The War Room

[P-DAZZLE]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Just a slight difference in the speed of what's happening between rugby and hockey.

If calling the rulebook (law book for rugby) rugby is much more difficult to referee than hockey. Much more difficult for the ref to get a good view of everything they need to see, more complex calls to make. Speed is only one component of what can make a call difficult.

I'm a huge rugby fan, it is my #1 sport over hockey. The refereeing has actually been a huge issue in the sport recently. The refereeing is far from perfect. However, I have long held the belief that the TMO system is the best review system in sports. It isn't bound by silly technicalities to the same degree as the NHL's reviews. It generally has the goal of get the call right based on what happened, which should be the goal of any review system but doesn't always (often even) seem to be the case.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by P-DAZZLE

If calling the rulebook (law book for rugby) rugby is much more difficult to referee than hockey. Much more difficult for the ref to get a good view of everything they need to see, more complex calls to make. Speed is only one component of what can make a call difficult.

I'm a huge rugby fan, it is my #1 sport over hockey. The refereeing has actually been a huge issue in the sport recently. The refereeing is far from perfect. However, I have long held the belief that the TMO system is the best review system in sports. It isn't bound by silly technicalities to the same degree as the NHL's reviews. It generally has the goal of get the call right based on what happened, which should be the goal of any review system but doesn't always (often even) seem to be the case.

Agreed,

I feel for rugby refs the Laws have been in flux for, well, the laws have always been changing/evolving since I started playing '89. I actually struggle to think of a sport with some many changes.

The pendulum has swung too far one way. Personally I think it all started when they removed rucking.

That being said making the Touch Judges, into assistant Referees helped.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by iloveicedhockey

For reference, Nigel Owens is the best referee in the game.
.

expect 2015 WC Final

He had a shocker in that.

[Johnny Makarov]

I was hoping for a video of Jason Kenney in his mom's basement when I clicked this.

[Jethro Choicebro]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

expect 2015 WC Final

He had a shocker in that.

From what I recall, it was pretty much exclusively the Australians complaining


But i think this highlights one of the major issues with NHL - allowing criticism.

Here was Nigel's response

Owens added: “There will always be a couple of decisions people are talking about because it’s impossible to referee a game of rugby without making some mistakes.
“There are always going to be some decisions people want to talk about.

“If you can’t deal with criticism as a referee you can’t do this job. So there is something inside you that helps you deal with that.

Refereeing is never going to be 100% perfect, but the NHL's lack of transparency and suppression of any criticism is a real downside.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I posit that since the NHL can not effectively and fairly referee the game based on the current rules, and seem to be unwilling and incompetent at it, then maybe it is just time to remove all the rules. Offside? Let's get rid of the off-side lines. Icing calls are wrong at times? Let's get rid of the centre line as well too. High stick - was it the follow-through on a shot? Was it missed completely? Was it a complete accident or was there some Dino Ciccarelli-type of intention? Who cares? Let's just make them all legal now. Blindside hits to the head? Acts of aggression that don't belong in the game? The constant 'spinning of the justice wheel' that leaves many people scratching their heads? Get rid of all that silly hoopla.



These rules are going to be the death of us all. I offer this as a rough blueprint of what a forward-thinking solution will look like:



Seriously, the eye in the sky isn't a bad call. Having a referee in the war-room in Toronto? Giving the refs more powers of review, though making the game longer, will rectify the 'unfairness' of the calls at times. NHL really does need to fix this, as though most games don't have an issue, there are some rather glaring moments of absolute horrendous game-changing calls that are then remembered above all other games.

[gt4flames]

Never heard of Nigel Owens before this thread. Oh man watching that 10 minutes was just spectacular. I want that guy to referee everything.

[TheSquatch]

Nigel's great, but most rugby referees are very similar, even if slightly less competent. They call something, they explain the rule, and you move on. If you don't move on, you get kicked out, basically, so it's very very easy to get with the program!

One of the beefs I have with the NHL is how reluctant they are to call 2 things: one is intent to injure, and the other is unsportsmanlike conduct. They hardly ever use 'em.

If the ref in a rugby game deems you unsportsmanlike, you are most likely sitting that game.


Anyway, there's a big discrepancy between rugby and hockey, I'm not suggesting I have a cure all here, I'm just saying "Look, this technology exists, it's implemented pretty seamlessly elsewhere, and to good effect." Surely the NHL could do SOMETHING to negate these absolutely brutal calls. I didn't get the feeling Nigel Owens felt threatened or submarined by having that spotter call down to him. It's... easy.