Everyone on this list has got to lighten up.
 
I have never been a hockey referee and have no wish to be one, but I
do respect those who go out there and do the job.
 
First of all, the job has to be done.  No referee, no game.
 
Second, it's difficult.  You're moving around, trying to follow the
action and see the important things that happen.  For everyone who is
bitching about a referee, tonight or tomorrow try to follow all the
action from a vantage point CLOSE to the ice, so you can't see the
entire rink at once.  Now try to see everything that happens.  You
can't.
 
Third, everyone forgets 98% of the calls, the ones that were right on
the money, and remember the 2% you made the mistakes on.  Teddy
Roosevelt once said something to the extent that if he were right 60%
of the time, he'd be proud of himself.  I think most referees in
college hockey are well above that.
 
Another thing people should do is ask how many referees they don't
like who did NOT referee a game which involved their favorite team.
If you watched a game involving two teams you have no emotional
attachment to, I'm sure you would have seen the calls differently.
 
Also, some of these people you only see work once or twice a year.
That is a small sample to use to judge the overall abilities of an
individual.
 
Last weekend RPI played the Colgate-Cornell duo and had the same
referees for both games, Mike Noeth and Alex Dell, who, except for a
bad man-in-the-crease call during the Cornell game, called good games.
Jayson and I were pretty much in tune with them, seeing the majority
of the penalties they called before play stopped and not having a
problem with them.
 
Yes, there were calls we didn't see or agree with, but just because
the official didn't agree with us doesn't mean he's wrong.  He has a
different opinion/interpretation of the events.  That's the way life
works, so let's get a little maturity and accept alternate opinions.
 
I don't remember the last time I railed against a referee on the
radio.  I probably never have, because however many mistakes the
referee may make, both teams make a LOT more.  Nobody's team plays
flawless hockey, why should the referees call a flawless game?  Any
game in which someone claims the referee "lost" the game for his team,
just how many opportunities did his team squander?  How many
breakdowns in the defensive zone contributed to the other team's
goals?  Had these events not happened, the referee's call would not be
an issue.  So check out your team first, then check the referee.
 
Now, I believe the quality of officiating is a valid topic, as is who
are better or worse at officiating.  But to label someone a "horrible"
referee based on one or two games you saw is jumping to a hasty
conclusion.  In the course of the posts I've seen, most are people
venting personal frustrations against a referee who called a game
his/her team lost, not an objective analysis of the officials
abilities or a thorough examination of his work, or even the calls he
made in that game.  It's usually a few bad calls that stick in the
mind that people use to make their judgements.  How would you like it
if people judged your work in that manner?  I doubt you'd like it at
all.  Then college officials should get the same treatment you'd
expect.
 
OK, I guess I'm done.  I have to go now and call a college hockey
game, and I'm pretty certain the players will decide the outcome of
this game, not the officials.
 
 
Kurt Stutt
[log in to unmask]
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.