• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
BewareThePenguin

The goalie interference Carolina got away with last night: diabolical

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Btw, go on most other hockey forums and you'll hear all about how the Red Wings get treated like royalty by the refs.

You mean like...

Tony Gallagher, Canwest News Service Published: Sunday, June 08, 2008

VANCOUVER -- Now that the Stanley Cup has been awarded to the Detroit Red Wings and any emotion from any one particular game has faded, we would be remiss if we didn't seriously ask some questions about what actually took place in that final series with respect to the officiating.

Having been around the NHL pretty much since the dawn of man, I have watched a lot of games and have seen a lot of good and bad calls by good and bad referees, and I rarely address this topic.

By and large the NHL officials are outstanding individuals whom any corporation would be thrilled to have represent them in almost any situation.

When the way the game was officiated swung back and forth in pendulum fashion over the years, you knew that these guys were always just doing what they were instructed to do by the New York office.

And when the most important games were played, the most experienced, senior officials were front and centre.

And even though the referees of the day would frequently call virtually nothing once the third period began and the game moved into overtime, there was never any sense of anything fishy.

The breaks involved in officials' judgments always seen to balance out over a series of games. There was no such feeling at this year's final.

While nobody really wanted to say so, how could you have possibly watched the calls in that series and not had the feeling that somehow, consciously or more likely unconsciously, there was a slant toward favouring the Pittsburgh Penguins?

While it seemed to be prevalent most of the series, at times to a far lesser extent, the final 20 seconds of Game 6 illustrated the problem perfectly.

With Detroit just having given up a power-play goal that allowed Pittsburgh to get to within 3-2 with under two minutes to go, the Pens had their goalie out and the Wings under siege.

But with about 18 seconds left, Pavel Datsyuk of the Wings managed to skate free with the puck, skate it out over the blue-line, but as he readied a shot toward the open net, he was hauled down with an abundantly obvious stick foul so blatant that Helen Keller would have been forced to raise her arm.

No call.

Pittsburgh then got the puck, stormed the other end and nearly tied the game in the last second.

This call wasn't missed. There is absolutely no conceivable way it could have been missed.

But the officials chose not to end the Penguins' season. In fact, for the first time in all my years of viewing hockey, I was overwhelmed by a sense that there existed a desperate need to keep this series going for the good of the game, no matter how far rule interpretations had to be stretched.

The most difficult part came once the series began to gain momentum and it became abundantly obvious the television ratings in the U.S. were building with every game and the league was sending out press releases to one and all that this was the case.

That's when things began to get a touch malodorous. With Detroit leading 2-1 in the third period of Game 4, the 1:26 of five-on-three time awarded Pittsburgh comes to mind.

In OT of Game 5, with the series a goal away from extinction, the two goalie interference calls that had Detroit head coach Mike Babcock steamed enough he felt compelled to complain to the media the following day didn't seem to pass the smell test.

There was Dallas Drake's charging penalty when in fact he was scarcely moving and barely made contact. The fact that one team had virtually all the five-on-three time, often for extended periods, was troubling.

And then there was the Datsyuk no-call, one that would have set off an absolute firestorm for hockey had the Pens sent it to overtime.

Of 10 experienced media types consulted about the officiating after the series, not one said they thought it was all right.

The responses of most can be summed up with a simple head shake and the response "not good."

Much has been made by some of the fact that the league didn't seem to use the most experienced people, but instead those who were vigilant about calling the touch stick fouls that have improved the game. And that may have been a factor. But the fact remains the officials who were used are generally very good at their craft.

Sorry, but there was something just not right about the way that series went down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Shoreline
I'm not overlooking your point. Just pointing out that it wasn't the OP's.

While I tend to agree that there has been extremely spotty reffing up to this point, unfortunately its a product of a few different beasts. First, there's the human error side of things. Any human can't be expected to make perfect calls in a game where they don't/can't see all the fouls (or lack there of) clearly due to positioning. Secondly, while the league likes to show its refs examples of what penalties are, there's always going to be different interpretations of some rules and different levels of leniency based on individual minds. In a perfect world, each and every ref would call a game the exact same way and a good portion of the questionable calls would go away because players would know what they could and couldn't get away with. Obviously we don't live in that world so there's always going to varying viewpoints on questionable calls.

While I'm not about say "its no big deal because every team gets screwed" as you put it, I do realize the varying personalities reffing the game and would be ecstatic if the one thing they could accomplish was consistency within a game, not so much within the different refs (because that's impossible). To me, a penalty should be called (or not called) from the moment until the puck drops until the final whistle blows. That'd would be enough of a start for me.

Here's the problem. You acknowledge there's an obvious problem with reffing here in the 2nd paragraph, pointing to the right things, but then downplay it. I guess that's the difference between myself and others. I can be perfectly happy watching a game, yet being incensed by the refereeing no less than being incensed by the way Bettman handles the league -- and without the crazy theories against the league of them outright fixing games, or Bettman being in bed with Crosby. Still though, I'm discounting hard-to-call plays like the Staal interference penalty, but pointing to plays that were called out in yesterday's GDT, plays that happened right around the puck which are impossible not to see. They can spot a mile away a stick get up on the hands (the difference between a stick lift and hooking), but they cannot see a player getting nailed away from the puck, when the players involved are right between the ref AND the puck? Or see right when the puck passes a player get interfered with in a knee on knee collision? I guess I'm not the type to just assume that this disparity can easily be shrugged off as human error. The refs are certainly not blind, nor are they idiots, nor do I expect perfection, just consistency on blatant things, which I know they can visibly see, given the way they call other infractions.

Edited by Shoreline

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's the problem. You acknowledge there's an obvious problem with reffing here in the 2nd paragraph, pointing to the right things, but then downplay it. I guess that's the difference between myself and others. I can be perfectly happy watching a game, yet being incensed by the refereeing no less than being incensed by the way Bettman handles the league -- and without the crazy theories against the league of them outright fixing games, or Bettman being in bed with Crosby. Still though, I'm discounting hard-to-call plays like the Staal interference penalty, but pointing to plays that were called out in yesterday's GDT, plays that happened right around the puck which are impossible not to see. They can spot a mile away a stick get up on the hands (the difference between a stick lift and hooking), but they cannot see a player getting nailed away from the puck, when the players involved are right between the ref AND the puck? Or see right when the puck passes a player get interfered with in a knee on knee collision? I guess I'm not the type to just assume that this disparity can easily be shrugged off as human error. The refs are certainly not blind, nor are they idiots, nor do I expect perfection, just consistency on blatant things, which I know they can visibly see, given the way they call other infractions.

I'm not downplaying a single thing. I'm stating that when human-error is involved, as is the case in reffing there is always going to be mistakes. Do I have an explanation for missed calls when a ref is looking right at the play: No, other than they either (a) didn't get a look at the infraction that we all believe they did or (b) they are taking their personal "feel" on what they saw as a borderline call and they aren't going to call that type of stuff going the other way either.

Of course I'm upset when blatant infractions of the rules go unpunished, but you and I going back and forth about it unfortunately isn't going to make it go away. I was simply trying to show you a reason why it exists, nothing more. That doesn't mean I'm happy about it.

As for Bettman and the way he handles the league, that's a whole other discussion if you *truly* don't believe there's a reffing conspiracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Shoreline
I'm not downplaying a single thing. I'm stating that when human-error is involved, as is the case in reffing there is always going to be mistakes. Do I have an explanation for missed calls when a ref is looking right at the play: No, other than they either (a) didn't get a look at the infraction that we all believe they did or (b) they are taking their personal "feel" on what they saw as a borderline call and they aren't going to call that type of stuff going the other way either.

Of course I'm upset when blatant infractions of the rules go unpunished, but you and I going back and forth about it unfortunately isn't going to make it go away. I was simply trying to show you a reason why it exists, nothing more.

As for Bettman and the way he handles the league, that's a whole other discussion if you *truly* don't believe there's a reffing conspiracy.

Alrighty then, guess it was just a misunderstanding, to the first two paragraphs.

For the latter part though, I'm suggesting there is assuredly no reffing conspiracy, as in, a coordinated effort by the refs, through Bettman, to fix games. I am suggesting that their personalities, as you also put it, could be taking things too far in purposefully overlooking certain calls, to what end, who knows, and for me, it doesn't matter really -- that would be for the league to decide. Since I'm not sure what, it would be nice either for a league meeting, or some sort of inquiry into what the deal is, and more importantly, for them to stop the referees blatantly disregarding obvious calls. (I'm sure you know a player pretty much has to embellish an obvious penalty, that isn't hooking, in order to get it called)

If they can spot a hook from a mile away, they can spot an interference or a knee-on-knee collision right near the puck while they're looking right at the play itself. I have higher expectations from these guys because I know they're not stupid, nor are they blind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alrighty then, guess it was just a misunderstanding, to the first two paragraphs.

For the latter part though, I'm suggesting there is assuredly no reffing conspiracy, as in, a coordinated effort by the refs, through Bettman, to fix games. I am suggesting that their personalities, as you also put it, could be taking things too far in purposefully overlooking certain calls, to what end, who knows, and for me, it doesn't matter really -- that would be for the league to decide. Since I'm not sure what, it would be nice either for a league meeting, or some sort of inquiry into what the deal is, and more importantly, for them to stop the referees blatantly disregarding obvious calls. (I'm sure you know a player pretty much has to embellish an obvious penalty, that isn't hooking, in order to get it called)

If they can spot a hook from a mile away, they can spot an interference or a knee-on-knee collision right near the puck while they're looking right at the play itself. I have higher expectations from these guys because I know they're not stupid, nor are they blind.

This is why I'm always happy to see McCreary reffing any Wings game. The guy is as consistent as they come and rarely misses a call.

That being said, if you're so concerned about refs supposedly missing blatant calls, I don't think training is going to fix that. Every ref in the NHL knows every single penalty by the book. Their reasoning for not calling what you and I might think is blatant, is that they just didn't feel it was a penalty. Like you said, they aren't blind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(but yeah I think you're right and that was what he was pointing out)

Unless this is a joke I don't get, I used the correct word.

Conceivable: capable of being conceived; imaginable

Inconceivable: not conceivable; unimaginable; unthinkable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unless this is a joke I don't get, I used the correct word.

Conceivable: capable of being conceived; imaginable

Inconceivable: not conceivable; unimaginable; unthinkable

Nope, you used it correctly it was just for a joke. :blush: Every time I hear the word conceivable or inconceivable it reminds me of The Princess Bride.

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="
type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>&">
name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="
type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350" /> Edited by Frozen-Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nope, you used it correctly it was just for a joke. :blush: Every time I hear the word conceivable or inconceivable it reminds me of The Princess Bride.

Ah....thankfully, I had no idea what you were talking about. :lol:

It's kind of like when the NHL All-Star game a few years ago was at the same time as the Season Premiere of American Idol. There were so many people here blasting the league for putting the game when it had no chance to compete for ratings. My response: I don't want people who watch American Idol watching hockey anyway. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah....thankfully, I had no idea what you were talking about. :lol:

It's kind of like when the NHL All-Star game a few years ago was at the same time as the Season Premiere of American Idol. There were so many people here blasting the league for putting the game when it had no chance to compete for ratings. My response: I don't want people who watch American Idol watching hockey anyway. :D

:lol: My grandparents took us in an RV all the way down to Disney World when I was a kid, there was a VCR on the RV and my cousin watched that movie non-stop almost the whole trip and he says inconceivable about 20 time in that movie so I heard it probably a thousand times. Has always stuck with me since then. :hehe:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Shoreline
This is why I'm always happy to see McCreary reffing any Wings game. The guy is as consistent as they come and rarely misses a call.

That being said, if you're so concerned about refs supposedly missing blatant calls, I don't think training is going to fix that. Every ref in the NHL knows every single penalty by the book. Their reasoning for not calling what you and I might think is blatant, is that they just didn't feel it was a penalty. Like you said, they aren't blind.

Wait, who said anything about training? :P

Did they really need to be trained in what is a penalty before? It wasn't as if the refs didn't know what obstruction was before the lockout. For one reason or another, they selectively decided not to call it. THIS, is what needs to be corrected.

Edited by Shoreline

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Pens have had a whopping TWO minors called on them in the last SIX periods of playoff hockey. That pretty much sums it all up, imo.

let alone play-off hockey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe this to be an instance of flak according to the propaganda model.

1.Ownership of the medium

2.Medium's funding sources

3.Sourcing

4.Flak

5.Anti-communist ideology

This is simply a targeted effort to discredit haters who disagree that the game should not be tilted for the Penguins and eliminate doubt cast on the prevailing assumptions that Crosby is likely a God.

Anti-Crosbyites will be marginalized by pointing to this non-call as clear evidence that the Penguins are indeed a superior team whom never have penalties called against them. Because Crosby is a God.

Edited by Zetterling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bettman is an NBA guy. Who has the most slanted officiating towards star power of any sport? The Nba. Who has the biggest stars in the Nhl? The Pens do.

In the last six periods of hockey:

Pens: 2 penalties

Their opponents: 8 penalties

Come on guys, how can anyone deny this?

The Pens are playing great right now, don't get me wrong. But Gill commits more than 2 penalties per PERIOD, let alone the last six periods.

For curiosity's sake, anyone know how many 5 on 3's the Pens have had to kill? I'm guessing zero but I'm not sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wait, who said anything about training? :P

I took the following statement of yours to be referring to something of the sort:

Since I'm not sure what, it would be nice either for a league meeting, or some sort of inquiry into what the deal is, and more importantly, for them to stop the referees blatantly disregarding obvious calls. (I'm sure you know a player pretty much has to embellish an obvious penalty, that isn't hooking, in order to get it called)

If they can spot a hook from a mile away, they can spot an interference or a knee-on-knee collision right near the puck while they're looking right at the play itself. I have higher expectations from these guys because I know they're not stupid, nor are they blind.

Did they really need to be trained in what is a penalty before? It wasn't as if the refs didn't know what obstruction was before the lockout. For one reason or another, they selectively decided not to call it. THIS, is what needs to be corrected.

I'm not saying they need to be retrained on what is a penalty and what isn't, obviously they should know that. Again, you're saying they are *selectively* not calling penalties. Unless we're in that ref's skates, we can't make that assumption regardless if it *appears* they are looking right at the play. Clearly, they are missing things we all think we see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OMG you have the sheer audacity to come on here and complaign about officating after the crap you got away with last night?

A. I live in Raleigh, so i follow the canes

B. no their not my favorite team.

C. Screw you buddy,.....That game should have been tied had Hal Gill not flown off of Eric Cole trying to gain ground and catapult himself in to MAF. Good Grief, he looked like hudler did when pronger hit him, only Gill has like 4 inches and 50 pounds on cole. The real salt in the wounds is how you can say that after cooke knee on kneeded cole and took him out of the game and likley the series.

The refs on the canes side? Are you nuts? There were bad calls both ways, but don't come on the board of a team that doesn't really care for you anyway and complaign about officating after two highly controversial and bogus plays were comitted BY your team.

A stick was knocked out of MAF hands,..waaaaaaaaaaah. Cole's season could be done asshat.

Screw me? NOTHING was as blatant as that stick knockout. Take off your red glasses and maybe there'll be enough room to get your head out of your ass-hat. Asshat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As we all know, the fix is always in for the Pittsburgh Penguins, which makes last night's goalie interference non-call a real mystery. Here was a Pens' opponent being allowed to knock the stick out of Fleury's hands, the result being a late score that made the game much more dramatic than it should have ever been.

Could it be that this amazing display of blindness on the part of the refs is actually part of a greater plan? Informed sources suggest that the league office actually sanctioned this as part of "Operation Red Penguin" (cousin of Red Herring) a ploy to keep the critics off balance. The plan is simple: favor the opposition early, saving a later time for when the league will award the Penguins their usual supply of calls and non-calls. When the viewing public howls, they then can point to Game 1 and the goal the Hurricanes got away with.

I can hear the commish's Dr. Evil laugh right now, as he rubs his hands together in his office sipping a cognac with his cronies...

Nothing as blatant as Flowers stick you say?????

You mean like the Pens player that slashed the stick out of our D-mans (Lilja) hands when you were on the PP in Game 6 last year (No call), down 3-2 in the series, and 3-1 in the game? You know where a goal was scored about 10 seconds later on a tip from Hossa (Lilja's man) in front of the net? Or Datsyuk racing along the boards to end game 6, then being tripped with about 20 seconds left (No call again) Give me a break, Pens fan is the last one who should be complaining about calls. Get outta here.

Again, I heard no Pens fans complaining about those no calls, why this one?

Edited by dawings1905

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Shoreline
I took the following statement of yours to be referring to something of the sort:

I'm not saying they need to be retrained on what is a penalty and what isn't, obviously they should know that. Again, you're saying they are *selectively* not calling penalties. Unless we're in that ref's skates, we can't make that assumption regardless if it *appears* they are looking right at the play. Clearly, they are missing things we all think we see.

I am more than willing to discount hard-to-see stuff, but slamming someone into the boards and then doing it to two more people right in the same shift way before they even can reach the puck is not subtle or hard to see in the slightest bit any more than the obstruction seen before the lockout with players riding one another with their stick or grabbing them. If you read the GDT several people were wondering what the f*** Gill wasn't given a penalty for, since there was a linesman visibly seen that was looking right at the play.

Despite acknowledging their personal interpretation comes into play, you suddenly downplay the implications of it. I have some very simple questions then. Do you really think the refs did not see the obstruction pre-lockout? Do you really think they do not see the interference that has been happening? It seems we need to get past this part first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Screw me? NOTHING was as blatant as that stick knockout. Take off your red glasses and maybe there'll be enough room to get your head out of your ass-hat. Asshat.

I saw the post game interviews and Fleury said he didn't think the stick was knocked out of his hands by a stick but basically it was accidentaly knocked loose by players but he thought it was moved away from him after that and maybe there should have been a penalty when it was moved away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bettman is an NBA guy. Who has the most slanted officiating towards star power of any sport? The Nba. Who has the biggest stars in the Nhl? The Pens do.

In the last six periods of hockey:

Pens: 2 penalties

Their opponents: 8 penalties

Come on guys, how can anyone deny this?

The Pens are playing great right now, don't get me wrong. But Gill commits more than 2 penalties per PERIOD, let alone the last six periods.

For curiosity's sake, anyone know how many 5 on 3's the Pens have had to kill? I'm guessing zero but I'm not sure.

I think they had to kill one (that I remember, I am getting older) in the Caps series, but I would be willing to bet that they get more 5 on 3 PP in the playoffs than any other team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this