Did the officials screw up

[MUhawks628]

Re: Did the officials screw up

From the prespective of a Michigan fan, I don't think Miami would have much of an argument if the goal was allowed and Michigan had won the game. I would like some Miami fans, or non-Michigan fans to state what the argument would be against the goal being allowed had the whistle not blown on the play (and the official did not have intent to blow it prior to the puck entering the net).

If the whistle didn't blow...good luck to Michigan against BC. I don't think there is a camera angle that shows Knapp touching the puck and having any sort of possession (I was at the game and only saw the one replay angel on ESPN). So there would not be much of an argument for Miami fans to make about the official not calling the play dead when he should have due to the penalty. I doubt anyone would have even floated that idea out there.

 

[chapmaja]

Re: Did the officials screw up

One more thing I would like to add.

Someone brought up football's replay system and how they allow the play to continue and then if needed reveiw the play.

I think college hockey needs to go to a similar system. Have the officials withold the whistle a little longer before blowing it, but allow the officials to make a ruling on the play under review.

The most likely issue is players taking swats that the goalie who has the puck covered. At this point holding the whislte for an extra second won't make a significant difference in injuries, but will allow officials to make sure they get the call correct. If on replay they see the puck was clearly covered and got poked out, disallow the goal. If the plays is allowed to continue and the puck ends up in the goal, the officials have a better chance to get the call correct both ways.

This would mean nothing for the past seasons games, but would need to be a rule change for upcoming seasons. The ultimate goal is to get the call correct and too many examples have been made of officials calling plays dead because they think they got it right when in reality they did not get it correct.

 

[MUhawks628]

Re: Did the officials screw up

The most likely issue is players taking swats that the goalie who has the puck covered. At this point holding the whislte for an extra second won't make a significant difference in injuries, but will allow officials to make sure they get the call correct. If on replay they see the puck was clearly covered and got poked out, disallow the goal. If the plays is allowed to continue and the puck ends up in the goal, the officials have a better chance to get the call correct both ways.

Soooo much more down time. Just say 5 pucks are frozen but get poked out and back into play because the official waits a little longer to blow his whistle. Each review is going to take almost 5 minutes and even then the determination that needs to be made will be extremely subjective. I get bored enough during 5 minutes of the ref staring at a monitor, let alone 25.

Not that I am against getting the call right, but there isnt really a foolproof solution.

 

[MinnesotaNorthStar]

Re: Did the officials screw up

One more thing I would like to add.

Someone brought up football's replay system and how they allow the play to continue and then if needed reveiw the play.

I think college hockey needs to go to a similar system. Have the officials withold the whistle a little longer before blowing it, but allow the officials to make a ruling on the play under review.

The most likely issue is players taking swats that the goalie who has the puck covered. At this point holding the whislte for an extra second won't make a significant difference in injuries, but will allow officials to make sure they get the call correct. If on replay they see the puck was clearly covered and got poked out, disallow the goal. If the plays is allowed to continue and the puck ends up in the goal, the officials have a better chance to get the call correct both ways.

This would mean nothing for the past seasons games, but would need to be a rule change for upcoming seasons. The ultimate goal is to get the call correct and too many examples have been made of officials calling plays dead because they think they got it right when in reality they did not get it correct.

So you want replay to be more subjective? Brilliant plan.

Quick whistles happen all the time in every game. This is nothing new, people.

 

[streaker]

Re: Did the officials screw up

Unfortunately, the whistle had blown before the goal was scored. It happens all the time. That's hockey. It sucks if you are Michigan, tho.

I don't think that is the debate as much as why the official was so out of position on this play, where he was in good position and allowed the play to continue on Miami's second goal when the puck was clearly under Hunwick's pad.

The whistle was blown prematurely because he was not in position to see it. The call may be correct, but the reason for it is incompetence, especially when you have three other officials on the ice that probably can see what is going on. It's not like this is confined to the HEA because Michigan has been screwed over by similar calls in league play two years in a row. CCHA head of officials Steve Piotrowski has been quick to defend these actions, and did it again on this one.

Sooner or later they have to be held accountable... this cost Michigan a chance at a championship.

 

[Arpod]

Re: Did the officials screw up

... this cost Michigan a chance at a championship.

Any more so than hitting the post several times, misfiring on shots at an open net, and taking penalties that resulted in Miami scores? I suspect not. It is a drag, to be sure, but it happens ALL THE TIME to virtually every team that plays this game - from midgets to the pros. I truly wanted MI to win, but it is what it is. Time to move on.

 

[streaker]

Re: Did the officials screw up

Any more so than hitting the post several times, misfiring on shots at an open net, and taking penalties that resulted in Miami scores? I suspect not. It is a drag, to be sure, but it happens ALL THE TIME to virtually every team that plays this game - from midgets to the pros. I truly wanted MI to win, but it is what it is. Time to move on.

Miami can say the same thing, yet they had the opportunity given to them to continue to play and score the winner.

I didn't participate too much in these debates, so I'll decide when it's time to move on, if you don't mind. That's what this thread is for, BTW.

 

[chapmaja]

Re: Did the officials screw up

Soooo much more down time. Just say 5 pucks are frozen but get poked out and back into play because the official waits a little longer to blow his whistle. Each review is going to take almost 5 minutes and even then the determination that needs to be made will be extremely subjective. I get bored enough during 5 minutes of the ref staring at a monitor, let alone 25.

Not that I am against getting the call right, but there isnt really a foolproof solution.

I will respond to your comments and concerns.

First, To avoid having the official stare at the monitor for 5 minutes, have an off ice replay official like football does. Only the replay official reviews the play.

The replay would be initiated by the on-ice official only (unlike football).

As for the stopages in play. Holding the whistle for 1 to 2 seconds at most on a held puck situation would not result in 5 replays. In most games I don't think it would be an issue and even at the very most one or two times per game, not the 5 you think.


I will just use the Michigan-Miami game as an example. Had the official witheld his whistle for 1 second, the puck is in the back of the net and now he could initiate a replay to see if the puck had been frozen/covered/controlled by Miami, which would have resulted in a whistle. If control was ruled, play's dead at that point and we play on. Had the official ruled the puck was frozen plays dead we play on. Had he ruled the puck wasn't frozen or controlled by Miami, Michigan is going to the Frozen 4.

No system is foolproof, but there are better systems that what college hockey is using right now and it's time that the NCAA looks at using them.

 

[MUhawks628]

Re: Did the officials screw up

I will respond to your comments and concerns.

First, To avoid having the official stare at the monitor for 5 minutes, have an off ice replay official like football does. Only the replay official reviews the play.

So we can watch everyone stand around while someone who we can't see stares at a monitor for five minutes. I don't see the difference, replay in college football this year was an absolute joke.

I guess I just don't understand what the uproar here is about. This happens every year in the Stanley Cup playoffs. It happens all the time in the regular season games at all levels. It is part of the game. Have all the Michigan people on here up in arms about this really never had this happen to one of their hockey teams before?

 

[streaker]

Re: Did the officials screw up

So we can watch everyone stand around while someone who we can't see stares at a monitor for five minutes. I don't see the difference, replay in college football this year was an absolute joke.

I guess I just don't understand what the uproar here is about. This happens every year in the Stanley Cup playoffs. It happens all the time in the regular season games at all levels. It is part of the game. Have all the Michigan people on here up in arms about this really never had this happen to one of their hockey teams before?

I think the frustration is in the fact that it is happening more frequently now and is dismissed as "part of the game". It shouldn't be. Both teams worked extremely hard and deserved a fair outcome without grievous officiating errors, which is all we are asking for. And yes, it has happened to Michigan- several times- once at MSU this season, and once last season at Yost against ND. Both occasions cost Michigan in that they would have tied the game in the last minute. The stakes were a little higher in this example, and I'm sure that you'd be less righteous and dismissive if it happened to Miami. What if they had allowed the goal? Would Miami fans be howling about how they allowed it after the whistle? What about the second Miami goal where the puck appeared to be held? Why not a presumed whistle there (maybe because he was in the proper position?)

And FTR, this same official has had similar incidents (one with Maine that I am aware of) where he has altered the outcome of a game by his incompetence.

And yes, the NHL isn't immune to it, either, especially with the asinine "the play is dead in my mind" caveat. Detroit has been victimized several times including a blatant miscall this season. Again, with several officials on the ice, I can't fathom how they lose sight of the puck or are not consistent in the time allowance in blowing a play dead. There should be a way to remedy it, even if video replay is not the answer. Afterall, the question is one of judgment and not as much about proof. The only question was whether the puck crossed the line before the whistle. It didn't. Case closed. Doesn't mean the right judgment was made, though, which is why there is an "uproar".

 

[MUhawks628]

Re: Did the officials screw up

What if they had allowed the goal? Would Miami fans be howling about how they allowed it after the whistle? What about the second Miami goal where the puck appeared to be held? Why not a presumed whistle there (maybe because he was in the proper position?)

I can't speak for all Miami fans, but had the goal been allowed with no definitive camera shot showing Knapp control the puck, what possible argument would I try to make? I would be angry we lost but arguing that the whistle SHOULD have been blow would just be absurd. I think we are all in agreement that it was a goal and the ref messed this up by blowing it dead, but the call was by the book after the review.

Something should be done about it, but who knows that the answer is. I've been on both sides of it, as have most hockey fans, and it sucks, but until they change something it is part of the game.

 

[streaker]

Re: Did the officials screw up

I can't speak for all Miami fans, but had the goal been allowed with no definitive camera shot showing Knapp control the puck, what possible argument would I try to make? I would be angry we lost but arguing that the whistle SHOULD have been blow would just be absurd. I think we are all in agreement that it was a goal and the ref messed this up by blowing it dead, but the call was by the book after the review.

Something should be done about it, but who knows that the answer is. I've been on both sides of it, as have most hockey fans, and it sucks, but until they change something it is part of the game.

No, the review clearly showed that the whistle blew simultaneously with the puck being shot. Miami fans would have moaned just as much about it being allowed, so from that standpoint it was correct. I can't tell you what should be done other than scrutinize the officiating competency better coming into the playoffs. If this is the best out there, than the NCAA should be ashamed.

The judgment used by the official, though is what is in question. Not only this call, but the previously mentioned 2nd goal, the inconsistent penalty calls or non-calls on both teams.... Both Gravellese and Bunyon were horrible all weekend and a certain prominent Michigan player was as bold to be quoted on it.


The bottom line is, the controversy took away from a terrific effort by Michigan and an even better effort by Miami, specifically Knapp. He stopped three breakaways, got a break on a crossbar (which in fairness, so did Hunwick) and made other great saves. I think both fanbases would agree that neither team deserved to lose. I only hope the FF has just as much drama and no further judgment controversies. At least Miami fans do not have to be concerned with CCHA or HEA officials doing their BC game, although fans from the ECAC and WCHA may not think their officiating is any better.

Good luck.

 

[chapmaja]

Re: Did the officials screw up

Something should be done about it, but who knows that the answer is. I've been on both sides of it, as have most hockey fans, and it sucks, but until they change something it is part of the game.

That is EXACTLY what I am talking about, changing it. I thought I had made it pretty darn clear that nothing could be done about this game, but a rules change needs to be looked into.


I have a big problem with things like this being dismissed as "just part of the game".

Bad calls were "just part of the game" in football and they instituted replay.

Bad calls were "just part of the game" in baseball and MLB has gone to replay.

Timing issues were "just part of the game" in basketball and now even HS allows last second timing plays to be reviewed in certain situations.


The fact is the technology is available now to help prevent mistakes like this from happening in the future. Hockey as a sport needs to get over itself and realize that the technology is available and it needs to be used for the fairness of the game.

In the Michigan-Miami game under the current rules there was no reason even to waste the time replaying the play because there was NO WAY it would have counted.

Can someone explain why the faceoff was moved to center ice though.

 

[chapmaja]

Re: Did the officials screw up

I think the frustration is in the fact that it is happening more frequently now and is dismissed as "part of the game". It shouldn't be. Both teams worked extremely hard and deserved a fair outcome without grievous officiating errors, which is all we are asking for. And yes, it has happened to Michigan- several times- once at MSU this season, and once last season at Yost against ND. Both occasions cost Michigan in that they would have tied the game in the last minute. The stakes were a little higher in this example, and I'm sure that you'd be less righteous and dismissive if it happened to Miami. What if they had allowed the goal? Would Miami fans be howling about how they allowed it after the whistle? What about the second Miami goal where the puck appeared to be held? Why not a presumed whistle there (maybe because he was in the proper position?)

And FTR, this same official has had similar incidents (one with Maine that I am aware of) where he has altered the outcome of a game by his incompetence.

And yes, the NHL isn't immune to it, either, especially with the asinine "the play is dead in my mind" caveat. Detroit has been victimized several times including a blatant miscall this season. Again, with several officials on the ice, I can't fathom how they lose sight of the puck or are not consistent in the time allowance in blowing a play dead. There should be a way to remedy it, even if video replay is not the answer. Afterall, the question is one of judgment and not as much about proof. The only question was whether the puck crossed the line before the whistle. It didn't. Case closed. Doesn't mean the right judgment was made, though, which is why there is an "uproar".

Speaking of things that need to be looked at.

Officiating as a whole in ALL NCAA sports needs to be looked at. I do work NCAA competition in one sport (dual meets only normally) as an official. The level of "training" for officials in some sports is a joke. In the sport I do the requirement is to pass an open book exam with 90% accuracy. You get up to 5 chances to pass the test. As long as you can read you should be able to pass this test.

Some sports have much better officating guidelines than others do.

I would be interested to find out what training these officials get in hockey. What type of support and evaluation they get from the NCAA and the conference.

There are too many cases in football, basketball, hockey, and oher sports that cause problems.

College softball is facing a huge issue this season with a mid-season rule intreptation change that drastically affects the games. This is something that sold have been delt with between June when last season ended and October when the teams began serious preperations for the 2010 season, not after the season started.

The NCAA needs to worry a little less about the money facto and pay a little more attention to the quality of the officiating because that has a direct impact on the game and thus an indirect monetary impact.

 

[RedFreak]

Re: Did the officials screw up

Can someone explain why the faceoff was moved to center ice though.

Don't they move the faceoff to center ice when it is determined that the whistle should not have been blown?

 

[chapmaja]

Re: Did the officials screw up

Don't they move the faceoff to center ice when it is determined that the whistle should not have been blown?

That may be, but wouldn't the fact they called a penalty on Miami take precidence over the center ice face off for an inadvertant whistle?

Unless I am mistaken when a penalty is called isn't the face off supposed to be in the offending teams zone.


There is still something missing about the entire mess. The question is what is the missing piece of the puzzle.

 

[satyking]

Re: Did the officials screw up

Play stopped not because the puck was in the net but because the ref lost site of it under the goaltender and he had his arm up for a penalty on Miami....the face-off comes to the side where the puck was when he lost site was and to the closest circle

This thread should be dead by now as it was then and still is the right call

 

[chapmaja]

Re: Did the officials screw up

Play stopped not because the puck was in the net but because the ref lost site of it under the goaltender and he had his arm up for a penalty on Miami....the face-off comes to the side where the puck was when he lost site was and to the closest circle

This thread should be dead by now as it was then and still is the right call

Let's clarify a couple things.

First, the question of this being a goal has been answered. No it would not have been counted as a goal. Thwe whistle clearly blew before the puck was in the net. That is not up for debate.

Second, there has been NO OFFICIAL WORD GIVEN as to why the whistle was blown. It has been SPECULATION that it was blown because he lost sight of the puck. There are other possible reasons why the whistle was blown that are at least plausible. The issue is not if the goal should have been counted, it shouldn't have. The question is did the official do the correct thing by blowing the play dead. That is still VERY MUCH up for DEBATE.

Finally, the issue that is left to be resolved is why the faceoff was not at the circle on the side of the ice where he lost sight of the puck, but was held in the Center Ice area.

The faceoff should have been in the Miami zone and it was moved (after a second review) out to center ice. Why?

 

[Runninwiththedogs]

Re: Did the officials screw up

Sir/madam, you will probably never know the reason for the whistle, so perhaps it might be time to move on.

 

[Craig P.]

Re: Did the officials screw up

Second, there has been NO OFFICIAL WORD GIVEN as to why the whistle was blown.

Except in the most extreme of circumstances, you will NEVER get official word, so you should stop angsting about it.

It has been SPECULATION that it was blown because he lost sight of the puck. There are other possible reasons why the whistle was blown that are at least plausible.

I see only one other plausible reason why the whistle might have been blown, and that is that with a delayed penalty called, the official thought a Miami player had controlled the puck.

The question is did the official do the correct thing by blowing the play dead. That is still VERY MUCH up for DEBATE.

Said debate is largely pointless. We can tell whether the official was in the right position (the only one who appears to be arguing against that is streaker, as far as I can tell everyone else has said that he was in the right position), and we can tell that the official might plausibly have lost sight of the puck and thought it was frozen. What's the point of further debate? It's not something that can be reviewed, and it's not something that should be reviewable. I suppose we might call into question whether the official really was positioned correctly, and we might derive some satisfaction from that, but again, that doesn't seem to be a point of controversy.