The Official "My Team Got Screwed!" thread of the 2022 NCAA Men's Hockey Tournament

[J.D.]

I'm sorry but if anyone wants or agrees with that ejection yesterday...what are we doing? The opponent got up like nothing happened. It was a complete overreaction to something that did not need to be a major in the opening minutes of a national tournament game. It's ok for refs to understand the magnitude of the situation they're in. They don't have to be robots.

 

[Darius]

I disagree with the ejection yesterday, but based on how college hockey calls majors, can see it going either way. Maybe if 25 year old fully developed men were not competing with 18 year old true freshmen the rules/calls might be relaxed.

 

[pdt1081]

I'm sorry but if anyone wants or agrees with that ejection yesterday...what are we doing? The opponent got up like nothing happened. It was a complete overreaction to something that did not need to be a major in the opening minutes of a national tournament game. It's ok for refs to understand the magnitude of the situation they're in. They don't have to be robots.

So it's only an ejection if the player gets injured? How long do they have to lay there to convince you they're "injured enough" to draw the ejection?

 

[MichVandal]

I'm sorry but if anyone wants or agrees with that ejection yesterday...what are we doing? The opponent got up like nothing happened. It was a complete overreaction to something that did not need to be a major in the opening minutes of a national tournament game. It's ok for refs to understand the magnitude of the situation they're in. They don't have to be robots.

When I complained about the exact same call against Michigan this season, I was labeled a whiner. And it happened multiple times where is was very questionable to even call it that resulted in an ejection.

And when it happened to us, clearly meeting the letter of the rules, the major was switched to a minor. Again, I was labeled a whiner.

So get used to it.

 

[J.D.]

So it's only an ejection if the player gets injured? How long do they have to lay there to convince you they're "injured enough" to draw the ejection?

Nope, not only if they get injured. But when the player gets up immediately and isn't even looking for a call let's try to use common sense.

 

[chickod]

If you are ever in an arena and can see both the clock on the video board, and the official clock at the same time, you will see there is almost a full second delay on the video board. The video clock starts and stops late. It's visually noticeable when you see both side by side.

So I'm watching the Northeastern/Western Michigan game now. The first period just ended. The horn blew at the EXACT same instant as the embedded clock hit zero. As far as I know (of course, we don't spend our lives trying to see if clocks are synched...but I will do this now for the next few games), this is pretty accurate. So what are you saying? "Which clock" are the horn and light synched to? You're saying there's a "second clock" that's "official?" And where is that? At the operating board in front of the scorekeeper? And how do you know there is a "delay?" What "official" clock are you comparing it to? So how are the players supposed to know how much time is left? Are you KIDDING ME???? I refereed for 17 years...the SCOREBOARD clock is official. Heck, I remember they passed that rule in the old AFL back in the 60s EXACTLY for this reason, so that nobody could dispute the end of the period.

 

[chickod]

So you are ok with bad calls just for the refs to be decisive.

Define "bad call." That's subjective. Are we going to start reviewing every tripping or hooking to see if it actually WAS a penalty? I'll watch a football game...the receiver CLEARLY has a toe on the line before he gains possession. They rule it a "good catch." This happens ALL THE TIME. Why? Because you can't take human judgment out of the equation. So apparently you're telling me it took twelve minutes because they all agreed? NO...they didn't agree. That's why it took so long. And that's my point. Haven't you been in the living room watching the game and someone says "He caught it" and the other guy says "No he didn't!" You both watched the same thing, right? But you each saw something different. It's called BEING HUMAN. SUBJECTIVITY. If you want to automate the entire world....fine... we're well on the way. Let's just play a virtual game instead and then the software can decide and we won't be able to argue with it. What I'm saying is that people can't even agree when they both SEE THE SAME THING.

Which means that you were ok with the puck going in from under the frame of the goal in the CCHA final because it was decisive. Even if it was clearly the wrong thing.

See, this is something you CAN automate and use replay for. A laser can determine this and there is no "time" component involved so it's cut and dry. There's an appropriate place for technology...all I'm saying is if it can't be automated, then DON'T implement it. And anything that involves human judgment is not automated.

 

[MichVandal]

Define "bad call." That's subjective. Are we going to start reviewing every tripping or hooking to see if it actually WAS a penalty? I'll watch a football game...the receiver CLEARLY has a toe on the line before he gains possession. They rule it a "good catch." This happens ALL THE TIME. Why? Because you can't take human judgment out of the equation. So apparently you're telling me it took twelve minutes because they all agreed? NO...they didn't agree. That's why it took so long. And that's my point. Haven't you been in the living room watching the game and someone says "He caught it" and the other guy says "No he didn't!" You both watched the same thing, right? But you each saw something different. It's called BEING HUMAN. SUBJECTIVITY. If you want to automate the entire world....fine... we're well on the way. Let's just play a virtual game instead and then the software can decide and we won't be able to argue with it. What I'm saying is that people can't even agree when they both SEE THE SAME THING.



See, this is something you CAN automate and use replay for. A laser can determine this and there is no "time" component involved so it's cut and dry. There's an appropriate place for technology...all I'm saying is if it can't be automated, then DON'T implement it. And anything that involves human judgment is not automated.

You say you are a ref, but think that every single penalty can be reviewed? The only ones that I'm aware of that can be reviewed are potential majors. And even those are subject to subjectivity- as we've been called for majors that were not, and had majors that were called minors even when someone got hurt. So spare me the crying about subjectivity. Other than that, your strawman of calls are not reviewable. You should know that already.

BTW- a bad call would be calling a goal that isn't. Like what happened last night and at the CCHA final. The entire point of having video review.

As for the automation, good luck with that. If you can design and engineer it to be perfect every single time so that a human would never be needed, and it to cost no more than a good video camera that has a clock embedded into the view- you could be a hero to people like yourself.

Again, I have no idea what took so long. I also question why it took so long given how easy it was to see the clock and the puck in the view they were showing. But given how important these plays are, why is it so evil that they take a long time to be sure?

 

[pdt1081]

So I'm watching the Northeastern/Western Michigan game now. The first period just ended. The horn blew at the EXACT same instant as the embedded clock hit zero. As far as I know (of course, we don't spend our lives trying to see if clocks are synched...but I will do this now for the next few games), this is pretty accurate. So what are you saying? "Which clock" are the horn and light synched to? You're saying there's a "second clock" that's "official?" And where is that? At the operating board in front of the scorekeeper? And how do you know there is a "delay?" What "official" clock are you comparing it to? So how are the players supposed to know how much time is left? Are you KIDDING ME???? I refereed for 17 years...the SCOREBOARD clock is official. Heck, I remember they passed that rule in the old AFL back in the 60s EXACTLY for this reason, so that nobody could dispute the end of the period.

The clock on VIDEO boards is not official. Here in Bowling Green, the official clock, and camera on that clock, are mounted to the wall behind the video board. Yes, there is a very slight difference, but it corrects itself whenever the clock is stopped.

 

[chickod]

You say you are a ref, but think that every single penalty can be reviewed?

Apparently you don't read very well. I said "Are we going to start reviewing every tripping or hooking to see if it actually WAS a penalty?" See...it had a question mark at the end. It was a sarcastic question.

How long are we going to delay games to get "everything right?" You must be young, because apparently you believe that we can make the world perfect. I don't want to be around for that day...because then we'll all be robots/machines (which is where we're headed anyway). But I get it that your generation can't accept anything that isn't perfect. There are no "mistakes," everyone is always right...and if they're not, we have to pardon them.

 

[chickod]

The clock on VIDEO boards is not official. Here in Bowling Green, the official clock, and camera on that clock, are mounted to the wall behind the video board. Yes, there is a very slight difference, but it corrects itself whenever the clock is stopped.

I don't know what goes on at Bowling Green...but I have officiated AND operated clocks. In high school and college gyms. Obviously these are not million dollar arenas. All I know is there is no "adjusting." The only clock IS the scoreboard...operated by the person at the board who flicks the toggle switch on and off. It's not soccer where a referee has a watch. Most places can't afford sophisticated technology such as you are apparently alluding to. The clock is the clock, and it's on the scoreboard. Period. When the clock hits zero and the buzzer (which is ON the scoreboard and synchronized with the clock) goes off, the period is over.

 

[MichVandal]

Apparently you don't read very well. I said "Are we going to start reviewing every tripping or hooking to see if it actually WAS a penalty?" See...it had a question mark at the end. It was a sarcastic question.

How long are we going to delay games to get "everything right?" You must be young, because apparently you believe that we can make the world perfect. I don't want to be around for that day...because then we'll all be robots/machines (which is where we're headed anyway). But I get it that your generation can't accept anything that isn't perfect. There are no "mistakes," everyone is always right...and if they're not, we have to pardon them.

Apparently you don't read my posts all that well either, as all of my points about good/bad calls have been about goals. And that the video review still includes the subjectivity that you so much worship.

And no, I'm not young. Not even close. Spare me your generational angst- you were as looked down on by your predecessors as you are on younger people.

But if you want to bear that cross, go for it. It's pretty clear that, as a ref, you are not aware of the rulebook all that well, as it's just taken me a few seconds to google it, scan through it, and find the appropriate part that applies here.

You obviously want no-goals count if the ref just says so. We have simple technology to make sure the ref gets the call right, and most people accept that. Clearly sucks for you that you would rather just get on with it, even if the wrong team wins. If 10min of your life is so important to you, perhaps you should not sit and watch games at all- since they last multiple hours.

 

[MichVandal]

Using chickod's standard, that was not called a goal, so therefore it was not a goal.

Good thing video replay exists.

 

[pdt1081]

I don't know what goes on at Bowling Green...but I have officiated AND operated clocks. In high school and college gyms. Obviously these are not million dollar arenas. All I know is there is no "adjusting." The only clock IS the scoreboard...operated by the person at the board who flicks the toggle switch on and off. It's not soccer where a referee has a watch. Most places can't afford sophisticated technology such as you are apparently alluding to. The clock is the clock, and it's on the scoreboard. Period. When the clock hits zero and the buzzer (which is ON the scoreboard and synchronized with the clock) goes off, the period is over.

The game with the "controversy" about the clock was played in a multi-million dollar facility with a state of the art VIDEO scoreboard. That's what necessitates having an "official" clock that may or may not be viewable from the ice. You're talking PeeWee while the rest of us are talking Division 1 NCAA.

 

[chickod]

Using chickod's standard, that was not called a goal, so therefore it was not a goal.

Good thing video replay exists.

Wrong again. My issue is with the "synching" of the clock(s). I already mentioned that this is a cut/dried issue. I'm still waiting for someone to show me where the evidence was for the "official" clock (which was at zero WAY before the buzzer went or green light came on) being "correct" is. I have never seen that large a discrepancy between the "two clocks" (apparently). And no, I'm not going to go back and watch it again because that's not the point. I want to know how there can be that much of a difference between the scoreboard/inset clock and the "official" clock. There still has been no explanation besides "the clock is right so that's it."

 

[chickod]

The game with the "controversy" about the clock was played in a multi-million dollar facility with a state of the art VIDEO scoreboard. That's what necessitates having an "official" clock that may or may not be viewable from the ice. You're talking PeeWee while the rest of us are talking Division 1 NCAA.

A state of the art video scoreboard that apparently is not even CLOSE to displaying the correct time. Why have one then? Just do what they do when the clock goes out (say...the shot clock in basketball, which happens frequently). The PA announcer can yell out the time and count it down. If you can't look up at the clock and know how much time is left, what's the point?

And as far as my not knowing the rule book...I was a basketball official...but the point is still relevant. Also, we have a "case book" that takes specific hypothetical scenarios and dictates how the rule should be applied in that situation. So regarding your statement "The clock is right and that's it," that's not 100% accurate. What if the clock ISN'T right? There are exceptions to everything, which is why these things are discussed in the first place. Again, if it were that simple, they would have made the decision in one minute (like they did in the Western Michigan / Northeastern game). Why did it take twelve minutes? That's why we have technology, right? It's always "right."

And I'm done with this...we can agree to disagree (even though I hate that expression).

 

[Darius]

Today’s review took a few seconds, yesterday’s review time was waaaaay to long. Reviews are greatly overused, that’s another discussion. If an error is not obvious in 30 seconds, move on.

 

[Darius]

Also, yesterday’s review was a complete cluster. Proved by the fact that we are still posting about it.

 

[MichVandal]

Wrong again. My issue is with the "synching" of the clock(s). I already mentioned that this is a cut/dried issue. I'm still waiting for someone to show me where the evidence was for the "official" clock (which was at zero WAY before the buzzer went or green light came on) being "correct" is. I have never seen that large a discrepancy between the "two clocks" (apparently). And no, I'm not going to go back and watch it again because that's not the point. I want to know how there can be that much of a difference between the scoreboard/inset clock and the "official" clock. There still has been no explanation besides "the clock is right so that's it."

What you are looking for is in the rule book, ref.

Are you capable of looking it up?

And I don't know what reviews you have seen, but the one they showed right away from above had a clock in the lower right corner, which was 0.00 way before the puck was shot. If you are too lazy to go look that up, that's your problem, ref. Especially since you are the one so bothered by it.

Nice if you to focus your theory on the clock when you have clearly posted how video review is ruining the game taking subjectivity out of the calls. Make up your mind what you are so angry over.

BTW, the team that put the puck in the net after the clock hit 0.00 did win the game.

 

[J.D.]

Clearly offside yet we need a 20 minute review