WC: 2014 Russia vs Finland WC Final

[JackSlater]

The complaints were not that the refereeing was bad in general, only that it was bad as it affected the Finns. You didn't see any Finns or Canadians complaining about bad calls that went against the Russians. If the problem was bad refereeing, and the calls were equally bad against both the Russians and the Finns, then the game outcome is fully justified. Conversely, if the complaints are that bad calls were made only against the Finns, then the complaints are about bias, not bad refereeing!

If the complaints are about frequent bad calls, whether they benefit one team more or not, then obviously the complaint is about the quality of refereeing in general. Good refereeing would have no such issue. I also don't know what bad calls went against the Russians, if there are several of them you may as well point them out.

Your last point doesn't make sense, despite the emphasis with which you attempt to make it. One team can benefit more from bad calls than another team does without bias being an issue. Perhaps these referees were biased, perhaps they weren't. We don't know. We do know that they were bad. It's a recurring theme pretty much every time this tournament is played.

I don't really care about the quality of refereeing in a relatively meaningless game like this. It does give a good example of why the cries and moans about "biased" refereeing and the need for referees from other countries in the Olympics are baseless though.

 

[xxxx]

After a certain world championship game, Jaromir Jagr said himself that he would much rather have 4 canadian nhl referees in an important game between Canada and the Czechs.

 

[1Gold Standard]

After a certain world championship game, Jaromir Jagr said himself that he would much rather have 4 canadian nhl referees in an important game between Canada and the Czechs.

Ya, what do players know about it? I mean, they're just the poor shmucks risking body and health... why listen to them? It's the irrational fan who may fall from their couch drunk and in a fit of rage because of some perceived bias that has yet to show itself in the 5 Olympics in which NHL referees have officiated.

But we'll all be entertained by the incompetent, yet 'neutral' officiating in this year's WHC. unless of course the incompetence bites the team you are cheering for in the ass...and then it will be something similar to what we read on January 5th/6th after the final whistle of WJHC GMG. That was fun.

I just hope it is not as egregious as it was in 2014. but I suspect it will be worse.

 

[Yakushev72]

If the complaints are about frequent bad calls, whether they benefit one team more or not, then obviously the complaint is about the quality of refereeing in general. Good refereeing would have no such issue. I also don't know what bad calls went against the Russians, if there are several of them you may as well point them out.

Your last point doesn't make sense, despite the emphasis with which you attempt to make it. One team can benefit more from bad calls than another team does without bias being an issue. Perhaps these referees were biased, perhaps they weren't. We don't know. We do know that they were bad. It's a recurring theme pretty much every time this tournament is played.

I don't really care about the quality of refereeing in a relatively meaningless game like this. It does give a good example of why the cries and moans about "biased" refereeing and the need for referees from other countries in the Olympics are baseless though.

I'm not convinced that you really believe what you are saying here - you might just be reaching to try to rebut a point that challenges the premise of your argument. I think, as a Canadian, you are repeating Canadian-isms that have been repeated to you over and over since you were a little Canadian! That was the basic premise of the Canadian excuse for a very lackluster performance in the '72 series - inferior refereeing.

You say bad refereeing, but as I look at the calls that the Finnish video present, particularly the first 2 highlighted in the video clip, they did not appear to be flagrant bad calls as the Finnish narrator claims. In the play involving Malkin, he did not raise his stick high or thrust it out as in a cross-check - look at how low the Finnish player's head was when he came in for the check. Malkin has the right within the rules to protect himself from injury, as long as he doesn't commit a foul. In the 2nd play at the blue line, the Finnish player had the puck, and the Russian hit him with his shoulder, so technically it was a legal check.

I understand that the Finns were frustrated by the final score, but they didn't cry, for example, when Patrik Laine committed a flagrant cross-check in the 3rd period of the WJC Gold Medal game to create the tying goal for Finland. Laine came up behind a Russian defenseman who had an opportunity to make a play on the puck and drilled him from behind, driving him face-first into the ice (you don't have to take my word for it, if you have video of the game, because the replay shows it at least 7 times). The referees for the game, a Canadian and American, no doubt of superior competence normally, looked right at it and decided to swallow their whistles. That created a sudden 3-on-1 that Laine scored on. You could say that that non-call cost the Russians a Gold Medal.

As for the smug comment that the World Championship Gold Medal game is "relatively meaningless," please tell that to the Finnish fans who have been whining about this game for the last 22 months non-stop.

 

[vivalavili]

Yeah, This was the year when we weren't supposed to win anything at all. The team had like nine or so future Jokerit-players and head coatch Westerlund was wildly criticised for using the WC as a practising tournament for Jokerit.

The following year and WC had some pretty good work by the refs as well Komarov got 5+20 for kneeing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDZPevYSrhc

 

[jj cale]

I'm not convinced that you really believe what you are saying here - you might just be reaching to try to rebut a point that challenges the premise of your argument. I think, as a Canadian, you are repeating Canadian-isms that have been repeated to you over and over since you were a little Canadian! That was the basic premise of the Canadian excuse for a very lackluster performance in the '72 series - inferior refereeing.

You say bad refereeing, but as I look at the calls that the Finnish video present, particularly the first 2 highlighted in the video clip, they did not appear to be flagrant bad calls as the Finnish narrator claims. In the play involving Malkin, he did not raise his stick high or thrust it out as in a cross-check - look at how low the Finnish player's head was when he came in for the check. Malkin has the right within the rules to protect himself from injury, as long as he doesn't commit a foul. In the 2nd play at the blue line, the Finnish player had the puck, and the Russian hit him with his shoulder, so technically it was a legal check.

I understand that the Finns were frustrated by the final score, but they didn't cry, for example, when Patrik Laine committed a flagrant cross-check in the 3rd period of the WJC Gold Medal game to create the tying goal for Finland. Laine came up behind a Russian defenseman who had an opportunity to make a play on the puck and drilled him from behind, driving him face-first into the ice (you don't have to take my word for it, if you have video of the game, because the replay shows it at least 7 times). The referees for the game, a Canadian and American, no doubt of superior competence normally, looked right at it and decided to swallow their whistles. That created a sudden 3-on-1 that Laine scored on. You could say that that non-call cost the Russians a Gold Medal.

As for the smug comment that the World Championship Gold Medal game is "relatively meaningless," please tell that to the Finnish fans who have been whining about this game for the last 22 months non-stop.

I can assure you that we Canadians have not been brought up to believe since we were little Canadians that we had a lackluster performance over in Russia due to bad reffing.

We have been brought up to believe that we overcame this terrible reffing with a GREAT performance. Which indeed it was.

Now Little Russians with the Canada cup in 1987, they have been brought up to believe they LOST because of bad reffing.

A classic Russianism.

 

[Paxton Fettel]

Why don't we bring the 1987 Canada Cup finals back to the table??? It was a 100 times worse than this meaningless final.

EDIT : oh it's already up there.

 

[jj cale]

Why don't we just move on to today and get ready for the playoffs and WHC coming up.

Since they are currently what matters.

 

[illone84]

As for the smug comment that the World Championship Gold Medal game is "relatively meaningless," please tell that to the Finnish fans who have been whining about this game for the last 22 months non-stop.


Russia was the better team regardless and deserved the win.

But what angers me is that Oleg Znarok made a mockery of the IIHF, and got a way without even a slap on the wrist. That was a straight up bull $%iT/!

Looking forward to the upcoming WHC in Russia.

 

[Yakushev72]

As for the smug comment that the World Championship Gold Medal game is "relatively meaningless," please tell that to the Finnish fans who have been whining about this game for the last 22 months non-stop.


Russia was the better team regardless and deserved the win.

But what angers me is that Oleg Znarok made a mockery of the IIHF, and got a way without even a slap on the wrist. That was a straight up bull $%iT/!

Looking forward to the upcoming WHC in Russia.

Good point! Znarok certainly wasn't in the press box just to take notes. Finnish fans might be comforted in the fact that it is unlikely that he came up with any brilliant ideas to help the team while he was there!

 

[illone84]

Good point! Znarok certainly wasn't in the press box just to take notes. Finnish fans might be comforted in the fact that it is unlikely that he came up with any brilliant ideas to help the team while he was there!

lol you missed the point

 

[QnebO]

No bias? Remembering ( I wasnt born then but I remember seeing it) the soviet "offside" @ 1980 olympic hockey, here it is...



@ 2:15 time in the video

That must be a bias call. Can't possibly be mistake, it is so clear.

In general, Canadian refs have done solid job. Somehow I like Canadian refs over USA refs even if its Finland-Canada. Canadian ref is like seller of their game, they can't spoil it.

 

[JackSlater]

I'm not convinced that you really believe what you are saying here - you might just be reaching to try to rebut a point that challenges the premise of your argument. I think, as a Canadian, you are repeating Canadian-isms that have been repeated to you over and over since you were a little Canadian! That was the basic premise of the Canadian excuse for a very lackluster performance in the '72 series - inferior refereeing.

The Canadian excuse for 1972 is generally split between lack of preparation and lack of Orr/Hull. The complaints regarding referees are generally only mentioned in two of the eight games. I don't understand what the point of this is though. That the refs in the Summit Series were not as good as NHL refs? Probably true.

You say bad refereeing, but as I look at the calls that the Finnish video present, particularly the first 2 highlighted in the video clip, they did not appear to be flagrant bad calls as the Finnish narrator claims. In the play involving Malkin, he did not raise his stick high or thrust it out as in a cross-check - look at how low the Finnish player's head was when he came in for the check. Malkin has the right within the rules to protect himself from injury, as long as he doesn't commit a foul. In the 2nd play at the blue line, the Finnish player had the puck, and the Russian hit him with his shoulder, so technically it was a legal check.

Oh yes, I believe that you believe that the refereeing was fine. There is no doubt in my mind of that.

I understand that the Finns were frustrated by the final score, but they didn't cry, for example, when Patrik Laine committed a flagrant cross-check in the 3rd period of the WJC Gold Medal game to create the tying goal for Finland. Laine came up behind a Russian defenseman who had an opportunity to make a play on the puck and drilled him from behind, driving him face-first into the ice (you don't have to take my word for it, if you have video of the game, because the replay shows it at least 7 times). The referees for the game, a Canadian and American, no doubt of superior competence normally, looked right at it and decided to swallow their whistles. That created a sudden 3-on-1 that Laine scored on. You could say that that non-call cost the Russians a Gold Medal.

Quite possibly. Poor refereeing is common in IIHF tournaments (WJC has been better in recent years, in my opinion) and though I didn't see that game it's probably true that the refereeing was bad. Your claims about the nationality of the referees miss the point quite humourously. The point regarding the referees is that he NHL refs do their job better than the IIHF refs do, even in games involving their own countries. That two referees (Canadian and American) did a bad job in a game featuring Russia and Finland demonstrates the low level of refereeing as opposed to bias - which is the point I was making all along. Thanks for the help I guess.

As for the smug comment that the World Championship Gold Medal game is "relatively meaningless," please tell that to the Finnish fans who have been whining about this game for the last 22 months non-stop.

Finns - please stop complaining about this relatively meaningless game non-stop. Yakushev72 can apparently see non-stop threads on this topic from the last 22 months that I can't, and it really does need to stop.

 

[habsrule4eva3089]

Ah yes, international threads are warming up for the Worlds with their complaints increasing just in time.

These threads are gold and outright comedic once the World's begins.

 

[FiLe]

The funny thing is, while I see Finns complaining about this, they only did so because they were given a chance - by a Canadian poster, who chose to bring the topic up. If said poster hadn't made a thread about it, I doubt a single Finn would have brought it up 22 months after the fact.

Sometimes it should be better to just let the sleeping dogs lie.

 

[Conspiracy Theorist]

Yeah, This was the year when we weren't supposed to win anything at all. The team had like nine or so future Jokerit-players and head coatch Westerlund was wildly criticised for using the WC as a practising tournament for Jokerit.

The following year and WC had some pretty good work by the refs as well Komarov got 5+20 for kneeing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDZPevYSrhc

There were questionable calls between Finland and the Czechs in 2015 QF (goal disallowed included) but Finland played horrible defense that game and probably did not deserve to go further in that tournament.

 

[Yakushev72]

The Canadian excuse for 1972 is generally split between lack of preparation and lack of Orr/Hull. The complaints regarding referees are generally only mentioned in two of the eight games. I don't understand what the point of this is though. That the refs in the Summit Series were not as good as NHL refs? Probably true.



Oh yes, I believe that you believe that the refereeing was fine. There is no doubt in my mind of that.



Quite possibly. Poor refereeing is common in IIHF tournaments (WJC has been better in recent years, in my opinion) and though I didn't see that game it's probably true that the refereeing was bad. Your claims about the nationality of the referees miss the point quite humourously. The point regarding the referees is that he NHL refs do their job better than the IIHF refs do, even in games involving their own countries. That two referees (Canadian and American) did a bad job in a game featuring Russia and Finland demonstrates the low level of refereeing as opposed to bias - which is the point I was making all along. Thanks for the help I guess.



Finns - please stop complaining about this relatively meaningless game non-stop. Yakushev72 can apparently see non-stop threads on this topic from the last 22 months that I can't, and it really does need to stop.

You keep repeating the Canadian-ism that IIHF (usually intended as a synonym for European) refereeing is bad, and NHL refereeing is good. There is no grounds for it. There is no measurement for it, other than anecdotal references to individual calls. What is a great referee? What is a bad referee? It's just refereeing. It's not really a complicated job, so the idea that refereeing is bad or good seems crazy!

 

[JackSlater]

You keep repeating the Canadian-ism that IIHF (usually intended as a synonym for European) refereeing is bad, and NHL refereeing is good. There is no grounds for it. There is no measurement for it, other than anecdotal references to individual calls. What is a great referee? What is a bad referee? It's just refereeing. It's not really a complicated job, so the idea that refereeing is bad or good seems crazy!

So to summarize - all refereeing is equal. Qualitative evidence is to be ignored. Good to know. Not as interesting as your theory that players do not improve from their late teens on, but interesting nonetheless.

 

[Yakushev72]

So to summarize - all refereeing is equal. Qualitative evidence is to be ignored. Good to know. Not as interesting as your theory that players do not improve from their late teens on, but interesting nonetheless.

Now you're reduced to putting words in my mouth to try to sidestep the issue. Of course, I never said that players do not improve in their late teens, only that massive improvements over a single year are rare and anecdotal.

Yeah, I think that refereeing is more or less all the same, at least at comparable levels of organization (e.g., KHL to NHL). The one intelligent argument that I heard was that back in the '70's, amateur referees were by and large poorer skaters than their NHL counterparts due to the speed of the NHL game. Those differences don't exist any more, so other league referees are probably exactly the same quality as those of the NHL.

 

[JackSlater]

Now you're reduced to putting words in my mouth to try to sidestep the issue. Of course, I never said that players do not improve in their late teens, only that massive improvements over a single year are rare and anecdotal.

Yeah, I think that refereeing is more or less all the same, at least at comparable levels of organization (e.g., KHL to NHL). The one intelligent argument that I heard was that back in the '70's, amateur referees were by and large poorer skaters than their NHL counterparts due to the speed of the NHL game. Those differences don't exist any more, so other league referees are probably exactly the same quality as those of the NHL.

Yes, your argument regarding the teenagers is still quite funny even as you try to backpedal from in by changing terms. With regard to this topic though, there is ample evidence from this tournament yearly that there is a refereeing disparity. Nearly every year we see many legitimate complaints about the quality of refereeing, mainly due to inconsistencies. Ignore it if you wish, but it's obvious to anyone watching that IIHF refereeing is below the standard that the NHL refs at the Olympics have shown.

 

[Booster*]

There is a huge difference between bad refs and bias ones.

In this final the riefs were bribed, you could see putin sitting in the VIP-box next to his belarussian president buddy, overviewing and making sure the refs folllowed the directives they were given. Since Finland knocked them out of olympics they needed a win.

It was a travesty and a very bad sign showing political corruption reached as far as major international sport events.

Very sad, i hope we wont see more of that in in the future and that any bad calls in the future will be just coz of incompetence.

 

[Yakushev72]

Yes, your argument regarding the teenagers is still quite funny even as you try to backpedal from in by changing terms. With regard to this topic though, there is ample evidence from this tournament yearly that there is a refereeing disparity. Nearly every year we see many legitimate complaints about the quality of refereeing, mainly due to inconsistencies. Ignore it if you wish, but it's obvious to anyone watching that IIHF refereeing is below the standard that the NHL refs at the Olympics have shown.

You say my argument that radical improvements over a 1-year span, such as the development of major new physical talents or the development of radically new skill levels, is not both rare and anecdotal, but you never seem to offer any real life examples that would rebut my argument. Instead, you take the easy way out by saying that my argument is "quite funny."

In the past, you have mainly seemed to justify your position by saying something like "last year, he was average in the WJC, but this year, he is making a major contribution to his NHL team." In fact, unlike any other pro sports league in the World, it has always been extremely common for NHL teams to rely on 18- and 19-year olds to not only be leaders on the team, but make major contributions leading to a Stanley Cup championship. No other pro sports league relies on babies to lead their teams, but it is necessary for the NHL to do so because of the chronic lack of sufficient talent to staff out 30 rosters. Now they want to expand to 32 teams. They have fully plumbed Europe - where will they go to find decent players?

Its a ridiculous premise to suggest that it is justified for native citizens of a country to referee a game in which their home flag is flying because of some undocumented, unsubstantiated claim that they are better "qualified," and should therefore override fair competition principles. There were plenty of complaints by Russian fans that refereeing by an American stole away their chance to advance to the semifinals in the game vs. USA in Sochi, and I never heard a single journalist proclaim "that was the best job of calling offsides I've ever witnessed with these eyes."

 

[illone84]

Close this thread. Reading about the exact same bull that was posted 22 months ago

 

[JackSlater]

You say my argument that radical improvements over a 1-year span, such as the development of major new physical talents or the development of radically new skill levels, is not both rare and anecdotal, but you never seem to offer any real life examples that would rebut my argument. Instead, you take the easy way out by saying that my argument is "quite funny."

In the past, you have mainly seemed to justify your position by saying something like "last year, he was average in the WJC, but this year, he is making a major contribution to his NHL team." In fact, unlike any other pro sports league in the World, it has always been extremely common for NHL teams to rely on 18- and 19-year olds to not only be leaders on the team, but make major contributions leading to a Stanley Cup championship. No other pro sports league relies on babies to lead their teams, but it is necessary for the NHL to do so because of the chronic lack of sufficient talent to staff out 30 rosters. Now they want to expand to 32 teams. They have fully plumbed Europe - where will they go to find decent players?

It's a topic to go into greater depth on in another thread, but it's obvious that players very often make substantial improvements from year to year during the infancy of their professional careers. To debate that is a losing proposition.

Its a ridiculous premise to suggest that it is justified for native citizens of a country to referee a game in which their home flag is flying because of some undocumented, unsubstantiated claim that they are better "qualified," and should therefore override fair competition principles. There were plenty of complaints by Russian fans that refereeing by an American stole away their chance to advance to the semifinals in the game vs. USA in Sochi, and I never heard a single journalist proclaim "that was the best job of calling offsides I've ever witnessed with these eyes."

As has been explained numerous times, we can look at the games themselves rather than speculating on what might happen due to perceptions of bias. In the games that have actually been played at the Olympics, bias has not shown itself to be an issue, yes even when NHL refs have worked games featuring their own country. We don't need to speculate when the games are there.

As for the complaints of those Russian fans, I don't know why I need to explain this to you yet again. Either you willfully ignore it or refuse to process it, but here we go - those complaints are irrelevant. Complaints do not matter - actions do. First off, the ref made the call according to the IIHF's rule. If the rule a good one? I don't know, but that isn't the ref's decision. Second, and more relevant here - Brad Meier is a Canadian referee sent to the Olympics by Hockey Canada. This has been explained before though, and if fans were able or willing to do even the tiniest amount of research they would have realized this.