Just a thought about the WCHA referee business.  Does having two refs in
a game change the chemistry?  For example, if one ref is making more
calls, would the other ref try to catch up?  It seems to me that the
double ref system was tried elsewhere and discarded.  I would appreciate
other viewpoints.
 
James Blashill
Lake Superior State University
[log in to unmask]
 
 
 
On Thu, 2 Nov 1995, Walter Olson wrote:
 
> I don't know and haven't figured out whether this piece of information
> goes to HOCKEY-L or INFO-HOCKEY-L. The rules are confusing and
> ambiguous. Perhaps I am just confused and ambiguous. :)
>
> But here is the information:
>
> It was annouced today that the WCHA changed the nature of the DQ
> given to MTU's Freshman Player Yarko Ruutu in Friday Night's refereeing
> debacle at Univ of Minn- Duluth. For a quick recap, at 13:56 in the
> 3rd period, Ruutu checked a UMD player near the UMD benches. This
> precipitated a brawl in which was caused by the referees losing control
> of the game.  Several penalties were given, one of which was a DQ to
> MTU's Ruutu for fighting. Since it was Ruutu's 2nd DQ for fighting,
> he was to sit out three games. In addition, if he were DQ'ed again for
> fighting, his playing season would be terminated.
>
> Review of game films showed that Ruutu did not throw any punches and
> generally tried to avoid fighting. The WCHA removed the reason for
> the DQ as being fighting but still allowed the DQ to stand. Since
> it was Ruutu's 2nd DQ (this DQ not fighting), Ruutu will have to sit
> out two games which include the Saturday 28 Oct 95 game and the Friday
> 3 Nov 95 UAA game. This also has the implication that should Ruutu get
> another fighting DQ (an event that we not Ruutu would like to see), he
> will not be terminated from play for the remaining games of this season.
>
> My additional comments:
>
> In the WCHA, we have a rule that states more or less that league officials
> shall not reduce game penalties awarded by referees. THis move is an
> apparent compromise between a flagrant bad call with injustice to
> Ruutu and the league rule. I am not certain about the wisdom of the
> league's rule.  In Friday night's game fight, the same one that Ruutu
> got the boot in, MTU was awarded fewer penalties at the time of the incident
> than was UMD. However, the referees did not allow MTU the power play. In
> addition, both MTU and UMD had players on the ice playing following penallty
> that were supposed to be in the penalty box.  In the last four seconds of
> regular period play, the ref's blew another call which led directly to UMD's
> OT win. An assist on that OT score was Mrozik who was DQ'ed for leaving the
> bench to participate in the forementioned fight. (Mrozik was not DQed until
> the next day when game films were reviewed.)
>
> In Saturday night's game, the same referees (Thomas, Krieger) also
> continued to make very questionable and film showing incorrect calls
> which influenced the game scoring.
>
> This is not to say that in either case that UMD would have lost the
> games. UMD is fine team which I expect to see in the playoffs.
>
> The real problem is what can the league do about such poor officiating
> after the fact?  It is true that no one, not even I, can see everything
> happening on the ice, especially when out of position and a long distance
> from the action. Because of the game speed and collision (field hockey
> is a contact sport) it is not possible for a human to be 100% correct
> 100% of the time officiating. If we expect that, then perhaps our goals
> are a bit idealistic. But we do have and should use the technology to
> review a questionable call at the time it occurs. Video replay on MAJOR
> infractions can prevent the debacle of both Friday and Saturday night
> games.
>
> I do not want every call reviewed. But a major call that is questionable
> should be reviewed.  Some might say this will delay the game. In Friday
> night's game, play was stopped for 20 minutes so that the ref's could
> get the facts straight and they still didn't. I think that if video replay
> were used, the situation would have been correct in about 5 minutes. By
> limiting the replay to defined major calls and by limiting the time to
> review and make a decision about the call, game delay can be held to a
> minumum.
>
> This should not be viewed as 2nd guessing or back biting the referees but
> rather as a way of improving the game of hockey. Coaches use film to
> improve the skills of their players to improve hockey. Some use it between
> periods. It is time that referees take advantage of this tool to improve
> their skills and the game.
>
> Walt Olson
> MTU
>
> (Usual disclaimers: I am not nor wish to be an official spokesperson
> for Mich Tech. The views above are mine but may be shared with others.)
>
> HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
> [log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.
>
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.