Ryan Stone writes:
> I hope (expect) that the coaches' input is just that one set of a large bunch
> of inputs which determines an official's overall performance.
 
I agree completely, so far, but he continues...
 
> When you consider what a coach is looking for in an official, one who doesn't
> call many penalties on his team and is able to catch all of the cheap shots
> committed by his team's opponents, how can you say these coaches are good
> jugdes of referees?  The only officials who will get good overall ratings by
> all coaches are ones who let everything go.  Which makes college hockey more
> and more like pro hockey, with everyone hooking and grabing everyone else.
 
I disagree.  Most coaches want official to keep the game under control.  I
would expect that almost (?) all of the coaches are looking for refs that
follow the spirit of the rules and be *consistent*.  I'm sure that coaches
are frustrated when truly bad calls are made, but, for the most part, I
think they understand and respect the good calls against their team.  (Not
that they may be happy with them.)  :^)
 
I think that the coaches are in a position to know which refs are good and
which ones aren't.  Their inputs are a valid part of the rating of refs.
I agree that the coaches should not choose which refs are kept (and hired),
but I think that complaints from the coaches should be considered.  (I do
*not* hold players' complaints with the same regard, BTW.)
>
> Let the players skate and play hockey and get rid of the goons.
> Just my opinion,
 
Pretty much matches my opinion too!  :^)
--
	- Steve
 
Brown '82    GO BRUINS!!!