tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4056005406217946469.post14844848350330295..comments2023-03-30T21:47:08.518-04:00Comments on Kicking Back: When does reputation matter?Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17411680916657152897noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4056005406217946469.post-77161918230994130672013-06-04T10:00:26.366-04:002013-06-04T10:00:26.366-04:00Excellent comments Steve.
I have a ton of respect...Excellent comments Steve.<br /><br />I have a ton of respect for the on ice guys, and generally agree the league can make things worse by removing the consistency that players were getting on ice.<br /><br />Where that breaks down is when something more than an "on ice" penalty is warranted, or as in the case of Cooke, he is there for a reason other than to play hockey. Referees don't have much ability to deal with long ranging punishments.<br /><br />Strongly agree with you that league actions put extra pressure on a referee. As an example, in MLS Alain Sutter came over from Switzerland to play for Dallas. He wore a head covering that was not allowed per the LOTG (Zenga did the same for NE), and referees were told to "let it go." <br /><br />While not totally in line with the current topic, referees are employees of the league (in the NHL case) and have to do what they ask for the reasons they ask. This may serve to "stretch the line" more than should be, and can lead to differences with in and post season play.<br /><br />While I get why the league does this ... to sell its product ... it can lead to tensions that referees have to mediate.<br /><br />Thanks for reading,<br />PKAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17411680916657152897noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4056005406217946469.post-9149890205295266672013-06-04T09:22:47.240-04:002013-06-04T09:22:47.240-04:00To a certain extent I feel that the NHL officals d...To a certain extent I feel that the NHL officals do a good job in knowing where to draw the line with players as over time they become very familiar with their play. After all there are only 30 teams so officials will get their fair share of games with each club. Known offenders are certainly given a shorter leash for the higher judgement calls like the frequent altercations that occur after play is stopped. I feel this is done for good reason. As a referee you do not want the game to get out of hand if it can be prevented. By assesing penalites for what some may call "not worthy" of two minutes is a great tool to draw your line for ALL players as to what is going to be acceptable from that moment on. Where the process failed on this in the NHL was done at the league level. On-Ice officials issued punishment to the highest extent they could, rightfully so. The league in failing to suspend the player removed all consistency in their policies. Additioanl sanctions had been handed out during the season and post-season for far less severe offenses. Does this send a message to players that the deeper into post-season we go, the tougher it is to gain suspension? Think of the burden this puts on match officials as players enter the game thinking about just how much more they can "get away with" without fear of missing additional matches.Steven Snoreply@blogger.com