On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 11:41 PM, Mark Lewin <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>
> Did anyone notice that the referees wear no names or identification as to
> which league they're from. I assume the referees were announced at the
> start
> of each game, but I missed them and the announcers never mentioned it
> during
> the play of any of the games I watched.
>

They would be announced, and it seems to be known by the writers which
conference they belong to, but TV is probably under instructions not to
mention it.


> And the OT goal during the Michigan-UNO game?  If the referees had the same
> view of the goal line as the tv audience did, there was no way they could
> have seen the puck, let alone "conclusive evidence" to overturn the "no
> goal" call on the ice.  Its a good thing to bring technology into play in
> national tournaments but that call gives technology a bad name.  I hope
> that
> is some further explanation of what happened during that interminable
> sequence, but I doubt we'll hear anything else about it.
>

There was an angle from the opposite end zone that appeared to show the puck
over the line, and I think you can see it moving through the net on the
overhead angle. I may be in the minority, but I think they got it right.

It may provide an advantage to a team to be sent to a regional near their
> home ice, but did you notice that there seemed to be signs of life in
> Bridgeport and Manchester but nothing but empty seats in Green Bay and St.
> Louis.


The problem in both of those places is that there is no local team at all,
so it makes selling tickets doubly difficult. The Frozen Four sells on its
own, and can be held just about anywhere and be fine. (We'll really find
that out next year!) Regionals are a different story. You don't get the same
amount of travelling to them, so they have to be supported locally. With a
local team, there are some options to tie Regionals tickets in with
season-ticket packages and to promote the weekend all season.

I really don't understand what the point was of going to St. Louis, unless
and until the other SLU reinstates hockey.


> Did anyone get a chance to listen to interviews with Paul Stewart (director

of officiating in the ECAC) during the ECAC championships broadcasting?  He
> kept going on and on about how the ECAC encourages the referees to use
> their
> discretion calling (or not calling) penalties when the effect of the
> penalty
> has no effect on the play.  According to him (I'm paraphrasing here), if
> someone is hooked in center ice, away from the puck and it doesn't prevent
> the victim of the hook from a scoring opportunity, the referee might want
> to
> "let it go".  After listening to him,  I no longer wonder why the state of
> referees in the ECAC is as bad as it is.  He seems to want
> to institutionalize incompetence.
>

It's not incompetence, it's a different standard. It's really the old-school
NHL standard of advantage, which was (to them) denying a scoring
opportunity. Someone might want to tell him, though, that the NHL abandoned
that theory after the lockout.

John

-- 
John Edwards
"You can insure against the weather, but you can't insure against
incompetence, can you?" - Phil Tufnell