Having read Anne's comments about officiating I needed to enter my two
cents.
 
We all agree that the best officiating is that which goes unnoticed. I
think the major underlying problem is that USA Hockey as a whole selects
and promotes the wrong referees.
 
I have been an official for two years in Michigan and have noticed the
"you've been here a long time" so you get the games. Most of the referees
have never played the game. But, because the official has 10 years
"experience" of minor hockey to their credit they move up the ranks.
 
USA Hockey has the message that the referee is in complete control. True!
Control is not the god-like assumption that most referees make.
 
I am not bashing USA Hockey nor am I bashing some good referees. But you
can be sure that if I am playing at a high-level I want a referee of that
same calibre, and not based on life-time experience. How about a mix of
playing level and "quality" referee experience.
 
Why would a Div-I activity ask for some referees who have never played high
school, or even college hockey.
 
There are so many penalties called by officials that would go uncalled by
myself, for example, because of the situation or location that the
infraction occurred.
 
I think no matter what we (fans), or USA Hockey does, officaiting will
continue to be a negative. We need consistent, "quality" experienced
referees.
 
How many leagues have bans on the players and coaches, not allowing them
the opportunity to express their displeasure. If a player stinks, we can
say it. If the coach stinks, we can say it. But if the referee stinks, the
coaches and players can't say anything. And we wonder how the God-complex
occurs.
 
Craig Lisko
Ferris State 1990-1994
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.