New year, tons of firepower, still cant score.

[TrueBlueGED]

When it's called evenly I don't care. And I only complain about the refs when they deserve it. It's been a while with the Bills.

I was referring to the implications of the "seeing what you want to see" comment. Alas, much to my disappointment, Freeman has shown great restraint on this day.

[SwampD]

I was referring to the implications of the "seeing what you want to see" comment. Alas, much to my disappointment, Freeman has shown great restraint on this day.

Believe me, I'd rather not see it. And after this past week, is this really the right time to pledge blind allegiance to the integrity of NFL officiating ?

[X. Benedict]

I thought the isles Sabres was an evenly called game. A lot of stuff they let go behind the play, some stuff an both sides were missed, but a well called game is really one where the players dictate the result. That was true.

[nfreeman]

I thought the isles Sabres was an evenly called game. A lot of stuff they let go behind the play, some stuff an both sides were missed, but a well called game is really one where the players dictate the result. That was true.

 

I agree with the bolded, but I wish the NHL would go back to stricter enforcement of interference as in 2005-07.

[X. Benedict]

I agree with the bolded, but I wish the NHL would go back to stricter enforcement of interference as in 2005-07.

Me too. Especially on entries. I don't think the league is going to touch it soon.

[Neo]

Me too. Especially on entries. I don't think the league is going to touch it soon.

I'd be interested in the thought behind your thought. Why wouldn't the league touch it? Is there a fan base for the interference? Legit and sincere to the informed.

[TrueBlueGED]

I thought the isles Sabres was an evenly called game. A lot of stuff they let go behind the play, some stuff an both sides were missed, but a well called game is really one where the players dictate the result. That was true.

I strongly disagree with this sentiment. As long as the refs aren't calling a bunch of phantom penalties, the players are deciding the game. Frankly, I think "letting them play" is very much the refs deciding the game, since such a style may favor one team over another.

Edited November 4, 2015 by TrueBlueGED

[X. Benedict]

I'd be interested in the thought behind your thought. Why wouldn't the league touch it? Is there a fan base for the interference? Legit and sincere to the informed.

I'm not sure, but for players and management I think it is an equilibrium they can live with.

 

Part of it I believe is players and owners didn't like the lopsided result in many of the 82 games in a long season when they didn't have legs, they fear embarrassment more than they like the thrills of a faster product. IMO.

I strongly disagree with this sentiment. As long as the refs aren't calling a bunch of phantom penalties. Frankly, I think "letting them play" is very much the refs deciding the game, since such a style may favor one team over another.

Refs really try to be consistent. Refs never want to leave the impression that they decided the game. Last Sabres game really was a pretty clean game for instance.

[TrueBlueGED]

I'm not sure, but for players and management I think it is an equilibrium they can live with.

 

Part of it I believe is players and owners didn't like the lopsided result in many of the 82 games in a long season when they didn't have legs, they fear embarrassment more than they like the thrills of a faster product. IMO.

 

Refs really try to be consistent. Refs never want to leave the impression that they decided the game. Last Sabres game really was a pretty clean game for instance.

And my point is by letting things go, they are helping decide the game.

[Neo]

I'm not sure, but for players and management I think it is an equilibrium they can live with.

Part of it I believe is players and owners didn't like the lopsided result in many of the 82 games in a long season when they didn't have legs, they fear embarrassment more than they like the thrills of a faster product. IMO.

 

Refs really try to be consistent. Refs never want to leave the impression that they decided the game. Last Sabres game really was a pretty clean game for instance.

Grateful ... I'm interested in the reasoning behind the decision.

[TrueBlueGED]

I'd be interested in the thought behind your thought. Why wouldn't the league touch it? Is there a fan base for the interference? Legit and sincere to the informed.

By suppressing the impact of talent differential, the league can create an illusion of parity so that fan bases can easily talk themselves into having a chance. Same reason they don't go to a 3-2-1 point system.

[SwampD]

I strongly disagree with this sentiment. As long as the refs aren't calling a bunch of phantom penalties, the players are deciding the game. Frankly, I think "letting them play" is very much the refs deciding the game, since such a style may favor one team over another.

  

And my point is by letting things go, they are helping decide the game.

But, the team that got mauled, apparently, won.

 

Go figure.

[TrueBlueGED]

But, the team that got mauled, apparently, won.

 

Go figure.

Well I'm talking in general, not specific to last night.

[X. Benedict]

And my point is by letting things go, they are helping decide the game.

They are allowing contact within the frame of the body. Once it is outside that they are calling interference. They've been consistent, at least.

Edited November 4, 2015 by X. Benedict

[Stoner]

If the point about parity is the reason we can't have nice things in the NHL, how sad. I also learned today that canned pumpkin isn't necessarily pumpkin. Everything I've always believed in... right down the drain.

Edited November 4, 2015 by pASabreFan

[X. Benedict]

If the point about parity is the reason we can't have nice things in the NHL, how sad. I also learned today that canned pumpkin isn't necessarily pumpkin. Everything I've always believed in... right down the drain.

 

The family tells me yellow #5 that colors cheese products is not cheese. Damn them for spoiling my cheesy ignorance. I'm moving to make yellow #5 a cheese. That way I can live in peace for the rest of my snacking days. 

[TrueBlueGED]

They are allowing contact within the frame of the body. Once it is outside that they are calling interference. They've been consistent, at least.

 

But consistency doesn't equal fairness, or equality, or refs not deciding the game. In order for all of those things to hold true simply by refs being consistent, you have to assume that all teams are doing the same amount of "allowable" interference. I'm not comfortable making that assumption, and while I don't have any data to back it up, the eye test sure tells me some teams do it more than others. So by being consistent and "letting the players play" the refs are actually helping to bias the results.

[SwampD]

But consistency doesn't equal fairness, or equality, or refs not deciding the game. In order for all of those things to hold true simply by refs being consistent, you have to assume that all teams are doing the same amount of "allowable" interference. I'm not comfortable making that assumption, and while I don't have any data to back it up, the eye test sure tells me some teams do it more than others. So by being consistent and "letting the players play" the refs are actually helping to bias the results.

Every game I've seen has looked pretty similar to this past Sabres game. I wonder if the NHL thinks that by slowing the game down they might cut down on concussions.

 

Other than the 3 on 3 OTs (which are awesome), the game seems to be more about in-close battles and body positioning, and as long as you have both hands on the stick and assume the Bubble Hockey player position, you can interfere to your heart's content.

 

I gotta say, I don't hate it.

[TrueBlueGED]

Every game I've seen has looked pretty similar to this past Sabres game. I wonder if the NHL thinks that by slowing the game down they might cut down on concussions.

 

Other than the 3 on 3 OTs (which are awesome), the game seems to be more about in-close battles and body positioning, and as long as you have both hands on the stick and assume the Bubble Hockey player position, you can interfere to your heart's content.

 

I gotta say, I don't hate it.

 

That's one of the best descriptions I've ever read...of anything :beer:

[Taro T]

Every game I've seen has looked pretty similar to this past Sabres game. I wonder if the NHL thinks that by slowing the game down they might cut down on concussions.

Other than the 3 on 3 OTs (which are awesome), the game seems to be more about in-close battles and body positioning, and as long as you have both hands on the stick and assume the Bubble Hockey player position, you can interfere to your heart's content.

I gotta say, I don't hate it.

Considering the gorillas that made a living in their careers causing concussions while not being able to skate are the ones leading the charge to slow the game, I really doubt it.

[SwampD]

Considering the gorillas that made a living in their careers causing concussions while not being able to skate are the ones leading the charge to slow the game, I really doubt it.

It doesn't slow down the hitters. It slows down the hitees.

[StuckinFL]

But consistency doesn't equal fairness, or equality, or refs not deciding the game. In order for all of those things to hold true simply by refs being consistent, you have to assume that all teams are doing the same amount of "allowable" interference. I'm not comfortable making that assumption, and while I don't have any data to back it up, the eye test sure tells me some teams do it more than others. So by being consistent and "letting the players play" the refs are actually helping to bias the results.

 100% agree

[Taro T]

It doesn't slow down the hitters. It slows down the hitees.

Exactly. So how exactly does that reduce concussions? If anything it increases them.

[SwampD]

Exactly. So how exactly does that reduce concussions? If anything it increases them.

Are you going to be more injured driving into a brick wall at 15 mph or at 45 mph?

[darksabre]

Are you going to be more injured driving into a brick wall at 15 mph or at 45 mph?

Depends on how many times you hit that wall. It's well known at this point that large numbers of smaller impacts can do just as much damage as a few big ones. Slowing the game down just gives Dusty Pluggerson more opportunities to take less extreme runs at Talent McSponsorship.