be fueled by ego, lack of experience, or an unwillingness to confer with colleagues

4. League generated policy. If a Ref has been instructed to watch for a particular type of penalty, i.e. diving, he may, by human nature, see an incident that isn't really there. This is especially bad when combined with point #2.

5. Replay. It's absolutely necessary in all sports to overturn a missed or blown call. With modern technology, it's the best way to correct a bad call. Unfortunately, it's hamstrung in all sports by time limitations, and policy. i.e. if a replay instigated to decide whether a puck fully crossed the line illuminates a missed goalie interference, it can't be used.

Also, the plays that can be reviewed are quite limited.

6. The very worst, and one that has been proven in soccer, is gambling. A random ref can always be motivated to intentional make or miss a call by financial encouragement. I'd suggest that this might exist in all pro sports, but that it likely is directly proportional to the amount of money wagered. My guess from most to least would be, soccer, NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL.

There is also the refusal of leagues to address perceived problems in a timely way. We've seen Stanley Cups won and lost with bad calls, perfect games in MLB stolen by horrible calls, good goals in the WC of Soccer disallowed because it's resistance to replay, ridiculously inconsistent interference calls in the NFL.

Obviously, the most common problem in errors by refs is human nature. No one is perfect, and even the very best officials make unintentional mistakes. Yet, whatever the cause, we, as fans, suffer horribly for each and every perceived violation against our team.

 

[Agnostic]

Colo lunges by himself inside the crease and on to the right side of it. This causes Weaver to jump on him and a pile up ensues. Read goes in after and even falls on Price, gets up, skates back sees the puck and scores. Price never had time to recover and there's 5 players battling in his crease. How is Price supposed to get up and recover exactly? This all started from Colo lunging into the crease all by himself.

Colaiacovo came through the crease playing the puck but was not in the crease at that time of the goal and at no time came in contact with Price. For there to be interference there has to be contact. The fact that there are Habs having a rugby match in the crease is inconsequential to the rule.

This one would have been a great one for a Refcam angle.


Edit: I'd go to TSN to see if Kerry Fraser weighs in on this but that site is practically unusable since they have changed the format. I don't even try.

 

[CanadienShark]

Don't get me wrong, I hate seeing missed calls, but these guys are human. Mistakes happen. People always seem to have unrealistic expectations of me at work - they don't realize that we don't just serve customers, we have to do a ton of cleaning, stock work, and other work that goes on behind the scenes. I've had customers yell at me because we were out of stock of a certain kind of beer, and when I tell him that the brewer messed up our order, he continued to insist that it's on me (when I'm not even qualified to do all the stock work/ordering), so I have nothing to do with it. Needless to say, the guy is a POS and I shake every Colt 45 he orders. With something so subjective, errors are bound to happen. Let's move past it.

 

[Nynja*]

If you want to discuss ridiculousness, is there any reason why Prust got a roughing minor for getting cross checked by Abdelkader in the 3rd?

 

[rabbit4949]

Nhl is by far the weakest reffed league in north America. Inconsistent calls are the norm and every team is affected by it.

Surely, you jest. Do you know difference between Gary Bettman and Vince McMahon? Vince tells the truth. He does not pretend that he is in anything but the sports entertainment business . Bettman tells us about competitive balance but what we get is officiating that makes sure that games are close.He wants every game to go into O/T,If a team gets a 2 or 3 goal lead , they will never get another PP while the team behind gets several whether deserved or not. It is all about the MONEY.He wants every team to be in the hunt in the last few weeks of the season to generate maximum interest and profit.Watch some games where you do not have a rooting interest and you see that it is almost comical when calls are made or not made.Remember that officials are paid by the league and it is in their best interest that the NHL continues to be profitable. Conspiracy theory?Maybe just the ramblings of a long-time fan.[since 1960] I am sure that most NHL fans do not care as long as their team wins.

 

[Kriss E]

Colaiacovo came through the crease playing the puck but was not in the crease at that time of the goal and at no time came in contact with Price. For there to be interference there has to be contact. The fact that there are Habs having a rugby match in the crease is inconsequential to the rule.

This one would have been a great one for a Refcam angle.


Edit: I'd go to TSN to see if Kerry Fraser weighs in on this but that site is practically unusable since they have changed the format. I don't even try.

He didn't come through..I mean come on. You're making it seem as if he skated through it and stopped outside next to the post. Re-watch the goal, that's not at all what happened. Coloiacovo purposely dropped to the ice inside the crease and a pile up ensued to get him out of it. While this is happening, Read also comes in falls on the pile, gets up, skates back, takes the puck and scores.
From what I ready off the rulebook, you don't need to have direct contact with the goalie. If you prevent the goalie from moving freely inside his crease, it should be a disallowed goal.
So you can just park yourself in his crease, if it forces him to back up in his net and limit his movement, it's no good.
But that's the problem with the officiating in the NHL, it's too subjective.

 

[Out East]

Some of you completely missed my point and the rule which is why you think the ref made a good call. You continue to make it about the puck being visible. That is not the point. The point is when a player(s) from the other team crash the net and impede the goalie from moving about freely in his crease the whistle should be blown and that goal would never even have occurred.
On the very next play Gallagher made incidental contact with the goalie in his crease and the play was correctly whistled dead. The very next play!!!
Someone please post the replay here so we can help the blind posters see...

 

[MrDangles67]

Then the same kind of play happens and the habs score but it's no goal

 

[29dryden29]

One of the things that annoys me about human nature (and it makes itself evident in sports) is how we overreact when things go wrong and ignore wrong when things go right.

I guarantee you had the Flyers come back and won last night all the talk would have been about the ridiculous goal mouth scramble goal the Flyers were permitted to score about 30ish seconds after the whistle should have blown. Since they didn't win no one says a word. Ridiculous.

All the talk that did occur at the time was about the puck being visible. Craziness. What about the rule that the goalie has to have free mobility inside the blue paint to make a save? Not only should the play have been whistled dead long before, but the circus that ensued while the ref obsessed over the location of the puck could have resulted in a serious injury to Carey Price. Then what would everyone be saying?

It's the same with dirty hits. When they happen and no one gets hurt hardly a word is said. When a clean hit occurs that results in an injury the clean hit is called dirty. It's all ridiculous. Are we all so blind and stupid?

A couple of weeks ago a goal was disallowed on Carey Price because of contact in the crease while he was trying to make the save. Many complained and the next day Fraser wrote an article about it and quoted the rule that states a goalie must be free to move around and make a save in the blue paint. Where was that rule last night. Pure insanity!

The difference with that and the Flyers situation which by the way was the right call the puck was clearly visible to the ref and thus the whistle did not blow. As for the free to move in the blue paint that is all well and good but the guys not allowing him to move were OUR players thus this rule does not apply.

 

[Nynja*]

Then the same kind of play happens and the habs score but it's no goal

It happens, but getting upset at refs for not botching a call cause it would have benefited us is not the way to go. Theres something very very wrong with "hey, that was the right call, but we didnt like it because we usually dont get the right call in our favour in that situation".

 

[FF de Mars]

Typical Montréal is an excuse.

 

[Devourers]

It happens, but getting upset at refs for not botching a call cause it would have benefited us is not the way to go. Theres something very very wrong with "hey, that was the right call, but we didnt like it because we usually dont get the right call in our favour in that situation".

Pretty sure most people would be happy with consistency regardless of who benefits from the calls you're referring to. Speaking for myself, I could live with the bad calls if I felt it effected other teams equally, but often times I find myself scratching my head. Therein lies the problem in my opinion. There's no consistency, one of our guys will go do something get called for interference, then moments later the same thing happens in reverse, no call.

Normally I don't mind, but imo the game we lost to Van if it weren't for poor officiating we could have taken 2pts. Not the end of the world obviously but can be frustrating for sure.

Personally, I wish they'd just call it by the book all the way and if that means we have more penalties so be it. I don't believe they've been doing that though, I believe they've been using far too much discretion in instances where penalties are warranted. Another quick example is seeing goals disallowed and then allowed, when they are identical. A bit of consistency imo would go a long way to appease me. Some people won't ever be happy but I would be if they made up their minds. Either put the whistles away or call the game 100% accurately.

Sometimes it seems one team is being held to a different rulebook and no doubt I've seen it in our favor too, it's stupid.

 

[Out East]

The difference with that and the Flyers situation which by the way was the right call the puck was clearly visible to the ref and thus the whistle did not blow. As for the free to move in the blue paint that is all well and good but the guys not allowing him to move were OUR players thus this rule does not apply.

You watch the replay and tell me again it was only Habs players in the crease... unless you are saying it is ok to crash the crease, create a melee, and then slip out before the puck goes in...

 

[LaP]

Missed the game, but saw that sequence on the hi-lights, strange and bizarre play around the net, but the ref seemed to be able to see the puck so he didn't whistle it dead...that being said, way too many bodies in Price's crease...a call that could have gone either way...

The one that frustrates me, is the quick whistle that goes against us most times, when a puck is free and we score, and it gets called back....anyhow the league is trying to get these right, but...

I did not see any replay outside of the game itself and the puck was clearly free no doubt about it but if i remember correctly (might be wrong) there was like 2 Flyers guys partially inside the goal crease and the puck was like not even close to one of them. Price could clearly not do his job freely. I feel like Price knew where the puck was but could simply not move. The guys need to make a reasonable effort to leave the goal crease when the puck is not there.

Like i said i did not watch any replay so maybe i'm wrong but if i'm right even if the puck was free if a guy from the Flyers was preventing Price to do his job inside his own crease while the puck was outside it then the ref should have stop the play anyway.

This said I've seen worse and goals like that are allowed or disallowed on a regular basis. In the end it's up to the ref judgement. The disallowed goal against Detroit was borderline as well could have been good.

I have more trouble with the amount of games we had 5+ pk against us this year. I know, i know we dive and bla bla bla but really we did not deserve those 5 pk and 5 on 3 against the Flyers. The penalty against Gallagher was a total joke.

 

[29dryden29]

You watch the replay and tell me again it was only Habs players in the crease... unless you are saying it is ok to crash the crease, create a melee, and then slip out before the puck goes in...

I have watched it and in a situation like that as a goalie myself the players you need to be pissed off at are your own team. Weiss jumped into the net behind Price and the others out front caused more of his issues than the Flyers players standing outside the blue paint.

 

[Agnostic]

Some of you completely missed my point and the rule which is why you think the ref made a good call. You continue to make it about the puck being visible. That is not the point. The point is when a player(s) from the other team crash the net and impede the goalie from moving about freely in his crease the whistle should be blown and that goal would never even have occurred.
On the very next play Gallagher made incidental contact with the goalie in his crease and the play was correctly whistled dead. The very next play!!!
Someone please post the replay here so we can help the blind posters see...

You seem pretty arrogant for someone who either doesn't understand the rule, hasn't watched the replay or both.

Fact 1: Colaiacovo was not in the crease and didn't contact Price
Fact 2: Matt Read was PUSHED into the crease by Malhotra. He left the crease well before the scoring play developed, but it doesn't really matter because he was PUSHED into the crease by Malhotra.

Fact 3: This is the relevant rule. Read the highlighted parts.

Rule 69 - Interference on the Goalkeeper

69.1 Interference on the Goalkeeper - This rule is based on the premise that an attacking player’s position, whether inside or outside the crease, should not, by itself, determine whether a goal should be allowed or disallowed. In other words, goals scored while attacking players are standing in the crease may, in appropriate circumstances be allowed. Goals should be disallowed only if: (1) an attacking player, either by his positioning or by contact, impairs the goalkeeper’s ability to move freely within his crease or defend his goal; or (2) an attacking player initiates intentional or deliberate contact with a goalkeeper, inside or outside of his goal crease. Incidental contact with a goalkeeper will be permitted, and resulting goals allowed, when such contact is initiated outside of the goal crease, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact. The rule will be enforced exclusively in accordance with the on-ice judgment of the Referee(s), and not by means of video replay or review.

For purposes of this rule, “contact,†whether incidental or otherwise, shall mean any contact that is made between or among a goalkeeper and attacking player(s), whether by means of a stick or any part of the body.

The overriding rationale of this rule is that a goalkeeper should have the ability to move freely within his goal crease without being hindered by the actions of an attacking player. If an attacking player enters the goal crease and, by his actions, impairs the goalkeeper’s ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed.

If an attacking player has been pushed, shoved, or fouled by a defending player so as to cause him to come into contact with the goalkeeper, such contact will not be deemed contact initiated by the attacking player for purposes of this rule, provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.

If a defending player has been pushed, shoved, or fouled by an attacking player so as to cause the defending player to come into contact with his own goalkeeper, such contact shall be deemed contact initiated by the attacking player for purposes of this rule, and if necessary a penalty assessed to the attacking player and if a goal is scored it would be disallowed.

Fact 4: The call on the ice was correct.

 

[groovejuice]

An interesting article where Kerry Fraser admits referee bias, and "hit lists".


http://www.habseyesontheprize.com/2...ciating-canadiens-brendan-gallagher-pk-subban

 

[Power Man]

An interesting article where Kerry Fraser admits referee bias, and "hit lists".


http://www.habseyesontheprize.com/2...ciating-canadiens-brendan-gallagher-pk-subban

you beat me to it


I hate you

 

[Rapala]

An interesting article where Kerry Fraser admits referee bias, and "hit lists".


http://www.habseyesontheprize.com/2...ciating-canadiens-brendan-gallagher-pk-subban

Don't beat cops know the nefarious characters in their neighborhoods?
What would the equivalent of being shot be...

 

[Sword]

There were a lot of good goals scored on Price that were disallowed, Datsyuk this year in Montreal and the Bolts in the playoffs. It has nothing to do with refereeing bias against the Habs, it happens to every team.

Although, I must point out that Pacioretty and Subban need to stop diving, because those two are giving the team a bad rep.

 

[groovejuice]

you beat me to it


I hate you

Get in line. Hehe

 

[groovejuice]

There were a lot of good goals scored on Price that were disallowed, Datsyuk this year in Montreal and the Bolts ina the playoffs. It has nothing to do with refereeing bias against the Habs, it happens to every team.

Although, I must point out that Pacioretty and Subban need to stop diving, because those two are giving the team a bad rep.

There are players who dive on every team. I frankly don't see the Habs having more than the average team.

As the article points out, if the reffing was more consistent and balanced, fewer player would feel the need to draw attention to a particular play. Except Marchand. That rat will never change.

 

[LaP]

There were a lot of good goals scored on Price that were disallowed, Datsyuk this year in Montreal and the Bolts in the playoffs. It has nothing to do with refereeing bias against the Habs, it happens to every team.

Although, I must point out that Pacioretty and Subban need to stop diving, because those two are giving the team a bad rep.

And the refs need to start calling hooking penalties against Subban and other high skills players. Yes he is fast and strong and can get away even when a player is slowing him down. But in the end it's still a hooking penalty against the other player. I remember once Subban got called for holding the stick when he was trying to remove the stick of the other player from in front of his chest while skating at full speed with the other player clearly behind him and not playing the puck of defending his position.

Honestly over 95% of the time when Subban "dive" the other player did a tripping or hooking move against him that would not have been called otherwise.

Of course he is not alone. It's the same for all above average players. In the playoffs when we won against the Pens a couple of years ago Gill was guilty of a hooking or interference penalty against either Crosby or Malkin at the very least 3-4 times a game. I think he was not called even once in the round for that. Even as a fan of the CH i thought it was totally stupid.

I'm close to 40 and i watch hockey since mid 80ies and Subban is one of the most player affected by hooking i have seen wearing the Montréal jersey ever. It's insane some night how much the refs let the other team slow him down with the stick parallel to the ice while he is skating at full speed and the other player is behind him. Things like that should be automatically called all the time.

I have no problem with a player trying to play the puck and lifting the stick of the other player in front of him. But when the stick stay parallel to the ice for more than a sec it should always be a call. After the 2004-2005 lockout it was. It's not anymore.

 

[donghabs98]

you beat me to it


I hate you

I legit was coming here to post this too.

 

[Power Man]

I legit was coming here to post this too.