Olympic Hockey Refereeing: Part II (mod warning post #190)

[B Boarding]

Thought the game was well reffed and I expected it to be. To blame this loss on the refs would be entirely ignorant, they did about as good a job as you can do considering the circumstances imo. Yes there were 3 Canadian refs but the IIHF elected them and the teams agreed upon them. They weren't why Sweden lost. I'd blame injuries more than anything.

Who is blaming it on the refs?

 

[Davebo*]

european posters simply refuse to answer the question why are european referees so bad they refuse to discuss it

Because Canada - that's why! Apparently we own the IIHF? That's why we;ve had one world championship in Canada in like a 100 years!

 

[FanHabtic*]

I thought Sweden was clutch and grabbing all game. And the hit on Kunitz could have been a double minor. Now i'm fired up!!!

 

[B Boarding]

You're the one perpetuating the alleged controversy. If you were fine with going with the best refs available, and not claiming that they might rig it, then there would be no controversy. It's not the IIHF causing a controversy. It's you

What Sur-Martin suggests is the principle of all other international sports. International hockey is the EXCEPTION here.

 

[jp7]

Who is blaming it on the refs?

Nobody that I've seen. Didn't say anyone did. Simply added that to blame it on the refs would be ignorant, because there was a massive discussion about the referees beforehand but they had a stellar showing imo.

 

[SurMartin]

Exactly. (And no we aren't blaming our loss on anything. Canada was better.)

Everyone should read this before they post:

The refs did an excellent job, as expected. But that’s STILL BESIDE THE POINT. NO ONE could have GUARANTEED before the game that the chosen refs wouldn’t be biased. That is the point, not how it played out afterwards. The refs should’ve been disqualified because of their nationality, to exclude a very basic reason to potential partial judgement. The reason for this is to keep the sport free of corruption, as a pre emptive action. Of course the best refs in the world should play, but just not the games where their own nation is playing. By doing this you open up an OPPORTUNITY for corruption. No, I know corruption is not very likely at all, but that is also beside the point. The point is to EXCLUDE any opportunities for corruption and non-fair play.
It’s the same basic and very logical principle as for courts in all civilized countries, where a judge can’t have ANY ties what so ever to any of the two parts, just to avoid ANY suspicions of being biased. You just don’t go with the best judge if he’s got ties with either of the parts. That’s when you become a banana republic.

What I’m trying to say here is that international hockey, like ALL OTHER INTERNATIONAL SPORTS, need to implement pre emptive action for trying to guarantee 100% chance of fair play, and not to go with what VERY LIKELY would be ok and hope that it plays out OK afterwards. I need to repeat this over and over again: What was happening here is the EXCEPTION to all principles for international sports! And it makes IIHF, the national federations and international hockey look unprofessional.

OT: Best team won. Canada probably iced the best team all-time. Very impressive!

If a controversial call had occured, swedes might have blamed refs for being biased or canadians might have blamed the refs for favoring sweden because they were trying to be impartial. It would have been highly unneccessary when we had american NHL-refs and KHL-refs standing by who were just as good.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

3 canadian referees in the final and now this? Smells fishy.

3 refs and linesmen selected by the IIHF, and agreed to by Sweden, Canada, the US, and Finland.

 

[Ace Rothstein]

What Sur-Martin suggests is the principle of all other international sports. International hockey is the EXCEPTION here.

And it has proven to not be an issue over 5 different Olympic tournaments.

 

[HABS win CUPS*]

Because Canada - that's why! Apparently we own the IIHF? That's why we;ve had one world championship in Canada in like a 100 years!

my favourite line from the other thread was the refs would throw us this game to become national heros

[mod]

 

[jp7]

my favourite line from the other thread was the refs would throw us this game to become national heros

[mod]

I wouldn't generalize Sweden because they're mostly beauties when not competing for a gold against us, but when I read his comment I just imagined a ref being hoisted up on a chair by a massive crowd of Canadians celebrating his glorious heroic biased game winning calls People don't realize how hard Canadians would despise a ref for ruining the legitimacy of a gold medal game

 

[sandysan]

3 refs and linesmen selected by the IIHF, and agreed to by Sweden, Canada, the US, and Finland.

But they didn't vote for Dick pound, our ace in the hole!

 

[B Boarding]

And it has proven to not be an issue over 5 different Olympic tournaments.

No, but it still doesn't make it right. Who knows if it won't be an issue in the next Olympics? International hockey shouldn't be different than any other international sport. It raises unnecessary concerns.

 

[Ace Rothstein]

No, but it still doesn't make it right. Who knows if it won't be an issue in the next Olympics? International hockey shouldn't be different than any other international sport. It raises unnecessary concerns.

Using second rate refs like FIFA does is a much greater concern.

 

[B Boarding]

Using second rate refs like FIFA does is a much greater concern.

At least there wouldn't be any concerns about the refs being biased. The rational solution would have been to have American NHL refs in a game between Canada and Sweden to not raise concerns.

 

[jp7]

At least there wouldn't be any concerns about the refs being biased. The rational solution would have been to have American NHL refs in a game between Canada and Sweden to not raise concerns.

It would be rational, most people would agree, but most people aren't the heads of hockey in various countries that supported it. In the end, luckily, everything worked out and we had a fair game.

 

[JetsFlyHigh]

No, but it still doesn't make it right. Who knows if it won't be an issue in the next Olympics? International hockey shouldn't be different than any other international sport. It raises unnecessary concerns.

Yes, but the way the Swedish newspaper acted was by the philosophy of guilty until proven innocent, if that's the case, then how do you ensure that an American ref would not be biased against a Finland vs Austria game? Who knows he might have a Austrian best friend who's a huge hockey fan, ridiculous right? That's how ridiculous these allegations were. This is why these international sports DOES NOT guarantee that reffing would not be biased either way. All these fluff is just PRESUMPTION. It's like dining in a five star restaurant, you're suppose to trust that the food will be great, but instead you question the chef and the process of how they make the dishes because you think that the food worse than your school cafeteria's.

 

[B Boarding]

It would be rational, most people would agree, but most people aren't the heads of hockey in various countries that supported it. In the end, luckily, everything worked out and we had a fair game.

No they aren't. And it's a concern for the status of international hockey if it's run like a bush league.
Yes, it worked out this time and it probably will next time as well. It's just that a professional sport must erase the "probably"s and the "luckily"'s to be taken seriously.

 

[Leo Getz]

Yes, and this is an as equally important reason why a neutral ref should be selected.

Even though I'm confident that the ref won't affect the end result in today's game I have a hard time understanding why even take the risk.

There are actually studies (use google if you doubt me) that statistically indicates biased refereeing in European football/soccer i.e. that home teams (and big football teams) get fewer yellow cards and more free kicks etc.

I doubt there are studies on bias in refereeing your own country's team in an international game simply because that situation would never occur.

Can you please provide a link to how football/soccer refereeing correlates to hockey?

 

[Leo Getz]

I also like how "luckily" things worked out like everyone outside of Sweden knew it would.. that Canadian refs would play no role in the outcome.

 

[jp7]

No they aren't. And it's a concern for the status of international hockey if it's run like a bush league.
Yes, it worked out this time and it probably will next time as well. It's just that a professional sport must erase the "probably"s and the "luckily"'s to be taken seriously.

I don't disagree about removing unnecessary speculation, but since the NHL basically gave the IIHF the what for in terms of using NHL referees it was bound to be mostly North Americans since there simply isn't a high quantity of European refs in the NHL, right or wrong (and a lot of the countries agreed upon it, having been used to the tendancies of NHL refs). I doubt we see a similar situation in South Korea when the amateurs are playing and there is no stipulation to use NHL refs, I'd think it would be more diversified

 

[Ace Rothstein]

No they aren't. And it's a concern for the status of international hockey if it's run like a bush league.
Yes, it worked out this time and it probably will next time as well. It's just that a professional sport must erase the "probably"s and the "luckily"'s to be taken seriously.

And using second rate refs would be bush league.

 

[KMart27]

We didn't want any controversy to be possible, that is not being a bad loser.
Bashing the loser is being a bad winner. [mod]

NO.
Because we did not want a ref from Canada or Sweden as it could make a call at the end of the game become controversial.

It did not happen, we should be happy about that. Go and celebrate, don't try to start a flamewar.

A call late in the game having an impact on the outcome would have been controversial even if the ref wasn't from Canada or Sweden.

The refs did an excellent job, as expected. But that’s STILL BESIDE THE POINT. NO ONE could have GUARANTEED before the game that the chosen refs wouldn’t be biased. That is the point, not how it played out afterwards. The refs should’ve been disqualified because of their nationality, to exclude a very basic reason to potential partial judgement. The reason for this is to keep the sport free of corruption, as a pre emptive action. Of course the best refs in the world should play, but just not the games where their own nation is playing. By doing this you open up an OPPORTUNITY for corruption. No, I know corruption is not very likely at all, but that is also beside the point. The point is to EXCLUDE any opportunities for corruption and non-fair play.
It’s the same basic and very logical principle as for courts in all civilized countries, where a judge can’t have ANY ties what so ever to any of the two parts, just to avoid ANY suspicions of being biased. You just don’t go with the best judge if he’s got ties with either of the parts. That’s when you become a banana republic.

What I’m trying to say here is that international hockey, like ALL OTHER INTERNATIONAL SPORTS, need to implement pre emptive action for trying to guarantee 100% chance of fair play, and not to go with what VERY LIKELY would be ok and hope that it plays out OK afterwards. I need to repeat this over and over again: What was happening here is the EXCEPTION to all principles for international sports! And it makes IIHF, the national federations and international hockey look unprofessional.
OT: Best team won. Canada probably iced the best team all-time. Very impressive!

How can you guarantee that refs from neutral countries wouldn't be biased?

I would say it makes the IIHF look more professional than other international sports because they can actually trust the refs. I think not using the best refs available would be an issue and it suggests that these other leagues view their refs as unprofessional.

 

[matsqq]

How can you guarantee that refs from neutral countries wouldn't be biased?

Well, the answer to this is:
You can't guarantee it, you can NEVER guarantee it .
Just like when you have a judge and jury who aren't parts in the case there could still be bias ...
But guess what (*shock*) :
It's less likely !

 

[wereq]

Well, anybody using argument that best refs are in NHL care to define "BEST REF". I am pretty sure, it's impossible to define.

 

[B Boarding]

A call late in the game having an impact on the outcome would have been controversial even if the ref wasn't from Canada or Sweden.



How can you guarantee that refs from neutral countries wouldn't be biased?

I would say it makes the IIHF look more professional than other international sports because they can actually trust the refs. I think not using the best refs available would be an issue and it suggests that these other leagues view their refs as unprofessional.

Nobody can, but it's more likely. That's why they have removed that possibility in every other international sport.
Let me explain this in a more simple way. You (let's call you mr A) live in a small town and end up in court against mr B. The best judge in town is mr C and everybody knows it. The problem is that he is related to mr B. Do you think the court would allow mr C to be the judge? Would you be ok with it?