Report: NHL suspended referee Tim Peel 1 game following Puck Daddy pic/interview

[BoltSTH]

Unfortunately Bolts-Blues have him tonight.

Over and under for hooking calls is baselined at 6

 

[Random Forest]

Have you ever officiated a game? Part of the reason they will let the borderline hook go in OT is because they do not want a borderline call to decide a game.

Furthermore, there's a psychological component to it, too. If you're a ref and you see something out of the corner of your eye, but you're not sure, do you make the call?

Well, the obvious answer is: it depends. What are the stakes? Regular season game? Is it tied? Are they going to OT? Playoffs? Game seven? The higher they are, the less likely you are to make the call. If you miss a call, nothing happens and the two teams maintain their respective likelihoods of winning the game. If you make a call and it's wrong, it could potentially decide everything.

It's in a ref's best interest to let borderline plays go the higher the stakes are. That will never change.

 

[patnyrnyg]

Furthermore, there's a psychological component to it, too. If you're a ref and you see something out of the corner of your eye, but you're not sure, do you make the call?

Well, the obvious answer is: it depends. What are the stakes? Regular season game? Is it tied? Are they going to OT? Playoffs? Game seven? The higher they are, the less likely you are to make the call. If you miss a call, nothing happens and the two teams maintain their respective likelihoods of winning the game. If you make a call and it's wrong, it could potentially decide everything.

It's in a ref's best interest to let borderline plays go the higher the stakes are. That will never change.

Very true. In football, you are taught to make a call ONLY if you see the whole play. So, out of the corner of my eye, 95% of the time I won't call it.

 

[SenzZen]

Couldn't have happened to a better guy. Peel is incompetent at best and likely doing the game a favor by missing a night. My favorite Tim Peel blunder of all time. Fast forward to 21 seconds



We threw so much crap on the ice that night.

Umm... am I the only one seeing that the puck was deflected by the shaft of Smith's stick? After he let it go?

 

[Sinistril]

Umm... am I the only one seeing that the puck was deflected by the shaft of Smith's stick? After he let it go?

I saw it too.

 

[Nynja*]

Have you ever officiated a game? Part of the reason they will let the borderline hook go in OT is because they do not want a borderline call to decide a game.

And what if that borderline hook that gets called 5 minutes into the game winds up turning into a PPG, and being the only goal scored in a 1-0 loss?

The game was decided on a borderline call. Yes, you can argue the other team sucked by not scoring any goals throughout 60 minutes, and I will argue that a team got the lead over a BS penalty.

What if that penalty is called at the end of the second, and the other team scores to give a lead 3-2 going into the third?


And yes, your umping story falls under the bolded part here:

A hook should be a hook whether its 2 minutes into the game or 30 seconds to go or overtime. There shouldnt be subjectivity on calls like this, its either a hook, or its not, the time or score shouldnt dictate anything.

Now, the subjectivity of a heavy, but legal, hit in a 4-0 beatdown is open to interpretation. Yes, it might be a legal hit, but it can be argued that theres no reason to lay down the body when the game is out of hand as that will cause tempers to flare, which is what the officials have to manage.

You cant compare laying the body down in a game thats essentially out of reach to a hooking penalty near the end of a close game.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

And what if that borderline hook that gets called 5 minutes into the game winds up turning into a PPG, and being the only goal scored in a 1-0 loss?

The game was decided on a borderline call. Yes, you can argue the other team sucked by not scoring any goals throughout 60 minutes, and I will argue that a team got the lead over a BS penalty.

What if that penalty is called at the end of the second, and the other team scores to give a lead 3-2 going into the third?


And yes, your umping story falls under the bolded part here:


You cant compare laying the body down in a game thats essentially out of reach to a hooking penalty near the end of a close game.

Spoken by someone who has never officiated....ever.

 

[MarkGio]

Couldn't have happened to a better guy. Peel is incompetent at best and likely doing the game a favor by missing a night. My favorite Tim Peel blunder of all time. Fast forward to 21 seconds



We threw so much crap on the ice that night.

This is why Refs have it bad. You, and that entire arena, made the wrong call; the ref made the right one.

Very few people can respectfully perform that job, but everyone's a critic. Its like people who can't play goalie on EASHL but often criticizes them.

 

[yada]

Personally peel is one of my favorite refs in the league. He makes bad calls and there are better refs but peels attitude and effort make up for his bad calls. I dont like lazy officials or poor attitudes.

 

[sepHF]

ridiculous decision

 

[frivolousz21]

It's nice to be officially told we are watching WWENHL.

 

[frivolousz21]

Furthermore, there's a psychological component to it, too. If you're a ref and you see something out of the corner of your eye, but you're not sure, do you make the call?

Well, the obvious answer is: it depends. What are the stakes? Regular season game? Is it tied? Are they going to OT? Playoffs? Game seven? The higher they are, the less likely you are to make the call. If you miss a call, nothing happens and the two teams maintain their respective likelihoods of winning the game. If you make a call and it's wrong, it could potentially decide everything.

It's in a ref's best interest to let borderline plays go the higher the stakes are. That will never change.

Wrong.

This thread is garage league 101

 

[Random Forest]

Wrong.

This thread is garage league 101

You can pretend like you'd make the right call every time, but that would be ridiculous. If there's a borderline play with a minute to go in a tie game, and you're not sure if you saw a penalty or not, you're most certainly not going to make the call.

Letting the teams remain 5v5 (even if you're wrong) is better for you, the ref, than making the call and being wrong and putting one team at risk of losing the game directly because of it.

 

[frivolousz21]

You can pretend like you'd make the right call every time, but that would be ridiculous. If there's a borderline play with a minute to go in a tie game, and you're not sure if you saw a penalty or not, you're most certainly not going to make the call.

Letting the teams remain 5v5 (even if you're wrong) is better for you, the ref, than making the call and being wrong and putting one team at risk of losing the game directly because of it.

You call the game exactly the same regardless of situation.

If somehow this makes the game so called unmanageable then you change the rules to make it work.

Anything else kills the integrity of the competition.

This isn't disputable.

The subjectiveness is already absurd compared to competitive video games.

Allowing refs to fabricate the outcome of the game in any manner and calling it game management makes it that much worse.

 

[Random Forest]

You call the game exactly the same regardless of situation.

If somehow this makes the game so called unmanageable then you change the rules to make it work.

Anything else kills the integrity of the competition.

This isn't disputable.

The subjectiveness is already absurd compared to competitive video games.

Allowing refs to fabricate the outcome of the game in any manner and calling it game management makes it that much worse.

Again, you're acting like it's black and white all the time.

If a ref is unsure of a call (in other words, he thinks he saw one, but he's not quite positive), he is MUCH more likely to blow play dead and call a penalty if there's nothing on the line (ie, beginning of the game) than if the stakes are higher (ie, OT or playoffs).

This goes beyond NHL Office mandates. This is human psychology. A referee will ignore a call in a high-stakes situation if he's unsure because it's MUCH more beneficial for him to not make the call and be wrong than it is to put a team a man down and be wrong. In the former scenario, both teams still control their fate equally. In the latter scenario, he's giving one team more control over their fate than the other.



Yes, lots of times calls are black and white, and refs see it explicitly and make bad judgments. But a very significant portion of the time, refs are forced to make inferences. For example, two players are tangled behind the play, and one goes down, but the ref couldn't see what actually tripped him up. Does he make the call? You bet your ass it depends on the time of the game. He won't make that call in overtime, but he may do so in the first period. And for good reason. Inferences are a big part of a ref's job. Don't forget that. Not everything is served up in front of his two eyes in obvious fashion.

 

[The Macho King]

Suspend him for the roughing call on Hedman when Hedman literally touched no one.

Edit: Note, not *****ing about the reffing tonight in general - it was bad both ways, but that was the biggest headscratcher I've ever seen.

 

[IdealisticSniper]

This is why Refs have it bad. You, and that entire arena, made the wrong call; the ref made the right one.

Very few people can respectfully perform that job, but everyone's a critic. Its like people who can't play goalie on EASHL but often criticizes them.

Uh except it wasn't the right call. It was completely wrong. It's very clear the stick wasn't thrown. It was dropped so smith could make the blocker save. So no, we weren't wrong, Peel was wrong. As always.

 

[MarkGio]

Uh except it wasn't the right call. It was completely wrong. It's very clear the stick wasn't thrown. It was dropped so smith could make the blocker save. So no, we weren't wrong, Peel was wrong. As always.

Oh I get it. He winds up and "drops" it towards the puck.

 

[IdealisticSniper]

Oh I get it. He winds up and "drops" it towards the puck.

Considering it dropped straight down and the puck was saved off his blocker. He was gonna go for the poke check, the Avs player made the move and in desperation he clearly drops it Hasek style to get his blocker over faster to make the save. Hence why it drops straight down and isnt flung out towards the Avs player.

I dont know how anyone with working eyeballs cant see that. Especially on the third view from the back side of the goal.

 

[MarkGio]

Considering it dropped straight down and the puck was saved off his blocker. He was gonna go for the poke check, the Avs player made the move and in desperation he clearly drops it Hasek style to get his blocker over faster to make the save. Hence why it drops straight down and isnt flung out towards the Avs player.

I dont know how anyone with working eyeballs cant see that. Especially on the third view from the back side of the goal.

He was gonna fling his stick out and make the save, but missed, so in desperation he's tries again but this time lets it go.

Evidence: the stick leaves his hand and winds up nearly 15 ft away in the shot direction.