At 09:50 AM 2/9/98 EST, Wayne Smith wrote:
>Bob wrote, in part..
>>There also could be a differentiation between various types of minor
>>penalties.  On slashes, boarding, high sticking and crosschecks, the person
>>penalized should be forced to stay in the box for the full 2 minutes even if
>>the opposing team scores one or more goals. ...
>
>Good theory, but I doubt it would work.  Working against you would be
>the reluctance of a(n already reluctant) referee to call the more severe
>penalty because it would have such a dramatic effect on the game outcome.
 
Unfortunately, you probably are right.  It reminds me a little like the
problem in the NBA where the refs make a point of not calling fouls on the
"stars" but will call them on the journeymen players.  There was the recent
case where the NBA fined a ref for calling a foul on a player who was not
involved in a play instead of the star, Chris Webber, even though Webber
clearly fouled the opponent.   He wasn't fined for deliberately calling it
wrong but for admitting it.   In baseball, the umpires have redefined the
strike zone making a mockery of the rules.
 
If a ref is reluctant to call the game, he shouldn't be on the ice (at least
in the perfect world).  By failing to call the game as the rules are
written, the field or the ice is not leveled.  If the rules as written are
out of date re-write them but make the officials enforce the rules as written.
 
>
>>                                        ...  It would also be useful if the
>>trailing linesman would watch behind the play where a lot of slashing etc.
>>takes place.
>
>How's this different from the current situation?  The key here is that
>the officials in hockey are not a co-equal team, but a dictator and a
>couple of "go-fers".  The disadvantage to our system (either 1 or 2 or 3
>refs) is that the non-senior people will *NOT* call anything unless they
>are *SURE* the head ref missed the play ...  and that's not going to
>happen very often.
>
>The recent change to *CALLING* hitting from behind into the boards goes
>against my pessimism.  Maybe hockey can find a way to weed out these
>other unnecessary and dangerous actions?
 
Again, I agree with you.... BUT my comments above apply here also.  If the
officials are ordered to call the "dangerous" penalties and are graded on
it, there eventually will be changes that are for the good of the kids
playing hockey.  Ditto with the "go-fers".  Don't get me wrong, I love a
clean, teeth rattling check.  It is a thing of beauty.  However, when I see
a cheap slash to the back of the knees well behind the play, I feel like
going up over the glass and going into the face of the officials.
 
Bob Svec
 
GO BLACK BEARS!!!!