Paul Stewart: Here is How Officials Get Evaluated

I think most fans know that the officials are evaluated from their superiors. The problem is why is it done privately?

Players have to answer to the press after the game. Players who play poorly have their ice time diminished, benched, sit out games or sent to the minors. Coaches have no problem telling fans (through the press) that player A is under-performing.

However dare a coach or GM say anything negative against an official. Why can't officials explain themselves like players, and coaches. If a referee has a terrible game why can't a coach tell the reporters after the game that he thought the ref was terrible? (He can but gets a huge fine)

This blog brings up a great point and one that I was curious about. As a former player how much did you need to work on your skating to be an effective (and yes IMHO you were) an effective NHL official? It is my recollection that the linesmen and referees have to skate at times better than the players to be in position to make calls.

As a flyers fan I strongly feel that often and especially in big games the flyers get the short end of the stick when it comes to all calls (penalties, offsides, icings, etc.) It's good to know that the officials are evaluated, but a part of me wonders if refs are given incentives to give the flyers a disadvantage.

I admit, I watch mostly flyers games and am more than a bit biased. Be that as it may, I still feel strongly that the flyers do, infact, get more than their fair share of questionable officiating. (cough leon stickel cough cough). I guess I'll never know the whole truth, but I'd be shocked to learn that a) no anti-flyers bias is present in officials AND b) the league penalizes officials equally for giving the flyers a raw deal than they would had the autrocious officiating had negatively affected any other NHL team.

just my 2 cents

Paul Stewart: Here is How Officials Get Evaluated
- Paul Stewart

As a flyers fan I strongly feel that often and especially in big games the flyers get the short end of the stick when it comes to all calls (penalties, offsides, icings, etc.) It's good to know that the officials are evaluated, but a part of me wonders if refs are given incentives to give the flyers a disadvantage.

I admit, I watch mostly flyers games and am more than a bit biased. Be that as it may, I still feel strongly that the flyers do, infact, get more than their fair share of questionable officiating. (cough leon stickel cough cough). I guess I'll never know the whole truth, but I'd be shocked to learn that a) no anti-flyers bias is present in officials AND b) the league penalizes officials equally for giving the flyers a raw deal than they would had the autrocious officiating had negatively affected any other NHL team.

just my 2 cents
- flyerscup2011

As much as I may feel the same about the Sabres getting the short end. I mean in the Sabres case they actually made up a rule on the spot to give the game and series to the Stars; who even if the Sabres won that game the Stars still probably would've won the series, but still... Not to mention the phantom goal in the playoffs when LeClair's shot clearly went in through a hole in the side of the net; chose to uphold the call as a "good" goal. And don't even get me started on the Titans and their illegal forward lateral. Not that I have sour grapes or anything.

Have the Flyers, and I'm asking honestly, have the Flyers had any of those sorts of calls go against them? I'm not talking about a missed high-stick on December 3rd of a 6-2 win. I'm talking game 6 of the Cup final.

If you truly try and watch with impartial eyes you will see that the flyers get away with borderline calls just as much as the team they're playing against. Oh sure on one night it might go against them, but the next it'll be for them. In the end it's a wash.

sparky
Toronto Maple Leafs wrote,

"I think most fans know that the officials are evaluated from their superiors. The problem is why is it done privately?"

It is for the same reason that judges are not openly critiqued for their rulings or conduct. It is about maintaining the veneer of legitimacy (and assumed competence). Truth be told, you will never get a perfectly called game or courtroom case where a humans serves as the deciding official. We are imperfect and that is the reality. Paul Stewart probably wouldn't admit this because it diminishes respect for the officials' decision or failure to make a call. That is why instant replay is the way to go. At least be willing to correct a clear bad call.

Non-calls? Typically, you won't get any admission that a call should have been made. I've seen a high stick where the replay showed the ref had a clear unobstructed view of it (literally was looking at it and saw it) on O'Reilly when he was with the Avs. It was not called. It is instances like that where the appearance of bias becomes a suspicion. In reality, I have come to the conclusion that it is mere incompetence and a stubborn sense of self-righteousness, again to maintain the presumption of legitimacy. At least the NHL is willing to have goals reviewed in Toronto.

Have the Flyers, and I'm asking honestly, have the Flyers had any of those sorts of calls go against them? I'm not talking about a missed high-stick on December 3rd of a 6-2 win. I'm talking game 6 of the Cup final.


- Wetbandit1

game 6 of the cup final.







however, i think the above point about the league possibly being out to get the flyers and actually rewarding officials for screwing them in ludicrous.