Refs keeping a close eye on Holmstrom

[union drone 0]

New article describes how Homer is getting some special attention, in a bad way! Here's the link:

Refs vs Homer

Personally, from seeing the disallowed Wings' goal against Phoenix, and then the 'Yotes goal that was allowed, I think that a double standard clearly exists.

[toby91_ca 620]

I didn't see the game on Saturday (at a wedding), but I just checked the highlights and the Phoenix goal looked fine to me. I can understand why you would complain from a Wings fan perspective, but from what I could see, there was no contact with Hasek until the goal was scored..so, the contract was irrelevent.

I didn't see the call on Homer, is there any video of that?

To be fair, Homer does walk a fine line in front of the net and he probably gets away with just as much as he gets called.

[union drone 0]

I know that Homer does walk a fine line at times, and the 'Yotes goal should stand. My point was that the disallowed goal was pretty much the same kind of play as the allowed one.

I didn't see the game on Saturday (at a wedding), but I just checked the highlights and the Phoenix goal looked fine to me. I can understand why you would complain from a Wings fan perspective, but from what I could see, there was no contact with Hasek until the goal was scored..so, the contract was irrelevent.

I didn't see the call on Homer, is there any video of that?

To be fair, Homer does walk a fine line in front of the net and he probably gets away with just as much as he gets called.

[redwingslady87 130]

I didn't see the game on Saturday (at a wedding), but I just checked the highlights and the Phoenix goal looked fine to me. I can understand why you would complain from a Wings fan perspective, but from what I could see, there was no contact with Hasek until the goal was scored..so, the contract was irrelevent.

I didn't see the call on Homer, is there any video of that?

To be fair, Homer does walk a fine line in front of the net and he probably gets away with just as much as he gets called.

I don't know if i could find video of it right now, but they did numerous replays looking for the interference, and both of his feet were clearly on white ice. No call should have been made.

[toby91_ca 620]

I know that Homer does walk a fine line at times, and the 'Yotes goal should stand. My point was that the disallowed goal was pretty much the same kind of play as the allowed one.

Well, I'd like to see a replay of the disallowed goal before I comment. I'd be surprised if it was the exact circumstances.

I don't know if i could find video of it right now, but they did numerous replays looking for the interference, and both of his feet were clearly on white ice. No call should have been made.

I saw an interference call on one of the Pens the other day and he was about 2 feet away from the crease. I was thinking that the call didn't make sense, but maybe I am confused on the actual rule.

I think one of the other problems is that you can't use video replay on goalie interference calls.

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

Well, I'd like to see a replay of the disallowed goal before I comment. I'd be surprised if it was the exact circumstances.

Toby........it actually was a bad call. Homer was clearly out of the crease and interfered in no way with Tellqvist. I agree that Homer can walk a fine line at times, but definitely not on this particular play. It was a clearly a botched call by the ref.

Edited October 23, 2007 by Never Forget Mac #25

[hockey&beer 16]

Unfortunately, this problem will exist through out the season. It seems everytime the Colin Campbell instructs his crew to be "more aware" of certain situations, many more calls are being made that usally don't exist. This is similar to when the refs decided to watch goalers a tad more closely for diving. The refs simply only watched the tenders with a "history" of embellishing contact and not watching everyone. One example was Hasek consistantly being called for diving 2 years ago and then Roloson that same playoff year not getting called for purposely knocking his mask off during play.

Between the two plays (call against Homer, non-call against Yotes) the PHO player was MUCH closer to interfering with the netminder than Homer was, even though neither should have been called.

[union drone 0]

Well, I'd like to see a replay of the disallowed goal before I comment. I'd be surprised if it was the exact circumstances.

Of course, the circumstances weren't exactly the same. When are they ever? Actually the goals are different in the way that they were scored. In the case of Homer, he was moving around the edge of the crease trying to plant his butt in the goalies face. Both his feet were out and no contact was made. Ref says no goal.

Look here:

highlights

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

Unfortunately, this problem will exist through out the season. It seems everytime the Colin Campbell instructs his crew to be "more aware" of certain situations, many more calls are being made that usally don't exist. This is similar to when the refs decided to watch goalers a tad more closely for diving. The refs simply only watched the tenders with a "history" of embellishing contact and not watching everyone. One example was Hasek consistantly being called for diving 2 years ago and then Roloson that same playoff year not getting called for purposely knocking his mask off during play.

Between the two plays (call against Homer, non-call against Yotes) the PHO player was MUCH closer to interfering with the netminder than Homer was, even though neither should have been called.

QFT

[toby91_ca 620]

Of course, the circumstances weren't exactly the same. When are they ever? Actually the goals are different in the way that they were scored. In the case of Homer, he was moving around the edge of the crease trying to plant his butt in the goalies face. Both his feet were out and no contact was made. Ref says no goal.

Look here:

highlights

Yikes, that was a bad call, unless I am missing something. Even if he was in the crease, if you don't interfere, it is okay (unlike a few years ago).

So I have two observations:

1. The two incidents were at different ends of the ice, so it is likely that a different ref made each call.

2. The call on Homer didn't appear to be legit to me, but refs do make mistakes, it will happen. Just like the players, they are not robots. Problem here is that this type of call isn't subject to video review.

[union drone 0]

Bad call? Definately. But maybe it is part of something bigger... The refs have probably been told to look for goalie interference from certain "trouble" players. I am sure that Homer is near the top of that list. I wouldn't be surprised to see a trend of bad or marginal interference calls go against him while he is anywhere near the crease or low slot area.

BTW, here's another article about this topic. I love Dom's comments. Haha, Dom could see that his feet were out from his own net?!? Wow, Dom, those are some eyes you got there!

Homer link

Yikes, that was a bad call, unless I am missing something. Even if he was in the crease, if you don't interfere, it is okay (unlike a few years ago).

So I have two observations:

1. The two incidents were at different ends of the ice, so it is likely that a different ref made each call.

2. The call on Homer didn't appear to be legit to me, but refs do make mistakes, it will happen. Just like the players, they are not robots. Problem here is that this type of call isn't subject to video review.

[toby91_ca 620]

I don't think there is any conspiracy here though. The league probably is taking a closer look at these types of plays and starting to make more calls, but in the last game as an example, I think the calls were made by different refs. No way would the same ref call one and not the other. Neither should be a penalty.

Homer will likely get called several times, maybe more than anyone else, but that is to be expected since he is in that position more than anyone else. There will be some bad calls made here or there, but don't confuse that with a conspiracy as I have already seen some similar bad calls this year on other teams.

Edited October 23, 2007 by toby91_ca

[Yemack 1]

From what I've read and heard, coach was aware of extra attention before this incidents.

I'm sure our GM and owner are in talk with NHL so that they don't screw us again. We getting screwed on schedule and travel. Not another crap like this!

[union drone 0]

I don't think there is any conspiracy here though. The league probably is taking a closer look at these types of plays and starting to make more calls, but in the last game as an example, I think the calls were made by different refs. No way would the same ref call one and not the other. Neither should be a penalty.

Homer will likely get called several times, maybe more than anyone else, but that is to be expected since he is in that position more than anyone else. There will be some bad calls made here or there, but don't confuse that with a conspiracy as I have already seen some similar bad calls this year on other teams.

Well, conspiracy is a pretty strong word. I wouldn't go so far as to call it that. However, I think that refs are on the lookout for certain players in certain situations and have their whistles primed for action when these players are in their sights.

Food for thought: Homer already has 20 PIM through nine games. Last year he had 58 PIM through 77 games. Already this season three goals have been disallowed while Homer was near the front of the net. On two of them he was called for goalie interference. Somebody's getting some special attention.

[Learn2LuvIt 252]

Hopefully our Wings brass has contacted the league officiating committee to bring some attention to this and find out exactly what the refs are looking at, and specifically what is Homer doing that is drawing a high number of these calls/negating goals.

I know this is commom practice and can be an effective tool for teams to plead there case. Doesn't help change the past, but it can pave the way for looking at the actual play, and not (especially in Homers case) looking at the style or percieved reputation of a player in the future. It may not pay off right now, but it may wins us a "no call" come playoff time if we contunially plead Homers case. If it helps us once during the playoffs....it's completely worth the effort.

Homer--keep on-keeping on.

Edited October 23, 2007 by Learn2LuvIt

[Earthhuman 8]

My guess is that bad calls are made on the better teams, so that it appears that the bottom feeders can skate with the truly talented players. Consider that, when expanding from 26 to 30 teams, 100 players that should not be in the NHL get jobs there. If Bettman is going to make a case for two more teams, he has to make it appear that the talent pool is deeper.

Follow me here- we can agree that 25 of those 100 marginal players are on Phoenix. They're just that bad. Well, if it looks like they can skate with NHL quality players, then there must be enough AHL & Euro players to fill the 50 roster spots in the future.

I wouldn't be surprised if the AHL-quality teams start getting some biased calls.

I also wouldn't be surprised if the majority of the players that get those newer, faster, frictionless skates are one-time AHL players, now NHL players. Then it appears that they can keep up...

So in that way it is a conspiracy.

[rick zombo 3,739]

If there is a major effort to clamp down on Homer then that is unfair. It will take away a huge part of his game.

And if this is the case then the refs better start clamping down on guys like Pronger for doing what they do best. That man could be called for something on at least every 2nd shift. Seriously.

Edited October 23, 2007 by rick zombo

[CenterIce 83]

If there is a major effort to clamp down on Homer then that is unfair. It will take away a huge part of his game.

And if this is the case then the refs better start clamping down on guys like Pronger for doing what they do best. That man could be called for something on at least every 2nd shift. Seriously.

A couple of comments.

Just staying out of the crease isn't enough anymore. The leauge is saying that players have to allow the goalie to come out to stop the puck, so some goalies are initiating contact with the skaters and getting a benefit goalie interference penalty.

Holmstrom was called for interference, not goalie interference. They mentioned this during the game. The only thing I could see was that he kind of pushed the defenseman out, so that he could get out of the goalies way. The defenseman wasn't allowing him to move out. I think that Homer and Dom are on some refs' lists, and if they see something out of the corner of their eye, involving those two, they get the penalty. I still see them go after Dom for the water bottle on top of the net.

Edited October 24, 2007 by CenterIce

[LeftWinger 5,152]

I know that Homer does walk a fine line at times, and the 'Yotes goal should stand. My point was that the disallowed goal was pretty much the same kind of play as the allowed one.

...except Homer NEVER touched the goalie...EVER. AND he was NEVER in the crease...

[puckloo39 5,686]

goalie interference... if you're Homer

Homer was not in the crease. The Yotie screening Dom on the goal allowed was, however. Go figure.

I hope they don't take Homer's game away from him, just for the sake of some warped attempt at parity.

[Dabura 12,232]

I wouldn't really call it a conspiracy. The league wants to make a statement about goalie interference, and caling Homer for everything makes it look like they're taking it seriously. Really, it's more laziness than anything else.

[puckloo39 5,686]

I wouldn't really call it a conspiracy. The league wants to make a statement about goalie interference, and caling Homer for everything makes it look like they're taking it seriously. Really, it's more laziness than anything else.

that's a fine idea, if it's even-handed. It wasn't in the game vs. Phoenix. Does make one wonder why it's called on one end of the ice and not the other...

Edited October 24, 2007 by puckloo39

[Dabura 12,232]

It's kind of a moot point, though, because we all know the league never truly does anything for the sake of parity.

In all likelihood -- and I don't mean to sound bitter or spoiled or anything -- this is all about Homer. God only knows how many complaints have been filed about him.

[puckloo39 5,686]

It's kind of a moot point, though, because we all know the league never truly does anything for the sake of parity.

In all likelihood -- and I don't mean to sound bitter or spoiled or anything -- this is all about Homer. God only knows how many complaints have been filed about him.

you're right, and it didn't do them any good anyway, did it?

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

I didn't watch the Phoenix game on Saturday so I cannot accurately comment on Holmstrom being a part of a disallowed goal in that game, and I'm speaking in an extremely general sense, but until I see a few more games to where this might happen, I wouldn't get too worked up about this.

Holmstrom probably gets away with a lot of stuff within the crease area as well when goals are scored, more or less. It's just that disallowed goals are easily recognizable, because some of them were probably legit.

I get more frustrated when referees make 30 calls a game like the Wings/Ducks game recently, that wasn't a hockey game, and there were some b.s. calls for both teams for just ticky tacky stuff.