Paul Stewart: The Salmon and the Bears

With your take on the Sheifele hit I agree....you should move to Alaska! Catch my drift?

Hate to say it as one time I would agree with this, but not anymore.

When you have a ref caught on audio intentionally targetting a team for a penalty all credability is shot to hell. You have Morton and Pochmara who were so attrocious at the AHL level with game managing it became utterly presictable when a penalty was coming and to whom. Hell, Pochmara earned the nickname Poochy for all his “pooched” reffing.

The NHL reffing is sadly lacking and beyond suspect. It’s integrity and credability is shot to a point that until it gets really addressed openly and “game management” is dead, fans are, and rightly so, going to armchair quarterback officiating.

Hate to say it as one time I would agree with this, but not anymore.

When you have a ref caught on audio intentionally targetting a team for a penalty all credability is shot to hell. You have Morton and Pochmara who were so attrocious at the AHL level with game managing it became utterly presictable when a penalty was coming and to whom. Hell, Pochmara earned the nickname Poochy for all his “pooched” reffing.

The NHL reffing is sadly lacking and beyond suspect. It’s integrity and credability is shot to a point that until it gets really addressed openly and “game management” is dead, fans are, and rightly so, going to armchair quarterback officiating.
- Roadrunner75

100%. For the few remaining fans who didn’t think there were obvious biases going on during games and refs dictating outcomes Tim Peel eliminated any doubt. NHL officiating is a joke and is the one thing holding back the league to progress imo. How can casual sports fans take a league seriously when refs have “make up calls” or are we going to make pretend that’s not happening? It’s a complete gong show and let’s stop with the burying our heads in the sand routine by saying it’s all in our heads. Give me a break call it as you see it not as you want it.

All due respect to refs but there isn’t one fan in those stands coming to see you it isn’t about you.

Hate to say it as one time I would agree with this, but not anymore.

When you have a ref caught on audio intentionally targetting a team for a penalty all credability is shot to hell. You have Morton and Pochmara who were so attrocious at the AHL level with game managing it became utterly presictable when a penalty was coming and to whom. Hell, Pochmara earned the nickname Poochy for all his “pooched” reffing.

The NHL reffing is sadly lacking and beyond suspect. It’s integrity and credability is shot to a point that until it gets really addressed openly and “game management” is dead, fans are, and rightly so, going to armchair quarterback officiating.

I think there is a difference between "general bias" and "specific bias".

General bias is when a ref favors a team from the outset, for example a "hometown bias". The calls heavily favor one team from the beginning to end of the game. I think this is what Paul's blog is about. For the most part I think this is uncommon in the NHL but it does happen. It actually is most common in the playoffs when one team is up by a game or two in a series. It seems like the refs (probably at the behest of the league) heavily favor the team that is down, likely hoping to extend the series. I think the league strongly prefers 6 and 7 games series over 4 and 5 game ones, for ratings and ticket sales. Another instance is in Sidney Crosby's rookie season it seemed like certain refs were really out to get him. Many refs were former tough guys in the league and hate players like Crosby. A lot of opposing fans called Crosby a whiner in his rookie season but the fact of the matter is that a lot of the officiating concerning him at that time was atrocious. I also remember a game in his second season against NJ where the refs called 5 hooking penalties against the Pens in one period. For whatever reason it really seemed like the refs were out to get the Pens in that game. However, that is very rare.

Specific or situational bias, on the other hand, happens in every game. Every hockey fan who isn't living in a fantasy world knows that it happens. This is situations like "I just called 3 penalties against team x, the next one has to be against team y no matter what" and "I just missed a call against team x, now I need to find something else to call against them" and "So far I have called 7 roughing penalties against team x, I am tired of calling them and will "just let them play" from here on". I don't think Paul's blog is really about this type of bias, though. If it tried to refute this I don't think anyone would take it seriously .

I think there is a difference between "general bias" and "specific bias".

General bias is when a ref favors a team from the outset, for example a "hometown bias". The calls heavily favor one team from the beginning to end of the game. I think this is what Paul's blog is about. For the most part I think this is uncommon in the NHL but it does happen. It actually is most common in the playoffs when one team is up by a game or two in a series. It seems like the refs (probably at the behest of the league) heavily favor the team that is down, likely hoping to extend the series. I think the league strongly prefers 6 and 7 games series over 4 and 5 game ones, for ratings and ticket sales. Another instance is in Sidney Crosby's rookie season it seemed like certain refs were really out to get him. Many refs were former tough guys in the league and hate players like Crosby. A lot of opposing fans called Crosby a whiner in his rookie season but the fact of the matter is that a lot of the officiating concerning him at that time was atrocious. I also remember a game in his second season against NJ where the refs called 5 hooking penalties against the Pens in one period. For whatever reason it really seemed like the refs were out to get the Pens in that game. However, that is very rare.

Specific or situational bias, on the other hand, happens in every game. Every hockey fan who isn't living in a fantasy world knows that it happens. This is situations like "I just called 3 penalties against team x, the next one has to be against team y no matter what" and "I just missed a call against team x, now I need to find something else to call against them" and "So far I have called 7 roughing penalties against team x, I am tired of calling them and will "just let them play" from here on". I don't think Paul's blog is really about this type of bias, though. If it tried to refute this I don't think anyone would take it seriously .
- PghPens668771

Crosby was a whiner in his early days. He's matured though and competes instead of whining.

100%. For the few remaining fans who didn’t think there were obvious biases going on during games and refs dictating outcomes Tim Peel eliminated any doubt. NHL officiating is a joke and is the one thing holding back the league to progress imo. How can casual sports fans take a league seriously when refs have “make up calls” or are we going to make pretend that’s not happening? It’s a complete gong show and let’s stop with the burying our heads in the sand routine by saying it’s all in our heads. Give me a break call it as you see it not as you want it.

All due respect to refs but there isn’t one fan in those stands coming to see you it isn’t about you.
- Cptmjl

Totally agree !

Take by example Chris Lee in game 3 Vegas vs CH, no doubt this ref is bias vs Montreal and facts proved it in the past.

Luke Gordon Field (The Beaverton) wrote a very good parody on it'

MONTREAL – A homicide has gone unsolved after the eyewitness who was right there turned out to be an NHL referee, and therefore somehow missed the entire thing.

“He was standing right next to the victim when he got shot in the face,” said Constable Maurice Duhamel. “There was blood everywhere and people screaming. But he says he didn’t see a thing.”

“He also told me he didn’t want to ‘decide who wins at trial, especially during the playoffs’. What the (frank) does that mean?”

Security cameras in the area were unable to capture the murderer’s face. But they did show NHL ref Larry O’Sullivan stand there, see the shooter and the shooting, look down at the murder victim, and then just kind of carry on with his day while staring blankly into the middle distance.

“He didn’t even raise his arm [to flag down a nearby police officer]! I mean at least do the bare minimum.”

This is not O’Sullivan’s first missed call. In 2017 he didn’t report a burglary happening across the street from his house because “he’d already reported a crime earlier that day that turned out to be wrong, so he figured he owed the criminals a make up call.”

O’Sullivan did not respond to requests for comment. He was last seen reporting several kids for jaywalking because “that’s an automatic delay of game misdemeanour.”

Willfully ignoring infractions isn't a mistake. If the refs aren't making money off their horrible calls then they're idiots, but I suspect that they're smarter than that and aren't wasting the opportunity that being the most important persons on the ice affords them. This year has been an absolute abomination.