The high stick: the concept of height no longer has meaning

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by nickerjones

Sure the high stick goal sucks but it's more than that. It's the inconsistency of what is called and the timing of when refs arbitrarily decide that they aren't going to call penalties. It shouldn't matter that the Ducks had been penalized 0 times, 5 times, or 100 times. If they commit an infraction it should be called.

The goalie interference on Bouma, the late holding the stick on Dougie, the lack of calling Perry for interference on the Dougie infraction.

The 2nd goal went in sure.. but the play should have been blown dead 10 seconds before the shot, when Perry is over at the bench punching players in the face... with an official standing right there.

In the last few minutes the Ducks had too many men, a high stick, and a blatant holding that were all let go , seemingly because the refs decided the Ducks had already had enough called on them.


I understand refs can't see "everything" but you can't use that line when a ref is literally standing beside Perry while he is throwing punches at players on our Bench. It's just sickening the amount of money fans put into this game and have to deal with the officiating that we have seen this year. I yell at beer league refs that make 40 bucks a game. NHL officials are making 6 figures a year. What other job can you be so consistently bad and still retain a job (not including anyone in the Oiler organization 2006-2016)?

But back to the original point of all these calls, what's the point of even having rules and penalties if you can simply stop following those rules at any time?

One of the reasons why there is a dearth of quality officials.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Robbob

Even Ron Maclean thought it was a high stick. Hell even Garrett thought it shouldn't have count. I was at the game so I didn't see the replays until I rewatched portions of the game tonight and I just can't see how any reasonable person could come to the conclusion the war room did.

It baffles me how in the NHL the people at the arena are not shown the review while it's happening. What are you hiding NHL?

And to nickerjones point yes the NHL stops calling penalties at a certain point and the players know this. Could you imagine if the NFL stop calling PI becausr a team already had too many PI calls? Heck the Raiders commit 20 penalties per game.

Things like this contribute to why the NHL cant take off. People feel its at best incompetant and at worst manipulated.

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by calgarywinning

THIS 100%. The Refs even saw Perry holding Bennett behind the net and the play, then dropping him to the ice and told him to KNOCK it off.

Also, I can't understand why Perry was in the Flames bench for as long as he was, without a penalty which resulted in a goal.

Imagine if a player on the bench started punching a player on the ice? It would be blown dead immediately, so I'm no sure why it was ok for Perry to stand there punching guys on the bench.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

And to nickerjones point yes the NHL stops calling penalties at a certain point and the players know this. Could you imagine if the NFL stop calling PI becausr a team already had too many PI calls? Heck the Raiders commit 20 penalties per game.

I think "putting away the whistle" is part of the game. On the surface, it sounds stupid, but during the game... you don't want a chintzy hook called with two minutes left in a tight playoff game, even if it is the letter of the law.

It certainly leaves them open to criticism, and as a fan it can be extremely frustrating (probably for the Ref too), but it has been that way for as long as I can remember.

[robaur]

I haven't had any luck being able to explain to those asking me why it wasn't a high stick. anyone else have any luck ?

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I think "putting away the whistle" is part of the game. On the surface, it sounds stupid, but during the game... you don't want a chintzy hook called with two minutes left in a tight playoff game, even if it is the letter of the law.

It certainly leaves them open to criticism, and as a fan it can be extremely frustrating (probably for the Ref too), but it has been that way for as long as I can remember.

yes it should. Player will learn not to do it. ever.
The Ducks knew the refs would not call anymore penalties so they pushed forward. And the Flames played tentative because they knew anything close for them would be called.

That's not fair.

[Robbob]

That is how the Broadstreet bullies won. They knew they weren't going to call every infraction so you just keep going.

[Passe La Puck]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I think "putting away the whistle" is part of the game. On the surface, it sounds stupid, but during the game... you don't want a chintzy hook called with two minutes left in a tight playoff game, even if it is the letter of the law.

It certainly leaves them open to criticism, and as a fan it can be extremely frustrating (probably for the Ref too), but it has been that way for as long as I can remember.

Then put away the ####ing whistle but that didn't happen in game 2 with the two late weak ass calls against the flames.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by robaur

I haven't had any luck being able to explain to those asking me why it wasn't a high stick. anyone else have any luck ?

That is because NHL logic said for it to be a goal it had to be below 4 feet. They said it was a goal, therefore it wasn't a high stick on the play. So sayith the war room up top mount NHL.

[Fuzz]

How is it, with all the money this league is rolling in, we can't have a technological solution to these things? Why are we looking at blurry shots with low framerates? Put a transmitter in the puck and build a 3D mesh scanner of the entire ice surface and sensors in the net. Go to the technology whenever there is a question.

It wouldn't be a simple system, but I'm not sure it is rocket science either. At the very least ring the boards with Gopros with high framerates covering every angle. This crap is ridiculous and the league looks like amateur hour at least once a week.

[Mattman]

Unsure if this has been posted yet, so sorry if it has.

But someone actually took the time to apply math to the situation and came out with a reasonable conclusion.

There are some great visuals along with the data he provides in coming up with his conclusion. Worth the read.


https://thewincolumnblog.wordpress.c...hompsons-goal/

Thompson’s stick clearly makes contact with the puck outside the projected net profile, thereby proving that there was a high-sticking infraction on the play. The NHL’s decision was incorrect and the goal should not have counted.

Conclusion

Well, there you have it, Flames fans. You were right. The Flames were once again robbed of a playoff win via video review, and will fight to stay alive tomorrow night in Game 4. Our fingers are crossed for a better outcome, but if the Ducks manage to win again, we can all find comfort in the fact that Dennis Wideman will finally be off the books.

[brocoli]

This entire issue should be with the rule. If you want it to be conclusive that change it from the cross bar to the player's shoulders. Simplify.

On the account of replay, it should be used for BLATANT violations. As soon as you start doing frame by frame you are removing the human element of the game and thus why even have them? Give the refs a chance to watch it 4 or 5 times again in real time. Unless it's obvious, boom...call on ice stands.

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by brocoli

This entire issue should be with the rule. If you want it to be conclusive that change it from the cross bar to the player's shoulders. Simplify.

On the account of replay, it should be used for BLATANT violations. As soon as you start doing frame by frame you are removing the human element of the game and thus why even have them? Give the refs a chance to watch it 4 or 5 times again in real time. Unless it's obvious, boom...call on ice stands.

Maybe they don't want to simplify it, that way they have some control over the out come! That said, I don't think refs watching plays in real time several times would make any difference.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

yes it should. Player will learn not to do it. ever.
The Ducks knew the refs would not call anymore penalties so they pushed forward. And the Flames played tentative because they knew anything close for them would be called.

That's not fair.

Unfortunately its what NHL Owners and GM's want. They don't want that call made in the 3rd period or OT so the refs don't make the call.

Doesn't matter what fans think.

In the NFL the owners want the rules called all game. Hence the PI call in the Superbowl OT this year.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Unfortunately its what NHL Owners and GM's want. They don't want that call made in the 3rd period or OT so the refs don't make the call.

Doesn't matter what fans think.

In the NFL the owners want the rules called all game. Hence the PI call in the Superbowl OT this year.

That's not entirely true. In Game 1 the Ducks were had 7 power plays to the Flames 2 so the Flames got a 5 on 3 with 3 minutes left in the 3rd. They will make the call if it fits the narrative. If there is a call in OT (for example delay of game) then there will be an even up call at the next opportunity.

Again, that's not fair because it makes one team scared.

[mikeecho]

Originally Posted by Robbob

That is how the Broadstreet bullies won. They knew they weren't going to call every infraction so you just keep going.

This is so true. I'm pretty sure I've posted this before, but I'd love to see a referee metric that compiles statistics on penalties called vs infractions for both teams.

Team A = 5 penalties for 33 infractions = 15.1%
Team B = 3 penalties for 11 infractions = 27.2%

The average person would suggest the officials favored team B because Team A got more penalties, but the reality is the opposite.

This is exactly how the Flyers won their cups.

[MarkGio]

If you guys have a problem with it, make the league pay for it with the only way that works.

Seriously, in today's day and age you can go online and hurt the league
-- Find a stream
-- Buy knock off merchandise
-- Buy tickets to some other event

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Unfortunately its what NHL Owners and GM's want. They don't want that call made in the 3rd period or OT so the refs don't make the call.

Doesn't matter what fans think.

In the NFL the owners want the rules called all game. Hence the PI call in the Superbowl OT this year.

Except they called Hamilton on an incredibly soft holding the stick, and Brodie in a cross check that was more of a shove with a superman dive. All with less than 5 minutes left. So somebody wants these calls.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

How is it, with all the money this league is rolling in, we can't have a technological solution to these things? Why are we looking at blurry shots with low framerates?

Because they don't think it's worth money to get the calls right. Personally I think they're very wrong. I don't think the NHL is losing fans to frustration, but I do think they have a problem gaining fans because of the general refereeing mess.

I've watched a few games with people who have been interested in learning the game, and usually at the end of the night they're clearly annoyed by the fact that even in a room full of hockey fans nobody can clearly explain why some things get a penalty call and other similar things don't.

Video replays are just one more thing that shows what a mess the refereeing is.

[codynw]

Originally Posted by brocoli

This entire issue should be with the rule. If you want it to be conclusive that change it from the cross bar to the player's shoulders. Simplify.

On the account of replay, it should be used for BLATANT violations. As soon as you start doing frame by frame you are removing the human element of the game and thus why even have them? Give the refs a chance to watch it 4 or 5 times again in real time. Unless it's obvious, boom...call on ice stands.

So Chara gets to deflect it a foot higher than anyone else? That's fair.