| 06 June 2011
Today’s topic is not going to come as some shocking revelation, but it’s something worth discussing nonetheless (especially in light of the recent game seven of the Eastern Conference Finals): the selective blindness of the playoff official.
It's a fact that even during the regular season, referees both miss calls and actively overlook things. From the outside looking in, it can be difficult to tell what has happened in a situation, and there are plenty of players who do their ‘best’ work when the referee’s back is turned. There will always be games where penalties are handed out like candy, but they’re memorable because they’re the exception to the rule. In professional and Division I hockey it’s even more noticeable than it is in the lower levels, because the power play is expected to have a certain minimum level of effectiveness. Earned or not, a slanted scoresheet in the penalty section raises eyebrows and sets tongues wagging.
That being said, a perfectly balanced scoresheet does not automatically mean that a game was well-called, and neither does a sheet full of infractions. Teams have off nights where they’ll act out (or take stupid penalties - Delay of Game and Too Many Men are calls that can’t be ignored), and sometimes minor penalties are seen as an acceptable price to pay for preventing a goal or sending a message. Officiating is a subjective exercise, and calls can be influenced by everything from the angle of the referee’s gaze to the significance of the game and who he happens to be partnered with that night. Every on-ice official has their own standard of enforcement, and the trick is in making sure that standard is fairly and evenly applied. Calling every minor hook and trip may ascribe to the letter of the law, but a hockey game needs movement and flow, and that often requires discretion to be applied in the form of a blind eye.
There’s no cone of silence on the ice - refs can (and do) coach players regarding how they intend to handle a situation. In a game with desperate and tightly controlled teams, players are more likely to heed warnings that they might otherwise brush off. “Next one of you who does [X] is going to the box” or “Keep it moving, boys, keep it moving” or “Loose! Loose!” A similar level of discretionary penalization is often seen in the recreational leagues, where an official will give players double-minors for roughing rather than a fighting major and game misconduct, because it’s eleven at night and pay-for-play and there’s no need for someone to sit a game over some frustrated flailing where the cages never came off.
In this year’s playoff season, we’ve had examples of both extremes when it come to penalties. On April 16, Philadelphia and Buffalo decided to get into a contest over who could accrue the broader range of penalties. They racked up a total of 24, with 11 different infractions assessed. In contrast, on Friday the twenty-seventh the Bruins defeated the Lightning in a game where the only time the whistle blew was a goal, an icing, or to settle the occasional face off circle.
There’s no hard and fast rule when it comes to playoff penalty calling. Officials are expected to rely on their judgment in the moment above all else. Toronto is always a phone call and video feed away, keeping a close eye and quietly reviewing every goal that gets called, but it’s the call on the ice that reigns supreme barring clear evidence to the contrary. Given the importance of each power play, each game won or lost of the possible seven, it takes a lot of courage to break the ice and call the first penalties of a game. Depending on an official’s approach, sometimes they’ll call early to set a clear precedent, and sometimes they’ll wait for something so blatant it can’t be ignored.
So what does this mean for the finals? Given the on-ice performance we’ve seen from both the Canucks and the Bruins, it means that we can expect to see at least one game on each end of the spectrum before the Stanley Cup is awarded this spring. Boston and Vancouver are both emotional teams, and while the entire series is important, penalty counts will likely run higher in the early games as they feel each other out while they still have breathing room. The closer one team gets to elimination, the more the counts are going to drop off (though given Boston’s record with the power play this post-season, Vancouver can afford to take minor penalties in the hopes of getting a few called on the Bruins in turn). We've already seen the higher counts in Game One, never mind the situation with Bergeron and Burrows, and the numbers have settled out a bit now that the teams are again into the swing of things.
Regardless of which team takes the cup home, the officials on the ice are bound to take the heat from the other team’s fans. Criticism is inevitable, but while one poor call may influence a game, there’s a reason that teams play to the best of seven. It will be the play on the ice that determines the winner, not the officials who work to keep the playing field level.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
