I haven't really noticed any change in the level of officiating since the
change to two refs.  What I really want to know is this: since every other
sport uses more than one ref and doesn't seem to have these kinds of issues
come up, what's the difference with hockey.
 
My guess is that the answer is that, as with most other times that a major
change is made (in hockey or almost anything else in life), this has become
the focus of people's disgruntlement whenever there is something about the
officiating that they don't like.  (Look, ma, he can write run-on
sentences!)
 
If basketball can get three officials coordinated, than hockey ought to be
able to do the same with two refs.  It would seem obvious that you need to
have the same two guys working together all of the time so that they can
develop a rhythm and style that works well for them.  This may mean that
you have a dominant member of the crew and an assisstant; it may mean that
the two of them look for different kind of things, ala football.  I haven't
been paying attention to this issue; perhaps the WCHA does keep consistent
pairs together.
 
I just think that there are too many times that infractions occur behind
the play or in other locations where a single ref can't be expected to be
looking (you don't suppose that's why they occur there, do you?).  There
must be some way to get a two ref system to work, even if it doesn't now.
 
J. Michael Jackson
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.