The Great NHL Regression

[Desiato]

IMO, there are cut and dry cases each game of inconsistent officiating. I think it's blatant. This is completely outside of what they reasonably may miss. The only defense--to me--is that they may be objectively following secret-to-the-public guidelines in a fair way that we cannot understand. Like officiating the flow of a game as opposed to the individual plays.

There are also inexplicable anomalies such as the non-calls on clear infractions against Sid despite a guy like Don Cherry saying that he's never seen a player more abused than Sid in these playoffs.

To remain an NHL fan, I eventually made the decision to move past the inconsistencies and anomalies. It's true in other sports too. Writing this, I can't help but to think of infamous game six of the 2002 NBA WCF.

[mikey287]

Without a doubt referees are told to take into account flow, context and the like...and it should be like that in my opinion. That's not a secret. I'm not sure why it's being portrayed as one like there's more going on behind the scenes or something...

Frankly, I don't get why the same refs (and announcers) don't get to cover an entire series. I know some people think some refs are out to get them or whatever, but that's the best way to get a feel for what's happening, get a feel for the series...

If you take every play in a vacuum, I think the whole thing goes to heck. There's so much context that needs to be taken into account I can't even begin to describe it...important thing is flow and control...

[MRandall25]

My biggest issue(s) is/are that something can be called as a penalty in the first period of a game, and 20 minutes later, it completely gets ignored. Same with the difference between a regular season game and a playoff game. The rule book is still the same, yet the games are called completely differently.

And make-up calls? Again, if you're going to make a call in the spirit of a "make-up call", you better 1) call that the rest of the game and 2) make sure it's a legitimate call, or don't call it at all.

You say "context", but when something that was called a penalty 10 minutes prior gets ignored and uncalled, are they really taking context into account there? Context shouldn't just include the current play. If the refs want players to get a feel for the game, AND if they want to have some perceived control, they need to be consistent with their calls. Games have gotten away from the refs far to often because what should have been a sure-fire call is egregiously ignored. Then they start calling ticky-tacky penalties and the loss of control snowballs from there.

I understand the whole "human element" thing, but humans know how to be consistent and make consistent judgements. NHL refs don't, apparently.

[dey soff]

Good discussion here. To me, just like the skaters, goaltenders are bigger and faster. Add that to the fact most teams are focusing more and more on defense, specifically focusing on limiting teams' chances from prime scoring areas, and you have less scoring.

Also, when I see Gretzky highlights, it seems like a lot of his goals are off the rush. I don't see that as much in today's game because the forwards backcheck like crazy and the defensemen will just stand players up.

As for fixing this problem, I think you have to give the players more net to shoot at (whether that means slightly larger nets or smaller goalie pads).

[Dan H]

I'll respect your point, but I think you're drastically over-stating the case re: officiating. It's the ultimate case for confirmation bias among fans. 10,000 straight zone entries could be called correctly. You miss one and it's front page news. You call a tight game, you're taking over a game...you don't call it tight, it's "Hudson Bay Rules"

Speaking as a long-time lousy beer league player, I think the problem is more than just this. Yes, there's a fundamental problem that nobody will ever be happy, and that's a genuine issue for referees in every sport. But hockey enforces its rules much more sporadically than most other sports.

I can hardly play a beer-league game nowadays without something happening like an opponent tripping me headfirst into the boards when we're chasing the puck into the corner, or lining me up for a huge check in a no-check league. Nothing is ever called. It goes the other way, too: if I make an unwise pinch at the defensive blue line and someone cleanly beats me and races in on goal, I can turn and hook the guy's arm all the way to the net. I know I won't get called. Then, after the game, I go home and turn on an NHL game, and I see the refs not calling anything there, either.

I can't think of another sport that so seldom enforces its basic rules. Can you imagine a baseball umpire "letting it go" if a batter deliberately conked a catcher with his bat? How many football referees would look the other way if a defender blatantly tripped a blocker on his way to the ball carrier? Do the PGA officials just shrug and grin when a golfer kicks his ball out of the edge of the woods onto the grass, then plays it without counting any extra strokes?

Now, I've refereed other sports enough to realize that ignorance of the rules and traditions of a sport can be widespread in not-so-stellar athletes, and for hockey purposes I might fall in that group. But I've never had a hockey referee give me a better explanation than "you guys are so awful at hockey that we get bored and don't call anything because penalties slow the game down, and we just want to get out of there as quickly as possible." That doesn't explain why they do the same thing in the NHL, though. Am I missing something here?

Hockey is still fun to play and watch even with frustratingly ineffective officiating. But until someone provides me with a clear, rational explanation why the officiating appears so inconsistent, I'll believe it has a unique problem that for some reason it refuses to fix, and that it's hurting itself by ignoring the issue.

[pronovost19]

After Watching the World championships, it is evident that nhl officiating is sub par.

[Great58]

Maybe someone can check me on this...but I got 4.98 GPG in the KHL. With the wide rinks and with worse goaltending and more reliance on skill/offense. I got 5.28 for the SHL, which also uses an international-sized rink. Liiga uses a larger rink than the NHL too (better goaltending here than Sweden's league probably, not by a ton though, higher emphasis on straightforward play): 4.94 GPG. ...NHL is 5.34 GPG.

Perhaps an even better apples to apples comparison: Vancouver 2010 Olympics played on NHL ice versus Sochi 2014 Olympics played on international ice:
Total Tournament:
2010 180 Goals/30 games = 6 GPG
2014 141 Goals/30 games = 4.7 GPG

Single Elimination games:
2010 73 goals/12 games = 6.08 GPG
2014 51 goals/12 games = 4.25 GPG

Preliminary Round:
2010 107 Goals/18 games = 5.94 GPG
2014 90 Goals/18 games = 5 GPG

So the premise holds that wider rinks do not produce more offense.

[rgj]

It doesn't really matter. As the NHL gains some respectability from network coverage, it is the physical play that makes the highlight clips and carries the day in the playoff run to the Cup.

Teams that pride themselves on their "finesse" (whatever that interpretation is) will always, always, ALWAYS lose to the more physical "lower seeded" physical teams that do the clobbering come playoff time. We all know from sad experience that the regular season and the "playoff season" are TWO distinct "seasons."

While the Pens pride themselves on their "skill" that carries the day during the regular season. they cannot perform well in the playoff season. We all know that the NHL will not change.

I suppose it is up to the Pens to change and adapt to the "new" NHL. Unless they do, no Cup. Simple as that. It remains to be seen as to what Mario expects his new GM (and, dare I say, coach) to accomplish. Playoff and Cup success or pretty seasonal success.

[Hugo Stiglitz]

Teams that pride themselves on their "finesse" (whatever that interpretation is) will always, always, ALWAYS lose to the more physical "lower seeded" physical teams that do the clobbering come playoff time. We all know from sad experience that the regular season and the "playoff season" are TWO distinct "seasons."

I have to respectively disagree with this statement.

Chicago is not a very physical team.
LA really isn't an overly physical team.
NYR are certainly not very physical.
Montreal isn't very physical.

Boston is far more physical a team than Montreal, the Penguins are more physical than NYR and Columbus was far more physical than the Pens.

[bh]

LA is pretty darn physical.

[shmenguin]

LA is pretty darn physical.

yeah, they're pretty nasty

[IMFC]

The thing I notice most lately is the STICKS. They seem so much longer than before and are used more away from the puck than ever.

Passing lanes blocked, shots interrupted and blocked with these one-handed 10-foot long reaches, and slash-whack-slash-slash-slash on everyone with the puck. I really hate it. Sometimes I think both hands on the stick and strict no use of a stick on another player would fix everything.

[pens_srq]

The league needs to take the next step and do what all the hockey insiders are terrified of: call every penalty, consistently, exactly by the rules. Yes it will slow the game down. At first it will anyways. Then it will speed it up as players adapt and realize they don't want to be shorthanded for half of a period. They also need to introduce video review so they can catch behind the scenes stuff. Then that will stop too.

And yup you need to take out fighting too. Because it's completely inconsistent with other rules like head shots. And because it makes hockey look like a bunch of goons to outsiders. You don't need fighting if you call the penalties. That's what all of the insiders say the refs do to "get the game under control". Believe me if the refs called everything, the game would be under control. It's the frustration with the consistency of the calls and the feeling that a team has "gotten away with something" that makes all the retaliation necessary. As a father of small kids, I've already had my kids trying to fight like hockey players... Just once, but still lol - they are 3. Yet another drawback to the fighting, in that parents don't necessarily want their little kids to see it.

When the league does this they will raise their credibility and potentially challenge other sports ahead of them in popularity. Until then, it is VERY difficult to explain the 'flow' and not wanting to slow down the play to an outsider.

The reason that the physical play is getting the highlights, is because there's a lot more of the physical plays going on than the finesse plays. Care to guess why?

The reffing the score thing has gotten way out of hand. It is very clear that the refs are doing it, and even more clear that they could easily effect the outcome of the game given the leeway they have to ignore key transgressions that lead to goals. We've seen refs fixing the score in basketball. Why do we trust hockey refs so much more? There is no other sport that one can watch and get so angry at the refs so consistently. You can get angry occasionally with calls in football and basketball, but it's nothing like hockey IMO.

I'd kill to see a thoughtful statistical analysis of the effects of different ref crews and styles of calling penalties. Also, an analysis of bias towards particular clubs.