Officiating and Replay Crisis

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
27,164
Cambridge, MA
As an aside, I'd like to do some digging on the status of the NHL's CBA with its referees. Currently, Scouting the Refs has a 5 year deal having been signed ahead of the 2014-15 season, making this the final season that that agreement would cover. No word on this from our intrepid hockey media, but Pension Plan Puppets echoes this.

I've posted my sentiments before - but while the league hasn't been giving the four on-ice officials the resources they need to do their jobs, it's also clear that the four-official system is hindered in a number of ways:
  • Two referees doesn't work, period. Too many bodies on the ice, too much inconsistency in standards from ref to ref within the same game
  • Linesman only having authority to whistle positioning infractions (icing, offside, faceoff tango) and bench minors (puck over glass, too many men)
  • No off-ice officials with any input on situations outside of goal / no goal
  • Making these guys look at tablets to help determine reviews

While a lot of that still needs to be addressed, at this point I'd be in favor of:
  • Making Wes McCauley on the refereeing side a non-union private contractor, and maybe Devorski / Racicot / a couple others for linesmen. Maybe Chris Rooney as well for referees, but he shouldn't be officiating Bruins games (seriously, a local official refereeing a game would cause riots in European football... that this is still done is bananas). Pay these guys what they deserve and have them be your go-to guys for SCFs
  • Going back to a one-ref system with an empowered off-ice official - meaning they can whistle play down in real time through the on-ice official for egregious missed calls, or to overturn egregiously-made calls.
  • Bringing in replacement officials if the current crop of referees raise a stink, which they will
  • Significant increase in referee pay to incentivize good performance
  • In line with the significant pay raise, make the on-ice official available to media after each game
If the CBA expires and the NHL goes with replacement referees - while implementing more off-ice controls - I would applaud it. The shit on display consistently in this postseason from their "best referees" has to stop
 

twibnotes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
20,232
Meh, officiating is a red herring for the NHL’s standing in popularity. It’s not popular because most players aren’t American, you can’t just pick up and play, it’s expensive, and absurdly white. Then maybe officiating starts coming in to play.
Plus, officiating sucks in the other sports too

Across all 4 majors, officiating needs to be a full time job and they need to bust up the unions so the best guys make the most money and ref the big games. And if you suck (looking at you, Angel Hernandez), you get replaced.
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
14,462
Gallows Hill
Plus, officiating sucks in the other sports too

Across all 4 majors, officiating needs to be a full time job and they need to bust up the unions so the best guys make the most money and ref the big games. And if you suck (looking at you, Angel Hernandez), you get replaced.
It is amazing that professional sports is a multi-billion dollar business yet you literally have to know someone to be an official at that level.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
11,612
The difference is that in the NBA - where I agree officiating is equally bad - it’s really not nearly as likely to lead to injuries. Especially head injuries.

The NFL might be capricious with holding or offsides, but, again, not much injury risk there. And, if anything, they tighten up on hits to the head or roughing the passer calls.

The NHL is the only sport where there’s discretion to call penalties on plays that can literally change/ruin people’s lives/careers. That’s bullshit and treating your players like less than commodities.
I don't see how your last paragraph is true at all. The NFL clearly has the same problem with injuries and whether or not they're called penalties. I'm not sure what you mean about plays that can literally change/ruin people's lives/careers.. Are you speaking about injuries or suspensions or..?

The NBA also has a problem with fouls too.. the whole system of flagrant fouls is a complete farce of discretion.. and those fouls are just as dangerous in leading to injuries as anything in the NHL..especially when going up to the hoop where players are completely unprotected.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,312
I don't see how your last paragraph is true at all. The NFL clearly has the same problem with injuries and whether or not they're called penalties. I'm not sure what you mean about plays that can literally change/ruin people's lives/careers.. Are you speaking about injuries or suspensions or..?

The NBA also has a problem with fouls too.. the whole system of flagrant fouls is a complete farce of discretion.. and those fouls are just as dangerous in leading to injuries as anything in the NHL..especially when going up to the hoop where players are completely unprotected.
My meaning was that when watching NFL games it seems that if anything they call penalties too liberally when it comes to anything involving a hit to the head. Maybe I’m wrong, but I usually find myself disagreeing with calls as being too strict. I don’t notice too many instances where there’s a blow to the head and no call.

Where the NFL seems to exercise more discretion or miss or overlook calls is on stuff like PI or holding, which can obviously be dangerous given the size and speed of the players, but isn’t as directly threatening.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,249
https://theathletic.com/1015900/2019/06/07/the-clown-show-continues-in-game-5-nhl-gets-faster-while-the-referees-fall-behind/ (Fluto)

If [referee] Sutherland had an excuse, it would have been that he did not see Bozak plant his right leg behind Acciari’s left knee, sending the forward on his game-changing tumble. Carlo was marking Bozak, which could have impeded Sutherland’s view. But aside from one slight glide off his left blade, Sutherland did little to improve his sightline.

So the NHL is back in the stuff where it usually lands. The league is smack dab in crap, its wheels unable to gain purchase with every spin.

...

These are not one-off gaffes. This a pattern of mistakes that could cost businesses millions. The game is only getting faster while the referees fall behind.

A system overhaul is mandatory. If the referees do not do more to improve their positions to get optimal views of plays that could be infractions, one official has to be placed in the press box. From there, given an unimpeded view and the same authority to make calls as on-ice colleagues, a referee could spot the ones that are obvious to everyone in the building.

Otherwise, the NHL has to invest in sharper referees. They have to attract optimal talent by offering them higher salaries and pacing them through better training. This has to be the league’s No. 1 offseason priority unless it wants further brand degradation with each call its referees miss.

If not, the same mistakes will continue to take place. The game is too fast, and the referees do not have the tools to process its speed.

If the NHL is content with its league and its referees being punchlines, it can continue to do nothing.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,726
Deep inside Muppet Labs
This cost Boston so nothing will be done. I'm serious. Toronto of course hates the Bruins, but the general anti-Bruins sentiment around the country is strong enough so that no changes will be made.

Only if either Boston benefits from such a non-call or a media and fan darling gets hurt by one will changes be made.
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
14,462
Gallows Hill
This cost Boston so nothing will be done. I'm serious. Toronto of course hates the Bruins, but the general anti-Bruins sentiment around the country is strong enough so that no changes will be made.

Only if either Boston benefits from such a non-call or a media and fan darling gets hurt by one will changes be made.
+1

Could you just imagine if the Maple Leafs lost a finals game like that? The media and fan outrage would be overwhelming for the league.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,726
Deep inside Muppet Labs
+1

Could you just imagine if the Maple Leafs lost a finals game like that? The media and fan outrage would be overwhelming for the league.
That would require the Leafs to actually make the Final, so it will never happen.

But man. CBC would run a 35 part documentary on it.

But fuck Boston, am I right?

This league is a joke.
 

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
6,196
I'm torn here.

On one hand, I always love fired up SJH. It produces some of the best rants you'll ever read.

On another hand, come on dude you aren't going to quit hockey because of a few insanely horrible calls. Stop being so dramatic.

On yet another hand, I'm right there with you on that ledge.
 

mwonow

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
7,095
Excellent combination of solid article and lunatic commentary, all emanating from Toronto:
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,726
Deep inside Muppet Labs
I'm torn here.

On one hand, I always love fired up SJH. It produces some of the best rants you'll ever read.

On another hand, come on dude you aren't going to quit hockey because of a few insanely horrible calls. Stop being so dramatic.

On yet another hand, I'm right there with you on that ledge.
Here's the thing: I slept on it before posting this morning. I wanted to be calmer about things.

The lack of calls all postseason has really bugged me. Never mind even last night: look at the missed hand pass in STL-SJS. Look at what the Blues did to Dallas and SJS with the cheap shots and high hits and generally playing like punks. The missed call last night was the culmination of many many things that have led to this.

I want to enjoy the sport and I usually do. But I have the nagging feeling that the Bruins are not getting a fair chance to win the series because the league has decided to let Berube dictate the way the game is played. That's a fundamentally flawed system.

I'm just really bugged by this.
 

coremiller

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
5,846
I think a bigger problem than the refs missing calls is there's at least the perception that the refs are influenced by the narrative and can be swayed based on what has happened in previous games. That should never happen.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,726
Deep inside Muppet Labs
I think a bigger problem than the refs missing calls is there's at least the perception that the refs are influenced by the narrative and can be swayed based on what has happened in previous games. That should never happen.
It's not the perception, it the reality. In the earlier mentioned Deadspin article, Barry noted that before Berube's comments, the Bruins were getting more than 4 power plays a game in the series. After them, they've had less than 3. And last night's particularly egregious non-calls were prima facie evidence that the NHL cowtowed to Berube about the officiating.

It's a disgrace.
 

veritas

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2009
3,151
Somerville, MA
As has been mentioned here, I think the NHL has definitely exacerbated the issue by sitting refs who made single mistakes. The refs are playing scared to screw up, it's human nature to be affected by that.

With headshots I'm kind of OK with them erring on the side of caution and letting DoPS handle it when it's not obvious. So many hits are just impossible to tell for sure in realtime what was the principal point of contact. It really sucks that penalties were missed on the Jojo and Krug hits. If they didn't call a penalty on Tarasenko's hit, I'd understand, especially if Barbashev is suspended. And I'm sure the Tarasenko hit factored into this, the refs probably wanted to make sure they weren't conned again in a similar situation.

The trip on Acciari, I'm still apoplectic over. Just terrible in so many ways. It's giving me existential angst about how much emotion I put into sports.
 

Steve Dillard

wishes drew noticed him instead of sweet & sour
SoSH Member
Oct 7, 2003
5,932
I think a bigger problem than the refs missing calls is there's at least the perception that the refs are influenced by the narrative and can be swayed based on what has happened in previous games. That should never happen.
Except the next two games
 

Mugsy's Jock

Eli apologist
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 28, 2000
15,069
UWS, NYC
[RMPS short-timer here, please forgive my relative naivety]

I was interested to read upthread that if you asked most non-Boston fans, they would characterize Boston as a relatively dirty team. Of course I'm well aware of Marchand's to play at the edge (and beyond), but I was surprised with that general characterization because a.) I assumed Boston is primarily a speed/finesse team, and b.) I prefer black and gold laundry.

Of course it could just be "the world hates Boston", but I always assumed that outside of NYC, that really applies only to the Patriots.

So, help me out here. On the spectrum of Lady Byng to Dave Schultz, where do the Bruins objectively land?
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,096
[RMPS short-timer here, please forgive my relative naivety]

I was interested to read upthread that if you asked most non-Boston fans, they would characterize Boston as a relatively dirty team. Of course I'm well aware of Marchand's to play at the edge (and beyond), but I was surprised with that general characterization because a.) I assumed Boston is primarily a speed/finesse team, and b.) I prefer black and gold laundry.

Of course it could just be "the world hates Boston", but I always assumed that outside of NYC, that really applies only to the Patriots.

So, help me out here. On the spectrum of Lady Byng to Dave Schultz, where do the Bruins objectively land?
The Bruins this year were:

2nd in penalty minutes (Rangers were #1; Blues were 24th)
1st in opponent's penalty minutes (Blues were 18th).
2nd in major penalties with 27. Rangers were #1 w/ 28; Blues were in the middle of the pack with 15.
7th in minor penalties.
15th in hits per game. The Blues were 24th.

So, Boston could thump with the best of them during the course of the season. I think some of the narrative is a bit historical and out of date (aka, Big Bad Bruins). But the B's were not solely a skating/finesse team this season. And, yes, opponent's fans hate Marchand and, to a lesser extent, Chara.
 

RIFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,087
Rhode Island
If you want to use objective data, then the Bruins are one of the most penalized teams in the league this year. That doesn't necessarily correlate to dirty and there are certainly some qualifiers that come with it but they are heavily penalized. They ranked 2nd in total PIMs, 2nd in majors, 10th in misconducts, and 5th in game misconducts. They did run up a lot of their minutes by leading the league in fighting majors which to some would mean they are a stand-up team but not necessarily dirty. They also were only 17th in unsportsmanlike penalties, so they aren't a bunch of divers.

One thing that stands out a little is that while they have a clear penalty leader (Marchand with 96PIMS), they only have 1player in the top 25, 2 in the top 50 (BM and surprisingly Grzelcyk, and 3 in the top 100 (BM, MG, and Chara). The spread the rest of the PIMs around the team.

They're aggressive and hard on the puck. I don't think they are dirty, but you'll never win that narrative on the data.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
30 of Grz’s PIM’s was from the Leafs game where Hyman ran McAvoy. IIRC, Grz got a bogus major for cross checking, 5 for fighting and 2 10 minute misconducts a few minutes after the McAvoy hit when the refs were looking to settle the game down.

Anyways, they have a league wide reputation as dirty or heavy or however you want to phrase it that stems from the Lucic era teams, 2008-2015 or so. They had some heavy teams back then, and the 2011 team was really the last truly heavy team to win a Cup. Fans/media elsewhere (*cough* Canada *cough) think they bullied their way to the Cup.

The current team is probably middle of the road. They fight more than most teams but it is usually reactionary. They don’t employ a goon and typically don't go out looking for a fight unless they have good reason. They have skill guys that’ll won’t shy away from a hit. McAvoy got suspended, but I don’t think he’s dirty, the hit that got him suspended was a poorly executed attempt at a legal check. Backes has been suspended each of the last 2 years, but most around the league consider him to be a stand up guy. His skills are eroding so he’s tried to move into an enforcer type role. Marchand has his well earned reputation which accounts for the majority of the head explosions over the Bruins around the league.
 

Mugsy's Jock

Eli apologist
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 28, 2000
15,069
UWS, NYC
Thanks to the above posters... that's super useful context for me.

FWIW I'm not a total pearl-clutcher. My college roommate averaged 3.27 penalty minutes/game back over his 8-year NHL career in the 80s -- #4 all time in PIM for players with less than 400 games.
 
Last edited:

MiracleOfO2704

not AWOL
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
9,528
The Island
Thanks to the above posters... that's super useful context for me.

FWIW I'm not a total pearl-clutcher. My college roommate averaged 3.27 penalty minutes/game back over his 8-year NHL career in the 80s -- #4 all time in PIM for players with less than 400 games.
I mean, you gotta tell now.
 

Boston Brawler

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 17, 2011
9,757
My research shows Randy Holt is number 4 in PIM for players less than 400 games.

Edit: He doesn’t fit the criteria though.

I’m going to guess Neil Sheehy.
 

Spelunker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
11,862
Thanks to the above posters... that's super useful context for me.

FWIW I'm not a total pearl-clutcher. My college roommate averaged 3.27 penalty minutes/game back over his 8-year NHL career in the 80s -- #4 all time in PIM for players with less than 400 games.
Also, one assumption in your post that I don't think is correct is that it's only a Patriots + NYC thing.

Boston is disliked in general by wide swaths of the country. Honestly, I think we've kinda earned the distaste for us as a fanbase, but either way it's definitely true that we're seen negatively across the board (and not just because we win all the time).
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,755
Pittsburgh, PA
I'm torn here.

On one hand, I always love fired up SJH. It produces some of the best rants you'll ever read.

On another hand, come on dude you aren't going to quit hockey because of a few insanely horrible calls. Stop being so dramatic.

On yet another hand, I'm right there with you on that ledge.
There are marginal fans out there who won't tune in further, won't watch regular season games when they might be, etc. I watch sports to see athletic skill and team coordination lead to victory. If I wanted capriciousness I'd watch "reality TV" or ice dancing or some shit. My time is too precious to affirmatively decide to see it wasted in that manner.

Playoff hockey is exciting and the players brilliantly skilled, but there are marginal fans all over the place that the league can either attract or repulse. There's no argument that we're at Peak Hockey, that the NHL is as popular as it could possibly get.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
McKenzie has a Twitter thread on this, but the BoG has approved expanded reviews. Details aren’t firmed up yet because GM’s need to approve it tomorrow, but here’s the cliff notes of what McKenzie is hearing for changes next year:

- Coaches challenges expanding to include “tainted goals” for reasons such as puck off the netting, hand passes, high stick (not puck directed in with a high stick, that’s still a league review. This is for a puck played with a high stick prior to the goal a la the Wagner goal in SJ this year).

- These challenges would fall under the offside challenge rule- unlimited reviews but a minor penalty if the on ice call is upheld. Toronto handles last minute of the 3rd and OT.

- Officials can review major and minor penalties on their own and rescind/uphold/reduce as they see fit.

No corrective mechanism going in for Acciari/Schenn type plays.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,304
McKenzie has a Twitter thread on this, but the BoG has approved expanded reviews. Details aren’t firmed up yet because GM’s need to approve it tomorrow, but here’s the cliff notes of what McKenzie is hearing for changes next year:

- Coaches challenges expanding to include “tainted goals” for reasons such as puck off the netting, hand passes, high stick (not puck directed in with a high stick, that’s still a league review. This is for a puck played with a high stick prior to the goal a la the Wagner goal in SJ this year).

- These challenges would fall under the offside challenge rule- unlimited reviews but a minor penalty if the on ice call is upheld. Toronto handles last minute of the 3rd and OT.

- Officials can review major and minor penalties on their own and rescind/uphold/reduce as they see fit.

No corrective mechanism going in for Acciari/Schenn type plays.
If the actual wording allows officials to review and completely rescind penalties I think that is the corrective mechanism for the Acciari play. If the ref isn't certain if he saw a trip I think it's more likely in the future they make the call, now knowing that if they were wrong they can go back and fix it without too much loss to the offending team. Similar to how NFL refs are told on a 50-50 fumble call to let the play continue, because they can fix it on review after.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
My read on it was the reviews would only be for majors (the Cody Eakin play) or double minors (friendly fire high sticks) called on the ice. Not every penalty/non-call. The Acciari play wouldn’t be reviewable.
 

Fred in Lynn

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 3, 2013
4,905
Not Lynn (or Ocean Side)
By my reading, cshea is right in that the proposed changes wouldn’t include all infractions. I sure hope it doesn’t. As bad as the non-trip was - and it was - opening everything to official review would just leave the question of where it would end. It would be a mess for officials, and therefore, for everyone else.
 

Fred in Lynn

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 3, 2013
4,905
Not Lynn (or Ocean Side)
Boston is disliked in general by wide swaths of the country. Honestly, I think we've kinda earned the distaste for us as a fanbase, but either way it's definitely true that we're seen negatively across the board (and not just because we win all the time).
No, it’s because you (in the case of the Sox, “we”) win all the time. It’s almost entirely because of the Pats, too.

Plus, officiating sucks in the other sports too

Across all 4 majors, officiating needs to be a full time job and they need to bust up the unions so the best guys make the most money and ref the big games. And if you suck (looking at you, Angel Hernandez), you get replaced.
I wish there was a way to measure this, because it’s not logical that officiating would become poorer over time. Maybe it’s the way technology has changed viewing a game, or how technology has changed the empowerment of the average fan to participate in discussions about officiating (for example, Mike Renfro’s non-catch catch in the 1980 AFC championship had zero comments in Internet forums, while we discuss the faintest minutiae in detail today), or maybe it’s that officiating has improved but lagged behind other aspects of sports such as the quality of the athletes. Or maybe we’re just more skeptical people than we were decades ago. I’m not sure, but the thought that refs are worse doesn’t sit well with me. Why would that be? Why would that exclusive segment of the sporting world become less efficient?
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,090
Tuukka's refugee camp
I think it's a combo of all those factors in pretty much all sports, especially ones played at the speed of hockey/football. Basketball generally has a slower pace with teams getting set in the halfcourt and baseball is the slowest of all four without too many bang-bang, judgment call plays, at least comparatively speaking.
 

Haunted

The Man in the Box
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
6,196
I've totally come around to the idea of an off-ice referee that can stop play from his or her booth and call penalties that way. It would give us the added benefit of getting an extra body off the ice.

I like Rod Brind'Amour's idea, plus my own enhancements:
  • 2 on-ice officials, at either end like current refs. Both can call penalties/goals as they presently do and would now drop pucks at faceoffs.
  • 2 off-ice officials, both who can call penalties bu also function as linemen. Seriously. Why do we need guys physically on the ice for that role? All they ever do is get in the way.

This would free the ice up quite a bit and get more eyes on the play.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
My problem with the eye in the sky type official is the communication to the ice. How are you stopping play? How will the players know when eye in the sky guy has his arm up so to speak and there is a delayed penalty coming? I see there being a ton of confusion. Eye in the sky could have communication into the on ice official but play is going on at a high speed, the on ice official needs to watch his area’s of responsibility plus also listen for the off ice guy in his ear telling him what to do? There also is a lag, there could be an instance where the off ice guy flags a penalty and as he is letting the on ice guy know possession changes and things like goals, penalties and further shenanigans happen. I also think the linesman need to be on the ice to call offsides, that is a hard one to see and you really need to be on top of the blue line to get it right in real time (which they do 99% of the time). I think they do an excellent job given the speed of the game.

I don’t know, I see a system like that being a disaster. The only thing I would do in terms of off ice official is a replay guy to correct obvious mistakes on goals/majors. A guy who could say, “uh, hey’ that was a hand pass before the GW OT goal.” But they’ve chosen to remedy the problem by expanding coaches challenges.
 

Mueller's Twin Grannies

critical thinker
SoSH Member
Dec 19, 2009
9,386
If a replay results in an overturned goal, do they add the time back onto the clock that elapsed between when the penalty/infraction happened and when the goal was scored or will that time be lost? I could see that being a sticking point with coaches, especially in the third period or OT during a regular season game.
 

Mueller's Twin Grannies

critical thinker
SoSH Member
Dec 19, 2009
9,386
They’ll put the time back on the clock.
Good. Second question: if a second penalty occurs (like, say, the delayed penalty that led to the game-winner in Game 2) and the replay shows that the missed penalty should have led to an immediate power play for the now-offending team (which never gains possession), does that penalty get wiped out or does it go 4-on-4 or does it erase the original non-call and hold up?
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
A couple of things:

1. They aren’t reviewing non-called penalties. The only penalties that can be reviewed are match penalties or majors. Those can be reduced to minors but not wiped out entirely. Instances like the Acciari trip will not be subject to review.

2. The review/clock process will work the same as it does today. If a goal is overturned due to an infraction (offside, puck off the netting, played with a high stick, etc.) then the clock resets to the time the infraction occurred and anything that happens after is wiped out.