Tom Rowe writes:
>Second, go back to the old system of two refs and one linesman. Or, failing
>that, allow linesmen to call penalties. This is a ridiculous situation where
>only one official on the ice is supposed to see and call all penalties -
>NOBODY will be able to get it all right. If you had two refs, you could have
>one from both East and West (mixed crew) in playoff and championship games.
>But why not let the linesmen get involved? I remember seeing a Div III game
>where two players were on the ice seriously roughing/holding each other well
>behind the play, the linesman stood there watching, while the refs were both
>up ice and nothing was called. Silly!
Because it makes too much sense. If the people at the NHL won't implement
this then how can we expect the NC$$ to. The NHL leaders, however incompetent,
actually care about the game unlike the NC$$. The argument you will hear is
that the linesmen have so much else to look for (offsides, icing, etc) that
they can't be expected to call penalties now too. I would say, the linesmen's
primary job should be to call violations not penalties but if something is
right in front of his face like the D-III example, then he should blow the
whistle.
>And BTW, as to adjusting your style to suit the ref, if you play one kind of
>game that gets you to a national championship and then come up against a ref
>that forces you into another style of game, how are you supposed to compete
>successfully?
WRONG! Good teams show the ability to adjust. LSSU did. Wisconsin didn't.
Should the ref adjust his style of officiating to suit the teams? I think
not. The ref was consistent. That's all you can ask of an official. After
the first period, the teams learned that MacConaghy was calling a tight
game. LSSU adjusted, UW didn't...that's why LSSU won. Plain and simple.
David Wisemore writes:
>Why is it SO difficult to train these officiating bodies to
>call a consistant game? I understand that the referee can
>not see everything that happens. BUT as we have heard from
>another member of this list (sorry forgot who) that he and
>another official wound not have made the same call on a play
>that they both saw.
Why? Because hockey is the fastest game on earth (although if there
is an exception, I'm sure someone will point it out to me).
Hockey is so difficult to officiate because if you call a tight game,
people will cry that you aren't letting the players play. If you call
a loose game, people will cry that you're letting the players get away
with murder. If you call an in-between game, people will call you
inconsistent. Hockey is the toughest sport to officiate, plain and
simple. MacConaghy did a decent job and, most importantly, he was
CONSISTENT (the most you can ask of an official). It was Wisconsin's
fault for not adjusting to what MacConaghy was calling. I respect
MacConaghy because he, unlike many other officials, didnot change
his style simply because it was the championship game. A penalty is
a penalty (in his mind) whether it's the first game or the last and
he acted accordingly. My dad always complains about officials who call
it tight for much of the game and then put the whistle away near the
end or they call it tight in the regular season and then let the guys
get away with murder in the playoffs.
>What I'm getting at is that you should be able to take any
>two refs and they should call the same game very closely.
>If we assume they see out of the same eyes the game should
>be called identicly.
Assuming they're both occupying the same position on the ice.
Anyways, the final Hockey-L Hobey Baker poll accurately reflected the
sentiments of the voters. 9.5 of 16 voters thought Scott Pellerin
most deserved to win the award, which he did. Although, more people
believed Michigan's Denny Felsner would win the award (6 of 14) than
Pellerin or anyone else.
The final tallies were:
SHOULD WIN: 9.5-Pellerin, 3-Felsner, 2.5-Madeley and 1-Derksen
WILL WIN: 6-Felsner, 3.5-Beattie, 3-Pellerin, 1-Madeley and 0.5-Olimb.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
BRI FARENELL CLARKSON '95 [log in to unmask]
"It's a great day for hockey." ---Bob Johnson 1931-1991
PROUD TO BE A FAN OF USA HOCKEY AND US COLLEGE HOCKEY.
"Take me out to the ballgame..." ---Baseball song
-------------------------------------------------------------------
PS- Great job in administering the list, Wayne. You must get a ton of mail
and you've always handled yourself with dignity (even when I've personally
disagreed with you, I've thought that).
PPS- It was nice to meet Rich Vehlow, Carol and the Sweeneys at RPI. Sorry
I couldn't stay longer (what happened afterwards).
PPPS- Thanks to Mike for his THOROUGH postings on whatever he posts and
his always inciteful...uh, I mean insightful (actually, it's sometimes
both 8^)) email. Maybe the Sox will finally win it all this year...maybe
not.