THETRIOUXPER Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I noticed where a crew of officials got a one game suspension handed down to them for a questionable call they made in an ACC basketball game. I realize it is not hockey. I only bring it up because it is nice to see these guys having to account for the call they made/didn't make. It would be nice to see this kind of accountability for our officials. I know this is a tired argument and I'm just dreaming that things like this could happen to some of the bumbling idiots we call officials, just wanted to see what everyone else thinks. Not that it matters but the game was Duke vs Florida State, sorry if this has been brought up elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yttrium Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 The Super Bowl & It's Pro-Pittsburgh Style: I felt the officiating last night in the Super Bowl was horrific. You could definitely tell who wanted the Steelers to win the 5th ring. I will # my complaints: #1: The call on the pass interference in the endzone was the absolute worse call I've ever seen in an NFL game which called back a touchdown against Seattle. #2: The 1st Pittsburgh TD wasn't even a TD. The ball is clearly in Rothlisberger's midsection when he hit the goal line. Rather then 4th and 1 a TD and who knows if they would even had scored. That play turned the game around. #3: Seattle scored another TD in the 4th when the WR caught the ball came down inbounds w/ one foot and the other foot kicked the endzone marker (the officials gave Michael Vick a TD on MNF this year). #4: With Seattle driving near to goal line a WR caught the ball at the 2 yard line and they ruled a "phantom" holding penalty where the announcers even said a bad call. Next play an interception where Pittsburgh scored again to make it 21-10. Here's the point totals: #1 - Would have given Seattle a 7-0 lead rather then 3-0 #2 - Who knows but Pitt maybe doesn't even score to keep Seattle ahead 7-0 #3 - Seattle would have been ahead 17-7 with this TD that wasn't called #4 - Another 3 or 7 points would have been scored w/ the ball inside the 5 perhaps Seattle 24-14 Yes, the crew had it out for Seattle. First time entries into the Super Bowl vs. Pittsburgh 7th or 8th. Plus Lord knows how many billions of $ were riding on Pitt winning by 5 or 6 to cover the spread. Pretty shady if you ask me. I know this doesn't pertain to Sioux Hockey but it's controversial like everything else on here. Let me know fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THETRIOUXPER Posted February 6, 2006 Author Share Posted February 6, 2006 My point was, if they can do it in BBall, why not all sports. One call that sticks out in my mind was the CFB Stafford got earlier in the year, lame, lame, lame. Now last weekend in Colorado the actually used some discretion and only handed out 2 minute minors when necessary, not counting Jonsies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frontroguy Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 The Super Bowl & It's Pro-Pittsburgh Style: I felt the officiating last night in the Super Bowl was horrific. You could definitely tell who wanted the Steelers to win the 5th ring. I will # my complaints: #1: The call on the pass interference in the endzone was the absolute worse call I've ever seen in an NFL game which called back a touchdown against Seattle. #2: The 1st Pittsburgh TD wasn't even a TD. The ball is clearly in Rothlisberger's midsection when he hit the goal line. Rather then 4th and 1 a TD and who knows if they would even had scored. That play turned the game around. #3: Seattle scored another TD in the 4th when the WR caught the ball came down inbounds w/ one foot and the other foot kicked the endzone marker (the officials gave Michael Vick a TD on MNF this year). #4: With Seattle driving near to goal line a WR caught the ball at the 2 yard line and they ruled a "phantom" holding penalty where the announcers even said a bad call. Next play an interception where Pittsburgh scored again to make it 21-10. Here's the point totals: #1 - Would have given Seattle a 7-0 lead rather then 3-0 #2 - Who knows but Pitt maybe doesn't even score to keep Seattle ahead 7-0 #3 - Seattle would have been ahead 17-7 with this TD that wasn't called #4 - Another 3 or 7 points would have been scored w/ the ball inside the 5 perhaps Seattle 24-14 Yes, the crew had it out for Seattle. First time entries into the Super Bowl vs. Pittsburgh 7th or 8th. Plus Lord knows how many billions of $ were riding on Pitt winning by 5 or 6 to cover the spread. Pretty shady if you ask me. I know this doesn't pertain to Sioux Hockey but it's controversial like everything else on here. Let me know fans. The pass interference was a jickyjack call, but the Rothlisberger TD did not bother me. Official called in on the field (albeit belatedly) and I did not think there was enough to overturn it. 3 I thought it was out of bounds 4 was a horrible call. I only hope they had the wrong # becuase the guy they called it on was not holding. All in all, it was better than the Pitt Indy game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yttrium Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 They were downright horrible calls. Presumption on Ben's TD but still shady. The officials totally determined the outcome of this game. Did the better team win. NO WAY. Seattle played solid, net great. Good enough to win though. I've never blamed on official on any game I've played in or coached but this one was pathetic. The MVP's should have the officiating crew from Super Bowl XL for Pittsburgh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THETRIOUXPER Posted February 6, 2006 Author Share Posted February 6, 2006 Are you by chance a Seattle fan there tittium ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yttrium Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Yes Area 51, I'm the scoop of the midwest. Of course I love the Seahawks .. they were the underdogs. How's the ribs doing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THETRIOUXPER Posted February 6, 2006 Author Share Posted February 6, 2006 Yes Area 51, I'm the scoop of the midwest. Of course I love the Seahawks .. they were the underdogs. How's the ribs doing? There ya go, pick on me cause your team sucks, maybe if you didn't have so many beers in you, these calls would have been more clear. Better luck next time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Ok a few things: 1. I love the underdogs, so I was rooting for Seattle too. 2. What? A thread about officiating? YOu HAVE to expect me to chime in sooner or later. Yes, there is an accountability program in the WCHA for officials. It has shown up, but VERY rarely do the fans notice it. Every now and again, an official would run Friday night but do so horribly, that another official would replace him for the Saturday night game. This is rare, though. Don Adam recieved a 1 month suspension after the DU/UND tilt. Regardless of why he only got a month if he even got a suspension at all is all conjecture, but there is an accountability program in the WCHA. The program, IMO, seems far too "buddy buddy" than I'd like, but that's how things go. Stupid/bad calls are a reality in the league, which is why I (as critical of the officials as I am) don't expect perfection every game. I DO expect consistency though. Perfection is impossible to obtain. Consistency is difficult, but VERY possible. One thing I noticed is how in the NBA and NFL, when a bad call is made, more often than not the league office will admit that the call(s) in question were not properly made and apologized for the disgrace. No such thing in the WCHA. I feel it gives off an aura of arrogance that the horrible calls that are sometimes called aren't horrible at all regardless what is thought by everyone else, including on those occasions where the team that benefitted acknowledged that the call was sketchy at best. I understand that Greg Shepherd can't come down hard on all of the officials. Officials that are good enough and qualifed enough to perform in DI hockey are hard to find. They are also hard to adequately pay, which makes attracting that kind of official difficult. However, Greg Shepherd has done little to nothing about fixing problems that everyone except for him knows exist. The best example is the NCAA crackdown on obstruction. While it runs rampant in the WCHA, Greg issues a statement stating how the WCHA hasn't really had to call that many because it doesn't exist. When he said that, I wondered if he truly was at the games they said he was in attendance for. Obstruction is still a problem. With the failure, year after year, to improve official consistency, address NCAA mandated problems and the problems as expressed by the fans, players, and coaches/administrative types within the WCHA, I've come to the conclusion that the solution to the problem isn't to fire all of the officials, but to fire the administrator and get someone in there who isn't ignorant of the problems of the league. Therefore, Greg Shepherd should not have been hired full time with the WCHA. He should have been either asked to resign/retire, or fired. By the way, if you want to know what obstruction-free hockey looks like, tune into the NHL. If the NHL can do it, why the hell can't we? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THETRIOUXPER Posted February 6, 2006 Author Share Posted February 6, 2006 I promise, I wasn't trying to bait you there Redwing. I just saw the article and thought to myself, if Big Time college BBall can hold there officials accountable for a horse$hit call, why can't they do it for hockey ? I could give several legit examples of different incidents that would have caused an official a game suspension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 I promise, I wasn't trying to bait you there Redwing. I just saw the article and thought to myself, if Big Time college BBall can hold there officials accountable for a horse$hit call, why can't they do it for hockey ? I could give several legit examples of different incidents that would have caused an official a game suspension. "Buddy buddy" accountability. In DI basketball and DI football (sticking to DI sports), there is much more on the line. Many more fans watching the games, expecting the quality all around to be the best, from the players and coaches, to the lowly ticket tearer and every point in between, including officials. DI hockey doesn't have that atmosphere. Without the "fear" of the public wrath over quality of officiating that is seen in DI bball and football, DI hockey will always be a site for substandard officiating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A.B.T.G. Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 From the 17th row at Ford Field (as a non-partisan fan) I will tell you that it was clear to most, if not all, in attendance that I was sitting near saw this as a game in which officials were way to involved in the outcome. From the offensive interference to the holing call late in the 4th quarter and several other very questionable calls (all of which were against the Seahawks) led me to believe the NFL wanted The Bus to be the storyline and it was very clear that is what the ref's were doing their best to accomplish that task. By the way most of the Steelers fans I came across were some of the most obnoxious and classless bunch of knuckleheads....I almost thought they were Gopher fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxdonyms Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 the holing call I hate those darn holing calls! Can't the field crew get rid of the holes!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxtatoo42 Posted February 7, 2006 Share Posted February 7, 2006 The Super Bowl & It's Pro-Pittsburgh Style: #3: Seattle scored another TD in the 4th when the WR caught the ball came down inbounds w/ one foot and the other foot kicked the endzone marker (the officials gave Michael Vick a TD on MNF this year). the reason vick got the touchdown was he had established possession of the ball inbounds. they ruled that since he touched the pilon in the air without any part of his body touching the ground out of bounds, it's a touchdown, it's the same as if he was a wide reciever in the air (after possession inbounds) and touching his toe to the goal line on his way out of bounds, as long as the ball is past the goal line is the key. the reason it was ruled incomplete is because he only got one foot down inbounds and did not establish possession, had he gotten his second foot down and then kicked the pilon with the rest of his body out of bounds (albeit in the air), as long as the ball was past the goal line, it would have been ruled a TD. I agree with the rest of your beefs, but this one the zebra asses actually got right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxguyinstpaul Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 the reason vick got the touchdown was he had established possession of the ball inbounds. they ruled that since he touched the pilon in the air without any part of his body touching the ground out of bounds, it's a touchdown, it's the same as if he was a wide reciever in the air (after possession inbounds) and touching his toe to the goal line on his way out of bounds, as long as the ball is past the goal line is the key. the reason it was ruled incomplete is because he only got one foot down inbounds and did not establish possession, had he gotten his second foot down and then kicked the pilon with the rest of his body out of bounds (albeit in the air), as long as the ball was past the goal line, it would have been ruled a TD. I agree with the rest of your beefs, but this one the zebra asses actually got right. good explenation of the rule Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.