As far as updates on my beloved Skating Friars, there aren't any. Literally nothing has changed in the past month. It's nice that the team put forth solid efforts in both third periods last weekend, but the result was still two 4-2 losses. One of these days, the team will put together these third periods into a 60 minute game and come up with their third win of the year.
What better time to get this win against winless Brown? The Bears have two less wins than PC, proving that the Friars might not be the most pathetic team in college hockey. Of course, the game is at Meehan Auditorium and will feature ECAC officials, making this an uphill climb. I've never seen a greater variety of insane, imaginary calls than the ones called against PC in ECAC rinks. It looks highly likely that the Mayor's Cup will be going back to Bruno in a game that no one - except a handful of people on both sides - really cares about any more.
The good news is that the Friday night game at Quinnipiac will be on NESN. All of New England will be able to see if PC can FINALLY get off the mat against the Skating Deer Ticks.
Random rants:
-Two things that cracked me up this week: Dave Hendrickson's annual Christmas column where Tim Army refers to Santa Claus as a "pantload" and MeanEgirl's entry on the MTU Blog that is basically Mr. Hanky's cousin. Misery can actually be really funny.
-Also, in the amusing category, yet another Dan Shaugnessy column where he not only jumps the gun, he launches himself into orbit. I'm very close to sending Charlie Chaplin to torch Mr. Shaugnessy's keyboard for this outstanding display of hubris. The Celtics are many things, but "invincible" is not one of them.
Notice the comments section - always a display of idiocy whenever it appears - is full of Portland Trailblazer fans talking smack about their "new" dynasty. Apparently, standards of dynasties have dropped precipitously when 14 wins in December constitutes a "dynasty". And this after people tried to deny the Pats had a dynasty after 3 Super Bowl wins in four years - mostly with logic that would have you laughed out of Socrates' classroom in Athens. If PC wins either the Brown or QU games, I'm declaring the Friars a legitimate dynasty! Go us!
-Hi Mark! and... best of luck!
Showing posts with label officiating. Show all posts
Showing posts with label officiating. Show all posts
Friday, December 5, 2008
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Quoi?
I like hockey, but some times I really don't understand it. In particular, I'm not really sure what constitutes a penalty. I used to be able to make that distinction - especially in regards to some of the crap calls PC used to put up with nightly. Now I do not. Maybe the problem is me. Maybe I don't understand hockey as much as I think I do. After all, I can't skate. It's easy to see how I could miss something that trained on ice official did not.
The idea that it's my fault for being uneducated about the finer nuances of the game - and a bit too quick to blame the officials for my team's lack of discipline - is a good one. But this hypothesis dies a quick death when the television broadcasters replay the penalty and I see NOTHING that would constitute a penalty. I'm not just talking about incidental contact or obvious diving by the opponent. I'm talking about players just brushing against one another and the color commentator making a remark that this is a "good call" that the official "had to make". I must be missing something, because for the most part, I don't see these penalties at all in real time or in instant replay.
See, here's the thing: I complain about officials no more or less than a deranged Tommy Heihnsohn. When they replay calls in the NFL, 9 times out of 10, it shows that the official made the right call. When they replay calls in the NBA, 9 times out of 10, the refs blew the call. Hockey used to be somewhere in the middle. Now, I'm completely lost: I try to be fair to officials and wait until I see a replay. The problem I'm having is that the, replay doesn't help anymore.
The two referee system that the NHL uses was recently filtered down to college hockey. This means two things (neither of them good): more penalties and more people in stripes accidentally getting in the way of the play. I think people would like to see hockey evolve into a more free flowing game. They just don't want to see 9,000 ticky tack basketball penalties that always seem to favor one team over another. This was driven home on the Friday game where PC's complete lack of offense and special team play was further muddied by a series of completely random calls. The same thing happened the next night when my wife and our mutual friend and I watched UML shut out UMASS. A seemingly random play would result in a penalty and I had no explanation as to why.
In the third college hockey game of the week, I thought I'd hit upon a plan to figure out these seemingly random calls once and for all. Fortunately, I get the Mega Sports Package From Hell on my cable package and I get the home games for the Golden Gophers. It was fortuitous that the Gophers were hosting MTU in a 2 PM matinee. And it was doubly fortuitous that the WCHA head of officials Greg Shepherd was in the booth with the two announcers. Or you would think that it was fortuitous. Even with the head of officials there, not only did the calls still seem to not make sense (with the exception of some complete stupidity on the part of the Huskies)but the explanations didn't jive with what I was seeing in the replays either. I think I'm doomed to never understand hockey officiating on any level. So let me apologize in advance to any officials for any complaining I might do in the next year or two. Obviously, I'm missing something.
One comment was telling: Mr. Shepherd was asked point blank if the extra ref and rules changes were made with consideration to the fans. He said no. Later on the broadcast, he amended his answer to say that if the rules changes had the desired effect (less stickwork, less clutching and grabbing and thus a more fluid pace), the fans would be a direct benefactor. Still, I just wonder if these rules designed to free up the offense work because the game is opening up or because the entire game is played in the power play. Just wondering...
The idea that it's my fault for being uneducated about the finer nuances of the game - and a bit too quick to blame the officials for my team's lack of discipline - is a good one. But this hypothesis dies a quick death when the television broadcasters replay the penalty and I see NOTHING that would constitute a penalty. I'm not just talking about incidental contact or obvious diving by the opponent. I'm talking about players just brushing against one another and the color commentator making a remark that this is a "good call" that the official "had to make". I must be missing something, because for the most part, I don't see these penalties at all in real time or in instant replay.
See, here's the thing: I complain about officials no more or less than a deranged Tommy Heihnsohn. When they replay calls in the NFL, 9 times out of 10, it shows that the official made the right call. When they replay calls in the NBA, 9 times out of 10, the refs blew the call. Hockey used to be somewhere in the middle. Now, I'm completely lost: I try to be fair to officials and wait until I see a replay. The problem I'm having is that the, replay doesn't help anymore.
The two referee system that the NHL uses was recently filtered down to college hockey. This means two things (neither of them good): more penalties and more people in stripes accidentally getting in the way of the play. I think people would like to see hockey evolve into a more free flowing game. They just don't want to see 9,000 ticky tack basketball penalties that always seem to favor one team over another. This was driven home on the Friday game where PC's complete lack of offense and special team play was further muddied by a series of completely random calls. The same thing happened the next night when my wife and our mutual friend and I watched UML shut out UMASS. A seemingly random play would result in a penalty and I had no explanation as to why.
In the third college hockey game of the week, I thought I'd hit upon a plan to figure out these seemingly random calls once and for all. Fortunately, I get the Mega Sports Package From Hell on my cable package and I get the home games for the Golden Gophers. It was fortuitous that the Gophers were hosting MTU in a 2 PM matinee. And it was doubly fortuitous that the WCHA head of officials Greg Shepherd was in the booth with the two announcers. Or you would think that it was fortuitous. Even with the head of officials there, not only did the calls still seem to not make sense (with the exception of some complete stupidity on the part of the Huskies)but the explanations didn't jive with what I was seeing in the replays either. I think I'm doomed to never understand hockey officiating on any level. So let me apologize in advance to any officials for any complaining I might do in the next year or two. Obviously, I'm missing something.
One comment was telling: Mr. Shepherd was asked point blank if the extra ref and rules changes were made with consideration to the fans. He said no. Later on the broadcast, he amended his answer to say that if the rules changes had the desired effect (less stickwork, less clutching and grabbing and thus a more fluid pace), the fans would be a direct benefactor. Still, I just wonder if these rules designed to free up the offense work because the game is opening up or because the entire game is played in the power play. Just wondering...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
