Since I may have fueled some of this thread with my adding comments about
officiating to game reports from southern colorado, I feel obligated to
address some of ken's comments in his recent posting.
 
I've been involved with hockey since the early 1950s as a fan, a bit of
intramural stuff while in college, youth hockey for my son, and supporter
(via the sponsor program) of several cadets on the USAFA hockey game as well
as a fair amount of being a minor official at various levels up through college
junior varsity.
 
In my official's commentary, I've tried to be reasonably non-partisan, and my
assessments have normally been discussed with coaching staffs.  In particular,
my comments about ned bunyan were discussed with both the ND coach and an AFA
assistant coach.  Most of the officials are not new, so we've seen them again
and again.  Jim Burlew, for example, is normally fairly good, but I've seen
him have some off nights.  Ned Bunyan has done a total of 6 games.  The two
I saw last week were the worst.  Mark Rudolph lets the teams play more than
I'm comfortable with, and it seems his style of officiating leads towards
more physical play with the elbows and sticks getting up.
 
The point is that, like players, some officials are better than others, and
also like players, some officials have off nights.  ALL OFFICIAL BASHING
can't be blamed on partisanship.
 
> From: Kenny Zalewski <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re:  Instructions to referees
>
> [ ken's stuff is severely edited. Much of what I deleted is stuff I ]
> [ either agree with or only have a slight disagreement with         ]
>
>                       Yet it seems like no one has any qualms about throwing
> the entire blame of a bad game on the referee.
 
That isn't quite true.  In well over 90% of the cases, the officiating makes
little difference in the outcome of a contest.  Some people get concerned
about that other 1 to 10%  The issue is critical plays.  There are probably
fewer than a dozen "critical points" in almost any athletic contest.  They
normally are not recognized until after the fact.  A bad official judgement
at one of these points is so much more crucial than those at other points.
The clearest example (without opening up another can of worms) is the
clip called on the Notre Dame blocker at this year's orange bowl.
 
> Having officiated myself for the past two and a half years, I can draw on
> my own experience.  Watching the game as a spectator is one point of view,
> and vastly different from the one I get on the ice.  Up in the stands, you
> can see everything from above.  On the ice, you are at the level of the
> players, and can easily miss things that may be obvious from above.
 
To convince yourself of this, go sit in the first row behind a goal and compare
your perspective of the game from there with one you get from high up in the
stands.
 
charlie shub  [log in to unmask]  -or-  ..!{ucar|nbires}!boulder!cdash
  or even     cdash@colospgs (BITNET)     -or-  (719) 593-3492