The Fix: Referees, Penalties, and Bias

[Tres Peleches]

No but I’m not making wild assumptions that they’re not. I bet there is a system in place though. Don’t you?

I mean, I’m sure there is. But for all we know it’s akin to the South Park clip where they cut a chicken’d head off, play the kazoo and see where it falls.

It would make since, given that’s how they seemingly call the games

 

[scottywiper]

And we add to the catalogue...I said to my son that we were surely due to get a few calls go our way, that it couldn't possibly happen again. Silly me. I still believe in Father Christmas too!

 

[SI]

What you're describing here is individual bias and yes, that exists. In what form and to what degree is hard to tell. But, psychological data going back decades acknowledges that there's individual bias. This affects everybody.

The Isles have different ref crews all the time. If there was one ref that doesn't call any penalties in Isles games, and you can pin that to an individual ref (or 2 or 3) and map a history of games that ref was in and note the anomalies in the penalty calls, then we'd be working with something.

But, you're not describing that at all. You're describing systemic bias. Systemic bias is very rare as it requires a conspiratorial framework among many individuals in which to exist. This is incredibly difficult to do.

I remember reading that the Isles dump the puck in more than any team in the league. They rarely score off the rush. They also play a highly regimented defensive system which doesn't allow many rush attempts going the other way. I wonder if there's a way to see how many penalties happen on the rush? My guess is that it's very high because that's where the most desperate plays happen.

What about when two of those missed calls result in goals?

They sucked tonight anyway.

 

[SI]

 

[SI]

 

[SI]

Delete

 

[crasherino]

Meh - I don't really think that's going to get called. Yes, his stick broke after contact from Fast so I guess you can call it a slash. But they were both fighting for position and the puck and Fast got his stick down where Leddy's was and Leddy's stick broke. In retrospect you can look at it and say that he slashed his stick causing it to break - a perfect example of a slashing call but I don't think that's a case of a player slashing a stick out of an opposing player's hand and then picking up and scoring. It was a fight for the puck in front of the net and Leddy didn't have good position and found himself reaching for the puck under where Fast's stick had to go to get the puck. Not going to say it wasn't a slash, but I don't think you're getting that call most of the time.

 

[MJF]

Meh - I don't really think that's going to get called. Yes, his stick broke after contact from Fast so I guess you can call it a slash. But they were both fighting for position and the puck and Fast got his stick down where Leddy's was and Leddy's stick broke. In retrospect you can look at it and say that he slashed his stick causing it to break - a perfect example of a slashing call but I don't think that's a case of a player slashing a stick out of an opposing player's hand and then picking up and scoring. It was a fight for the puck in front of the net and Leddy didn't have good position and found himself reaching for the puck under where Fast's stick had to go to get the puck. Not going to say it wasn't a slash, but I don't think you're getting that call most of the time.

Your argument would have a better foundation if the refs hadn’t been calling all the stick penalties (slashing sticks out of hands, sticks to midsections, restraining, etc) so stringently this season and last.

So that’s the time they let it go because they’re fighting for position? Incidental contact? Nope not buying it.

 

[SI]

Meh - I don't really think that's going to get called. Yes, his stick broke after contact from Fast so I guess you can call it a slash. But they were both fighting for position and the puck and Fast got his stick down where Leddy's was and Leddy's stick broke. In retrospect you can look at it and say that he slashed his stick causing it to break - a perfect example of a slashing call but I don't think that's a case of a player slashing a stick out of an opposing player's hand and then picking up and scoring. It was a fight for the puck in front of the net and Leddy didn't have good position and found himself reaching for the puck under where Fast's stick had to go to get the puck. Not going to say it wasn't a slash, but I don't think you're getting that call most of the time.

I disagree - I don’t believe the defensive player would get the same consideration. if the roles were reversed and it was a defensive player who accidentally slashed and breaks the stick, then clears the house and eliminates a scoring chance that would be called 100%

even with these 2 goals - they sucked last night and deserved to lose

 

[ScaredStreit]

I don't think there's much to a conspiracy...we just swept the NHL darlings in the playoffs last year. It's got more to do with our style of play.

 

[crasherino]

I disagree - I don’t believe the defensive player would get the same consideration. if the roles were reversed and it was a defensive player who accidentally slashed and breaks the stick, then clears the house and eliminates a scoring chance that would be called 100%

even with these 2 goals - they sucked last night and deserved to lose

Maybe/maybe not - its hard to say. All I'm saying is that in this instance, the primary move isn't a slash to the stick. The stick breaking is more of a corollary to going after the puck. I can understand how its not called. Usually when you have a stick breaking, the slash is aimed at the stick. Here, if the stick didn't break, that's not a slash - merely incidental contact where two guys are fighting for the puck. That's not usually the case when a stick is slashed - the breaking just makes it extra obvious.

 

[impaaaaaact]

Not sure if anyone has done this yet, but I wanted to see how much the lack of powerplays has been hurting the team. I tried to see how many more goals they'd have with an average number of opportunities.

Teams right in the middle of the pack have about 143 powerplay opps - 44 more than the Isles. Isles are averaging goals on 19.2% of PPs - 44 x .192 = 8.4 goals. While that doesn't do much in terms of moving them up the team leaderboard (from 22nd in goals to 20th), given all of the tightly contested games they play, you gotta think another 8 goals is worth 4, maybe 5 points. Of course, this is all conjecture - but interesting (depressing) to think about

 

[PK Cronin]

Not sure if anyone has done this yet, but I wanted to see how much the lack of powerplays has been hurting the team. I tried to see how many more goals they'd have with an average number of opportunities.

Teams right in the middle of the pack have about 143 powerplay opps - 44 more than the Isles. Isles are averaging goals on 19.2% of PPs - 44 x .192 = 8.4 goals. While that doesn't do much in terms of moving them up the team leaderboard (from 22nd in goals to 20th), given all of the tightly contested games they play, you gotta think another 8 goals is worth 4, maybe 5 points. Of course, this is all conjecture - but interesting (depressing) to think about

Depends which games they come in, right? Probably worth some more points in the standings but hard to determine how much.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Kerry Fraser admits ref bias

this is an older article - old habits are hard to break.

Barzal most likely on that list- if it exists-

You have to be careful. The most that Fraser says is "If there is an internal published list of players for the officials to watch for, it's a well-guarded secret at this point."

Berkshire is trying to exonerate Gallagher's dive that negated a goal, using stop-action to spin his version, while it's pretty clear from the regular video that the refs made the right call.

I don't think it's surprising that each ref has a mental list of players to watch for, but there is a lot of difference between a ref making a mental note that "Gallagher is a diver" and the league sending out a memo to the refs to "don't call penalties against whatever team is playing against the Islanders".

 

[Doshell Propivo]

You have to be careful. The most that Fraser says is "If there is an internal published list of players for the officials to watch for, it's a well-guarded secret at this point."

Berkshire is trying to exonerate Gallagher's dive that negated a goal, using stop-action to spin his version, while it's pretty clear from the regular video that the refs made the right call.

I don't think it's surprising that each ref has a mental list of players to watch for, but there is a lot of difference between a ref making a mental note that "Gallagher is a diver" and the league sending out a memo to the refs to "don't call penalties against whatever team is playing against the Islanders".

Exactly. Pointing to this article as potential proof that the refs are biased against NYI this year is ridiculous.

 

[notDatsyuk]

So far this season, we have drawn penalties at a rate of 2.88 per game. Toronto and Montreal are next at 3.04 and 3.05 respectively, and there are seven more teams who have drawn less that half a penalty more per game.

We don't even have the worst net penalties.

We draw the fewest and take very few (except for misconducts, where we have the third most), so I think the explanation is simple: obviously our boring game is putting the refs to sleep.

 

[Doshell Propivo]

So far this season, we have drawn penalties at a rate of 2.88 per game. Toronto and Montreal are next at 3.04 and 3.05 respectively, and there are seven more teams who have drawn less that half a penalty more per game.

We don't even have the worst net penalties.

We draw the fewest and take very few (except for misconducts, where we have the third most), so I think the explanation is simple: obviously our boring game is putting the refs to sleep.

thankfully that will change soon. Cuz, you know, it’s unsustainable...

 

[MJF]

So far this season, we have drawn penalties at a rate of 2.88 per game. Toronto and Montreal are next at 3.04 and 3.05 respectively, and there are seven more teams who have drawn less that half a penalty more per game.

We don't even have the worst net penalties.

We draw the fewest and take very few (except for misconducts, where we have the third most), so I think the explanation is simple: obviously our boring game is putting the refs to sleep.

I’m not bored.

 

[PuckItUp27]

Definite ref bias vs Isles.

 

[Bones45]

Good call by refs vs Brassard. Had to be called.


Brassard should be benched

 

[Stasis]

I feel like it's an obligation to say that I come in peace. I really do. I won't overstay my (un)welcome.

But I just had a mini discussion with one of yours in the GDT for tonight's game and thought I'd post it here since this is a thing that I too very much have an issue with in general. I won't refer to specifics about tonight, other than to say I think we were both, in different ways, on the receiving end of some poor officiating. My stance has always been: "Call it, or don't call it, but call it even." Some games refs are going to call things that go uncalled 9 times out of 10 and while I'd prefer they not do that at all, if they're going to do it, then they have a duty to do it equally and all night. You can't start a game with weak calls and then suddenly decide to let everything go, because ultimately one team is going to benefit from that and it changes outcomes. This is especially problematic, of course in playoff games, but still very much an issue in games like tonight where there's a playoff hunt and points are important in the same division.

And for what it's worth, our announcers said that we're one of the most penalized teams in the league. I don't know the stats or numbers, and I'm not at all trying to start anything or compare anything. Just that I see you guys say you're the least or among the least in terms of getting a call/PP. And we're the most or among the most called teams. I know these things are very different but ultimately, in agreeing that there's a definite officiating problem in this league, we both suffer from it in our own way. That's all I'm saying. Nothing at all to do with any of our two games. Just overall.

So, you can either tell me to eff off, and I absolutely will (and will anyway because I can't really stick around in these parts very long without fearing for my safety =P) or you can read the following. I'll quote the person and then add what I replied to him. He was replying to me, but my initial comment doesn't add much.

I think the majority of fans of all teams can agree that the officiating in the league is awful. I really hate how the NHL demands accountability from its players and coaches and the refs essentially have a never ending pile of get out of jail free cards. And when a player or a coach has the stones to call them out, they get slapped with a fine. It’s complete garbage. I hate watching games where the officiating takes over and influences the outcome of a game, no matter who is playing.
I really hope that during the next owners meeting, someone has the stones to call out the NHL and their bull**** protection of the zebras. They need to be held accountable for their performance like everyone else in the league.

If I could like this post 100 times I would. I loved Torts for that and still do. Our owner is likely blissfully unaware of anything that occurs ever with regards to the NHL side of things (other than money, maybe) so he definitely won't speak up, but some owners do seem like real passionate hockey guys who could and I hope the trend we've seen towards speaking out about things normally kept private and hush-hush keeps going. Not too far where everyone is blamed and everyone is walking on egg shells, mind, but far enough where coaches can actually speak out too. There are some refs who are decidedly known to be bad at their jobs or deliberately take sides (for/vs. a player or for/vs. a team, even) and enough stories have leaked out over the years that... well, where there's smoke there's fire. It absolutely should be addressed head on, openly, and directly. I think we're seeing a big enough shift in the NHL that we might see this occur. We've seen some big shifts already this year and smaller ones in prior years. There's momentum. Obviously mistakes happen and not everything will be perfect but there are definitely ways to improve the system in general and one of them is obviously open channels of dialog. The Old Boys Club thing is still very strong in the NHL but it's shifting away from that, slowly but surely. Our current coach, Quinn, seems like the kind of guy who could/would speak out but he just doesn't have enough tenure in the NHL to do so. Career suicide, and his career is already something to be decided when it comes to the NHL. But I do believe we could see some of the older outgoing vet coaches (who aren't being ousted for their own lacks of judgement and **** behavior) speak up on this topic and that could get the ball rolling.

Anyway, I must now leave this place. I have been here far too long. Cheers.

 

[xIsle]

No idea but it seems there is no punishment for badly officiated games. Not sure if your a soccer fan but I have watched English premier league for a long time now. They would review the referee after every game and if the ref had a really bad game he would get demoted to the second division for a few games. I would love to see the nhl do this but I doubt they ever will.

I could be wrong, but I believe they are evaluated for each of their games. At the end of the season, those with the best ratings are selected for the playoffs. And even during the playoffs, we reduce the number of referees in each round.

 

[PWJunior]

I could be wrong, but I believe they are evaluated for each of their games. At the end of the season, those with the best ratings are selected for the playoffs. And even during the playoffs, we reduce the number of referees in each round.

That's all well and good, but the shit refs that don't get postseason work will be right back the next season to continue screwing things up. If it really is a meritocracy, it should also decide who shouldn't be back or needs more guidance/training so they don't suck at their job - or not suck so bad at least. No accountability.

 

[GrandmaSlices51631]

Depends which games they come in, right? Probably worth some more points in the standings but hard to determine how much.

Yeah, even when the Isles were ranked like 11th OA on the PP and our fanbase was pointing to that, I was saying just this. Good teams find ways to convert on the PP when it matters most.

Just seems to be when they could really use a PP goal, they come up blank. I think they are their own worst enemy and I say that as a fan.

 

[xIsle]

That's all well and good, but the **** refs that don't get postseason work will be right back the next season to continue screwing things up. If it really is a meritocracy, it should also decide who shouldn't be back or needs more guidance/training so they don't suck at their job - or not suck so bad at least. No accountability.

Sometimes some referees are shown the door. I think it's rare however, but it happened to Stéphane Auger. Maybe some remembers his incident with Alex Burrows?

Stéphane Auger - Wikipedia