Officiating up to your expectations in NCAA tournament?

[WeAreNDHockey]

Re: Officiating up to your expectations in NCAA tournament?

The act of dumping the puck in with a player off sides nullifies a goal. And the play is to be whistled for an intentional offsides and a face off in the offending teams end zone no closer to the goal then the side of the ice the puck was shot from

Upon further reading, the goal on the offsides play SHOULD have been disallowed. But not for an "intentional" offside. The play should not be whistled dead simply because a player is offside. The puck can be legally dumped into the offensive zone with a player already there. That's DELAYED offsides. The offending skater has an opportunity to get onside, and as long as no offensive player played the puck, or a defensive player touches it, the offsides would be waived off. But at the end of the offside rule (page HR 81, Rule 6 section 36, subsection d2) the rule is further clarified:

If the puck enters the defending team’s goal during a delayed offside
or immediately after the offside, the goal is disallowed. The faceoff will
be in the neutral zone at the faceoff spot nearest the attacking zone of the
offending team, if the puck was carried offside. The faceoff shall be at the
nearest spot in the zone of the origin of the pass, if passed offside

I suppose the "immediately after" would be open to interpretation, but it looked immediately after to me, skate hits blueline, puck crosses goal line.

[bronconick]

Re: Officiating up to your expectations in NCAA tournament?

The disallowed goal in the WMU/UND game was a real life version of your high school math teacher taking points off because you got the answer right, but she told you to show your work and your work makes zero sense.

[satyking]

Re: Officiating up to your expectations in NCAA tournament?

100% true.....they put officials up for these games on a seniority basis instead of quality of work.....the Frozen 4 will be the same way

Full disclosure: I have no rooting interest in any of the teams that have been fortunate enough to play in the regionals.

Without rehashing the controversial plays that have already been rehashed numerous times, let me simply agree with an earlier poster and grade the officiating as a D+ -- at best, for the following reasons.

--Far too many "ticky-tacky" calls for an NCAA regional series. The most egregious examples that I saw were the performances of the ECAC crew that worked the BU-Minny game and the Hockey East crew that worked the Cornell-Ferris game. The interference call made on a Cornell player that led to the first Ferris goal was totally bogus. The Cornell player simply used his speed to gain inside position on the Ferris player, which is what you're supposed to do.

--The outrageous action by the WCHA crew that allowed the Union open-net goal to stand, even though an attacking player was at least ten feet offside. So far as the possibility of the play being legal because of the delayed offside rule goes, I watched the replays carefully and IIRC, there is no doubt that the offside player had not "touched-up" at the blue line when the puck entered the net. But that's irrelevant since linesmen are supposed to kill the play immediately if the puck is shot on goal to eliminate any possibility of a disputed goal. This was an egregious blown call by this crew that denied the trailing team a fair chance to tie the game. And the blame doesn't stop with the front linesman/AR. His line/AR partner is supposed to be backing him up and there are also the two referees who can overrule any line call. In total, a colossal epic collective fail by this WCHA crew.

--The CCHA also doesn't get a free pass: The Mark Wilkins call on AF in the last minute of play should go to the ticky-tack Hall of Shame. A marginal call at best with the game on the line and the trailing team unfairly denied a chance to tie in an extra skater situation. Just an appalling lack of discretion IMO.

One thing to remember before we walk anyone to the gallows, though, is that somewhere up the line there are administrators and supervisors who influence how games are called. If the officials think the higher-ups want then to call tight games, then that's what will happen.

Be that as it may, the problem with college officlating, from my vantage point, is that it tends to be more of an Old Boy Network as opposed to a meritocracy. This is especially true in the east. The result is that the guys you see in post-season play are the senior lodge brothers and not necessarily the best and brightest that the various leagues have to offer. There are lots of really sharp young officials being produced by the USA Hockey Officiating Development Program but the D1 college leagues either marginalize them or ignore them completely. Unfortunately, I don't see this changing anytime soon.

[shiftyjedi]

Re: Officiating up to your expectations in NCAA tournament?

How many times do they hand out penalties for knocking the net off? 9 times out of 10, it just happens and never gets called.

It was pretty dang intentional. If they don't call it delay of game I guess I might understand. Even being a Minnesotan the Duluth player gave a good example of a easy delay of game call. He took a bad angle and to top that call would.

[WeAreNDHockey]

Re: Officiating up to your expectations in NCAA tournament?

It was pretty dang intentional. If they don't call it delay of game I guess I might understand. Even being a Minnesotan the Duluth player gave a good example of a easy delay of game call. He took a bad angle and to top that call would.

I don't understand why this is so hard to understand. The rule book specifically covers this. Delay of game is basically a deliberate or direct act, like pulling the puck under your body as you lay on the ice. The UMD player accidentally knocked off the net. Why would you knock off the net you are trying to score on on purpose? And if the UMD player knocked off the net because he felt like Maine was going to break it right out of their end and go down and score, I think the punishment of letting the scoring opportunity play out was the PERFECT punishment on the play. But again, why would you INTENTIONALLY dislodge the goal you are trying to score on. They have a rule for this. They followed the rule they have.

[leswp1]

Re: Officiating up to your expectations in NCAA tournament?

He took his arm down when the player cleared the zone--I think it was after the puck entered the zone but before it went into net
Does that make it a good goal?

http://www.ncaa.com/video/icehockey-...ss-union-recap
Link shows the Union guy still sliding toward the blue line to be onsides when they cut away from shoing the clip of the goal. Also a brutal noncall where someone goes in headfirst after being crosschecked to the boards (as the set up to the goal) and the hit that was a 2 minute minor when the guy charged, boarded and injured the UML player. I wonder why they put that in the highlights, kind of an interesting choice. (Not saying those would have changed the game. Union won because they are GOOD)

[uniontrack]

Re: Officiating up to your expectations in NCAA tournament?

Upon further reading, the goal on the offsides play SHOULD have been disallowed. But not for an "intentional" offside. The play should not be whistled dead simply because a player is offside. The puck can be legally dumped into the offensive zone with a player already there. That's DELAYED offsides. The offending skater has an opportunity to get onside, and as long as no offensive player played the puck, or a defensive player touches it, the offsides would be waived off. But at the end of the offside rule (page HR 81, Rule 6 section 36, subsection d2) the rule is further clarified:

If the puck enters the defending team’s goal during a delayed offside
or immediately after the offside, the goal is disallowed. The faceoff will
be in the neutral zone at the faceoff spot nearest the attacking zone of the
offending team, if the puck was carried offside. The faceoff shall be at the
nearest spot in the zone of the origin of the pass, if passed offside

I suppose the "immediately after" would be open to interpretation, but it looked immediately after to me, skate hits blueline, puck crosses goal line.

While I agree with the rule-book and by that wording, it probably should not have counted, the story write-up here on USCHO mentions another tid-bit of info that complicates the situation:

"It wasn’t until Union’s Kyle Bodie banked a shot off a Lowell defender and into a empty net with 40.6 seconds remaining that the team’s faithful that traveled in bulk from Schenectady, N.Y., could breathe a sigh of relief and burst into celebration knowing the next stop is Tampa, Fla."

According to this write-up, the puck hit a Lowell man first, then went into the empty net. I don't know which man was hit and the replay doesn't make it any easier to see. Does this exonerate the officials, or does the puck hitting a Lowell man first not change anything?

Keith.

[uniontrack]

Re: Officiating up to your expectations in NCAA tournament?

http://www.ncaa.com/video/icehockey-...ss-union-recap
Link shows the Union guy still sliding toward the blue line to be onsides when they cut away from shoing the clip of the goal. Also a brutal noncall where someone goes in headfirst after being crosschecked to the boards (as the set up to the goal) and the hit that was a 2 minute minor when the guy charged, boarded and injured the UML player. I wonder why they put that in the highlights, kind of an interesting choice. (Not saying those would have changed the game. Union won because they are GOOD)

I agree that Welsh hit the Lowell man from behind, but had they called the penalty, the goal would have never happened in that form. Lowell would have gone on the PP and they struggled with that all game. So, all in all, on that play, I think Lowell came out ahead.

On the check from the side, I could see, maybe boarding, by strict rule definition, but not charging. The rule book provides an exemption for defenders that are checking a player with the puck. I am not surprised that the NCAA showed Jeremy Welsh a lot on the replay. He was the Region MVP and he is a serious pro signing when Union finally ends the season....It was unfortunate that the Lowell man got his bell rung. The game is much better when everyone is at full-strength and manpower.....

As for the empty-net goal, see my other post.....

Go Garnet!!!

Keith.

[manurespreader]

Re: Officiating up to your expectations in NCAA tournament?

Honestly the refereeing was about what I expected, not all that good. I'ts not all that good in the regular season either, and there is no reason to expect it to be better during the playoffs.This seems to be regardless of league. If as a whole, fans want better officiating they need to make that desire heard. It can be better, but it costs money.

[Split-N]

Re: Officiating up to your expectations in NCAA tournament?

...According to this write-up, the puck hit a Lowell man first, then went into the empty net. I don't know which man was hit and the replay doesn't make it any easier to see. Does this exonerate the officials, or does the puck hitting a Lowell man first not change anything?

Doesn't change a thing. All attacking players must be simultaneously clear of the attacking zone in order for the delayed offside to be cancelled. It doesn't matter how many defending players touch it unless one of them directs (not deflects) it into his own net. Can't tell much from the NCAA-provided replay but the live TV coverage showed white ice between the offside Union player and the blue line. Commentary from the announcers was along the same lines. It may not have changed the outcome but these things aren't supposed to happen at this level.

[Terrierbyassociation]

Re: Officiating up to your expectations in NCAA tournament?

You can dump the puck into the attack zone even when you have a player offside. Play continues. I believe the Union skater had re-established himself onside before the puck crossed over the goal line, which is what I think is necessary for the goal to count.

He had not. He was a good 10 feet away from the blue line when the puck entered the offensive zone, which is what the rule is, not that the guy is onside when the puck crosses the goal line.

[Terrierbyassociation]

Re: Officiating up to your expectations in NCAA tournament?

During the miked conversation with the linesman, the linesman said confidently that the non-participating Union player was not offside. So that's what they were talking about, not whether it hit a Lowell player.

[Hockey Dogg]

Re: Officiating up to your expectations in NCAA tournament?

Be that as it may, the problem with college officlating, from my vantage point, is that it tends to be more of an Old Boy Network as opposed to a meritocracy. This is especially true in the east. The result is that the guys you see in post-season play are the senior lodge brothers and not necessarily the best and brightest that the various leagues have to offer. There are lots of really sharp young officials being produced by the USA Hockey Officiating Development Program but the D1 college leagues either marginalize them or ignore them completely. Unfortunately, I don't see this changing anytime soon.

This.

When I was an active USA official (not long ago), high school and prep school games were almost exclusively controlled by NIHOA, which is the greatest old boy network outside of Skull and Bones. You can't even get a copy of their manual in advance of taking the NIHOA officials test. You have to borrow one from an existing member. And boy, are a lot of those NIHOA guys old, slow, bad, and bad tempered. The junior level games seemed to be more open, but like all level of officiating you have to know / suck up to / carry water for the superivisor / assignor. Actual officiating skill is such a small part of these feeder levels, that many, many good young officials never get a chance to be seen, let alone make it into the list of college officials. It may be different out West, but in the East it is very hard to break into the "guild" and once you're in, almost impossible to get tossed out.

Lest you think this is personal sour grapes, I never had the skill, talent, time, or inclination to want to do more than a couple of Pee Wee A games on a Saturday morning. It was a good way to get on the ice and stay in touch with the game. Sadly, don't even have time for that anymore.

Also, I know a lot of people don't care for former NHL ref Paul Stewart and his enormous ego. However, from what I heard from a lot of officials, he was genuinely interested in recruiting / promoting officials based entirely on merit when he was with Hockey East. They respected that about him. I guess they could still use him....

Edit: typos and spelling

[MarkEagleUSA]

Re: Officiating up to your expectations in NCAA tournament?

Also, I know a lot of people don't care for former NHL ref Paul Stewart and his enormous ego. However, from what I heard from a lot of officials, he was genuinely interested in recruiting / promoting officials based entirely on merit when he was with Hockey East. They respected that about him. I guess they could still use him....

They can have him! ECAC officiating is terrible with Stewart at the helm.

[WeAreNDHockey]

Re: Officiating up to your expectations in NCAA tournament?

He had not. He was a good 10 feet away from the blue line when the puck entered the offensive zone, which is what the rule is, not that the guy is onside when the puck crosses the goal line.

It still is not immediately offsides. How many delayed offsides are there in the average game? 10? 12? 15? The offensive player being in the zone preceeding the puck is not the determining factor for offsides. Was he still off when the puck entered the net? If so, no goal. And as I posted earlier, if the puck crosses the goalline immediately after the player touches the blueline, the goal still shouldn't count, which I thought may have been why they got it wrong. But the puck being in the zone with the Union player still in zone is NOT the be-all and end-all of whether or not the play is offside.