Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

West Coast Ref bias


tyhee

Recommended Posts

How does anyone know that the refs are not held accountable? Because it's not talked about publicly? If it was talked about publicly, it would be really bad form and would drive even more potential referees away from the game. This is one area I believe the league handles internally and it should stay like that.

Handles internally? Then it would cease to be a problem over time and that's not the case...it's getting worse not better.

That's how it works...if people ARE held accountable it sets a tone and then corrects itself over time. But that hasn't happened because.....it isn't being "handled" - internally or otherwise.

A lot of things over time have been thought to be best kept in the closet swept under the rug "internal" but it doesn't mean it's best or that it actually happens that way.

It should be talked about publicly....the public pays for tickets and deserves a better product AND to know what is being done to address lapses in service. Or, become a WWEFG league and script the deal so we can then decide whether or not we want to support it. We want a fair game and are demanding for one....the only thing that would be really bad would be a bunch of lip service suggesting it's being handled internally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could you please tell me why that would not be breaking the law by publishing copyrighted material?

t

People are asking you to include the content in your post because 1) many users don't necessarily want to be going to external sites for various reasons and 2) it's not really appropriate to be posting here to redirect people to other sites.

You're not violating any 'publishing' laws by citing or quoting another source for discussion. It's done in all genres. It's published public domain material that is fair game to be cited and quoted.

It's not that hard to cut and paste and cite the source, which is the general protocol.

I'm not a mod, but I'm not interested in external links, creating traffic for who knows who, so I'm with the other people here who have asked you to include in your OP what you are referring to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Handles internally? Then it would cease to be a problem over time and that's not the case...it's getting worse not better.

That's how it works...if people ARE held accountable it sets a tone and then corrects itself over time. But that hasn't happened because.....it isn't being "handled" - internally or otherwise.

A lot of things over time have been thought to be best kept in the closet swept under the rug "internal" but it doesn't mean it's best or that it actually happens that way.

It should be talked about publicly....the public pays for tickets and deserves a better product AND to know what is being done to address lapses in service. Or, become a WWEFG league and script the deal so we can then decide whether or not we want to support it. We want a fair game and are demanding for one....the only thing that would be really bad would be a bunch of lip service suggesting it's being handled internally.

I wholeheartedly disagree. The public does not need to know everything just because they bought a ticket or a jersey or a foam finger.

Officiating will always have a human element. Mistakes will happen and it's part of the game. It's never going to perfect and improving officiating does not need the input of the general public who has a completely biased opinion in favour of their favourite team.

Instead of supporting something you don't like, take your entertainment dollars elsewhere. No one forces you to watch hockey. Speak with your wallet. Tell the NHL you've had enough with their officiating and you refuse to support it. But by you still watching, your complaints will never be heard. Continued support will not drive change. But we all know you won't leave the game behind. You want to have your cake and eat it too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wholeheartedly disagree. The public does not need to know everything just because they bought a ticket or a jersey or a foam finger.

Officiating will always have a human element. Mistakes will happen and it's part of the game. It's never going to perfect and improving officiating does not need the input of the general public who has a completely biased opinion in favour of their favourite team.

Instead of supporting something you don't like, take your entertainment dollars elsewhere. No one forces you to watch hockey. Speak with your wallet. Tell the NHL you've had enough with their officiating and you refuse to support it. But by you still watching, your complaints will never be heard. Continued support will not drive change. But we all know you won't leave the game behind. You want to have your cake and eat it too.

That last line? That's your idea but it doesn't make it true.

Change often DOES come with people voicing their displeasure and many "gentlemens clubs" are broken up because of it. A good example is the local firehall here that was forced to examine and change policies when public outcry demanded it. Sure, they'd done it internally for years....with no changes made as a result.

Most jobs involving humans are subject to human element but those in charge are obligated to ensure that patterns of errors are corrected not excused on an ongoing basis.

I should just abandon the game? No....that's how quitters do it. If enough people do voice their dissatisfaction it can result in change and I know that first hand through experience. I "like" hockey.....so why should I quit watching it? I just don't like the lousy officiating that we're seeing on a regular basis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could you please tell me why that would not be breaking the law by publishing copyrighted material?

t

Include the link and source?....many are leery of links and some have posted viruses so if you're going to post an article we'd appreciate being able to read it here vs an outside source.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most jobs involving humans are subject to human element but those in charge are obligated to ensure that patterns of errors are corrected not excused on an ongoing basis.

Again, you assume that those in charge do not address these so-called patterns of errors because they aren't doing right in front of your eyes and ears?

From: http://www2.tsn.ca/blogs/kerry_fraser/?id=438675

Some might suggest if officials were subject to public game suspensions for missing an obvious call there wouldn't be enough personnel left to cover the games. The truth is there is a form of internal accountability currently in place.

Officials have been suspended for public conduct that was unbecoming a member of the profession and for failure to pass the required fitness test. On one occasion a lineman's playoff assignments were withheld pending a full investigation into a missing puck. Fines have been levied against many officials for misinterpreting a rule; present writer included. The amount of the fine can vary between $250 and $500 and is donated to a charity of the official's choice. A "one time" donation is usually sufficient for the official to become completely familiar with all the playing rules!

Officials are largely held accountable through a subjective internal evaluation system that is conducted by the Officiating Department to determine annual playoff selection. Considerable bonus money is available for each playoff round that an official is selected to work. In addition to the money, there is tremendous pride associated with being chosen for this honour.

Each official receives a midseason evaluation which often includes areas where improvement is expected. If an official's performance reviews are consistently sub-substandard he will be put on notice that he must bring his game up to the expected standard or be subject to termination. Specialized coaching should be provided to any official that might fall into this category!

Once a referee or linesman's season has concluded an exit meeting with the V.P. of Officiating or one of his designates is arranged to discuss the season in review and to provide suggestions moving forward.

While the success of any evaluation process hinges largely upon the competency of the personnel who conduct the reviews there is currently one in place intended to hold the officials accountable. It's just not done in the public arena.

Officials are held accountable by the league, that is good enough for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are Refs who do make personal calls in games, because they just don't like someone and normally they are held accountable for some of these things. Although the biased or conspiracy aspect which I do believe in, is actually not the refs fault, it's the LEAGUES fault. The refs are doing what they are told, they are employed by the NHL, it's the league who should be held accountable for what is happening, the refs are doing what they are told unfortunately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the general public keeps treating officials like yesterdays garbage...how do you ever expect the officiating to improve? Who in their right mind wants to officiate any sports at all?

You rarely ever hear a young guy saying they want to be a referee or an ump or whatever because they likely tried in the youth ranks and were harrassed off the playing field by parents, coaches and fans. It's an unenviable job but the quality of officiating is never going to improve with the constant scrutiny on top of multiple camera angles and hundreds of replays criticizing every single call.

How does anyone know that the refs are not held accountable? Because it's not talked about publicly? If it was talked about publicly, it would be really bad form and would drive even more potential referees away from the game. This is one area I believe the league handles internally and it should stay like that.

That's how it works...if people ARE held accountable it sets a tone and then corrects itself over time. But that hasn't happened because.....it isn't being "handled" - internally or otherwise.

It should be talked about publicly....the public pays for tickets and deserves a better product AND to know what is being done to address lapses in service.

Like Deb says,..some public accountability is essential in establishing credibility. Letting a ref answer post-game questions from the media, or having them explain a point-of-view on a controversial call,..or make an apology for getting a call wrong,...would all be things that could go a long-way in restoring the paying fan's faith in the impartiality, fairness & integrity of officials.

Do any of you recall an incident in MLB when a 1st base judge failed to call the obvious-out that would have preserved a pitcher's perfect game? Well, after the initial out-cry this official faced the music, apologized for his mistake,...and apologized to the player & his team. The result wasn't over-turned,..but that acknowledgment became the 'feel good' story of the year in sports. It also restored ball-fans' faith in the integrity of that particular official. That is proper...accountability! In the absense of such confessions,...conspiracy theories & biases are suspected & believed,..especially with little or NO evidence to counter such perceptions.

Some DPS pronouncements via videos...make it clear that they have biases clouding their judgerments in determining intent. The very video angle they choose to focus upon does that, too. The DPS also gives little explanation for why they show us one angle over another or do not compare them. I find it very frustating when their judgements are questioned,... or compared with other rulings,...that little or NO effort is made to explain these discrepancies or "biases". Subsequent explainations would help to eliminate controversy & conspiracy theories,...but they dont and wont do this,...because there are teams, players & officials behaving badly who are being sheltered,... despite their poor histories or records of performance.

^How do we know this? Because it is clearly the 'most senior' officials making some of the 'more controversial' calls in some momentous games,..who still get rewarded with more play-off games. O'Halloran, Sutherland & Devorski have NO business calling games vs the Canucks,.. with their present history of bias or game-management against them. All NHL teams should be allowed to black-ball at least 2 NHL officials from officiating in their play-off series. The IIHF goes miles further to eliminate even the perception of bias from their tournaments. If the NHL wants some of their integrity back,...they should be doing likewise.

BTW: The last time I saw Dan O'Halloran referee a game - he was up to his old tricks. Yet, on this forum, I was extremely complementary of the 2nd referee, Jean Hebert,..for doing his honest-best to call a fair game & this despite the older & supposedly more-experienced referee's inclination to just let 'em play (ignore everything). O'Halloran has also repeatedly waived-off goals scored by the Canucks or allowed 'em for their opponents - so that when video review is in-conclusive,... the ruling on the ice stands.

NOT using all of the technologies available to them well ...or correctly,..is just another criticism facing league officials (on & off of the ice). More accountability from the likes of Walkom (NHLOA), Quintal (DPS) & Bettman (NHL), needs to be there on that account, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no bias anywhere in the NHL. The refereeing is just bad across the board.

Completely agree. I think the biggest problem is that no one really knows what a penalty is anymore. It's much like suspensions, some cases x play is fine but then y play is not even though they both could be identical.

Personally, I would love the NHL to have a long sit-down with the rule book, the officials, and all GM's (in the off-season) and try to sort out what is a penalty and what is not. There is still confusion it seems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like Deb says,..some public accountability is essential in establishing credibility. Letting a ref answer post-game questions from the media, or having them explain a point-of-view on a controversial call,..or make an apology for getting a call wrong,...would all be somethings that could go a long way in restoring the paying fan's faith in their impartiality, fairness & integrity.

I don't want referees making public apologies. It doesn't matter one iota to me. This just makes them come across as weak and not knowing what they are doing which invites a whole whack of public shaming on them. Imagine what happens the next game that referee officiates. The players, fans and coaches will ride them all game long about it. It opens them up to unfair criticism from people who have no ability nor criteria to judge them on.

Go log onto every other team's forum and you will find crying about biased officiating. It's not a Canucks-centric 'problem'. If all 30 fanbases think there is a problem, then there really isn't. They are just seeing what they want to see and that is an alleged bias against their team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, you assume that those in charge do not address these so-called patterns of errors because they aren't doing right in front of your eyes and ears?

No, it's because the situation is getting worse not better. So again, don't put your twist on things.

Go log onto every other team's forum and you will find crying about biased officiating. It's not a Canucks-centric 'problem'. If all 30 fanbases think there is a problem, then there really isn't. They are just seeing what they want to see and that is an alleged bias against their team.

:blink:

Do you not realize how ridiculous that statement is? Or, rather than your conclusions that "there isn't a problem" when all 30 fanbases are complaining it more likely supports that there is a problem?? No logic in your thinking at all. Because it's consistent and there are calls being blown across the board...that it isn't isolated to one fanbase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want referees making public apologies. It doesn't matter one iota to me. This just makes them come across as weak and not knowing what they are doing which invites a whole whack of public shaming on them. Imagine what happens the next game that referee officiates. The players, fans and coaches will ride them all game long about it. It opens them up to unfair criticism from people who have no ability nor criteria to judge them on.

Go log onto every other team's forum and you will find crying about biased officiating. It's not a Canucks-centric 'problem'. If all 30 fanbases think there is a problem, then there really isn't. They are just seeing what they want to see and that is an alleged bias against their team.

Are you serious?!

Post game - if there was an egregious 'officiating" error made, ...I want to hear an apology,..because it would show that there was no malicious intent,... that they know a mistake was made,... and that they are willing to try to correct whatever it was - that might lead them to make the same mistake in the future. Sometimes the explanation, "I'm sorry, I did not see it"... is enough. Other times when the cameras are showing a referee watching the puck or some incident unfold,...that explaination doesn't hold-up,..and something more is required.

You are wrong on this front. By example: Robidas apologizing or contacting Matthias to see if he was well was better & more honorable,... than Duncan Keith NOT doing so to Daniel Sedin. One guy was being somewhat accountable here,... & the other is sayin' thru his in-action,..that he'd do it all over again & leaves us to wonder about his character & motivations. You eliminate conspiracy theories with openess.,...but maybe this league really wants us to buy into such things,... as they readily produce frustrations that give rise to more passion & conflict within the sport.... leading to frustrated players fighting more upon-the-ice.

The NHL totally has their share of sh*t-disturbin' dirt-bags who seemingly want to stear this sport closer to a WWF entertainment-model,... than towards something more respectable like the IIHF. We know who they are,...by what they say & what they do.... & by what they will NOT say or do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not claimed that the Canucks are the only victims of poor officiating,..but I do claim that there is a heavy O-6, So-Cal, CGY bias on the DPS & in other league appointments,... and that other teams have been victimized by this bias, also. Bettman isn't being BOOed ceremoniously around the league because things are hunky-dory for everyone. Altho' I bet its pretty fair to say that he gets far better receptions in O-6 or So-Cal arenas, am I right?

The majority of hockey-fans out there know that the NHL, it's commissioner, & its' department heads have a few integrity issues,...and they have NOT been wrong in pointing these things out with their BOOs...when opportunities arise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Go log onto every other team's forum and you will find crying about biased officiating. It's not a Canucks-centric 'problem'. If all 30 fanbases think there is a problem, then there really isn't. They are just seeing what they want to see and that is an alleged bias against their team.

By that logic, if 30 out of 30 people see a house on fire, then the house really isn't on fire.

Hilarious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want referees making public apologies. It doesn't matter one iota to me. This just makes them come across as weak and not knowing what they are doing which invites a whole whack of public shaming on them. Imagine what happens the next game that referee officiates. The players, fans and coaches will ride them all game long about it. It opens them up to unfair criticism from people who have no ability nor criteria to judge them on.

Go log onto every other team's forum and you will find crying about biased officiating. It's not a Canucks-centric 'problem'. If all 30 fanbases think there is a problem, then there really isn't. They are just seeing what they want to see and that is an alleged bias against their team.

I will agree with you on your first statement.

But my god, what happened in your 2nd statement. When people notice something is wrong, that means it's wrong, not right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want referees making public apologies. It doesn't matter one iota to me. This just makes them come across as weak and not knowing what they are doing which invites a whole whack of public shaming on them. Imagine what happens the next game that referee officiates. The players, fans and coaches will ride them all game long about it. It opens them up to unfair criticism from people who have no ability nor criteria to judge them on.

Go log onto every other team's forum and you will find crying about biased officiating. It's not a Canucks-centric 'problem'. If all 30 fanbases think there is a problem, then there really isn't. They are just seeing what they want to see and that is an alleged bias against their team.

You're not reading carefully enough. RM. I did not insinuate that this is only a Canuck-centric problem...or that every official is currently under suspicion. I just see a pattern of bias in the officiating of some of the most senior NHLOA officials who have some cause to lobby for post-career positions within the league.

I have also noticed a very strong & an appointed 'bias by design' on the DPS favoring the O-6's, So-Cal & Cgy teams. I'm sure hockey-fans of the teams who also play against the favored - do so as well. The only time there seems to be a signifigant change in the behavior of these more 'dubious' officials ,..is when the favored-teams are playing against each another. Then their biases are apparently.....a wash.

The 'eyes' of the beholder will influence one's point of view in all things. The IIHF knows this,.. and they attempt to eliminate bias on several fronts. The IIHF vets their officials and their past or present performances & affiliations. Controversial rulings of the past often dis-qualify certain officials from refereeing certain match-ups again - in the future. 'Experience' in that context.... is rarely if ever a reason for deploying the same group of officials, to work the same match-ups again. Fresh eyes are almost always better in such situations.

Carry over justice by officials should be discouraged..yet that's not the norm,..in fact it seems to be encouraged frequently in the NHL. Auger-gate was hardly a unique accusation,..it just happened to be more publicly-exposed for what it was. Clean-slates in each match-up should be the promise & should be an imparitve goal for each member of the NHLOA. This eliminates the perception of bias. The NHL needs to learn a lot more about this concept,.. when millions of extra $ are at stake for the advancing franchises thru the play-offs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...