referees

zambonidriver · Post by **zambonidriver** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 3:52 pm

Why at the bantam level and above is there only on referee and two linesman?
Why not 2 refs and one linesman?

Section 8 guy · Post by **Section 8 guy** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 6:53 pm

Great question.

Scout716 · Post by **Scout716** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 9:39 am

Rule 501 | Appointment of Officials

(a) Referee Systems – The three-official system (one Referee/two Linesman) and the two-official system (two Referees) are the only approved systems for USA Hockey sanctioned games.

MN Hockey follows the USA Hockey Rule Book.

Stripes2011 · Post by **Stripes2011** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 9:49 am

Scout716 wrote:Rule 501 | Appointment of Officials

(a) Referee Systems – The three-official system (one Referee/two Linesman) and the two-official system (two Referees) are the only approved systems for USA Hockey sanctioned games.

MN Hockey follows the USA Hockey Rule Book.

This is Correct.

BadgerBob82 · Post by **BadgerBob82** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 10:01 am

Yes, the WHY is because USA Hockey requires only 1 referee on the ice enforcing the rules.

The real question is WHY does USA Hockey ignore that every other sanctioning body in the world has moved to 2 referees with either 1 or 2 linesmen?

They put a STOP sign on the back of their jerseys, but only have one set of eyes enforcing the rules.

Ridiculous!

Oh, and please all referees please respond about how the calls are more consistent with only one "interpretation" of the rules. That might be fine with an experienced referee that can keep up with the play and understands the game of hockey, not just the rulebook. Many youth referees can't keep up with the play, don't know the game, and many don't consistently enforce the rulebook. Add to that bias, incompetence and inexperience and I think the obvious remedy is 2 referees and 0-2 linesmen.

USA Hockey is a follower, so I can't understand why they haven't followed the rest of the world in the move away from the 1970's referee system.

The Next One · Post by **The Next One** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 11:24 am

BadgerBob82 wrote:Yes, the WHY is because USA Hockey requires only 1 referee on the ice enforcing the rules.

The real question is WHY does USA Hockey ignore that every other sanctioning body in the world has moved to 2 referees with either 1 or 2 linesmen?

They put a STOP sign on the back of their jerseys, but only have one set of eyes enforcing the rules.

Ridiculous!

Oh, and please all referees please respond about how the calls are more consistent with only one "interpretation" of the rules. That might be fine with an experienced referee that can keep up with the play and understands the game of hockey, not just the rulebook. Many youth referees can't keep up with the play, don't know the game, and many don't consistently enforce the rulebook. Add to that bias, incompetence and inexperience and I think the obvious remedy is 2 referees and 0-2 linesmen.

USA Hockey is a follower, so I can't understand why they haven't followed the rest of the world in the move away from the 1970's referee system.

So you want two people on the ice that don't know the game, can't keep up the play, are bias, incompetent, and inexperienced? I don't think any officiating system will work for you.

Stripes2011 · Post by **Stripes2011** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 12:00 pm

We officials know its impossible to please everyone, for the most part all officials do their best. One thing to remember, for most of us its not our day job, Its not our career. to get paid roughly $35 to do a peewee game that takes me, lets say 20 minutes drive time each way to the arena, Lets say 20 minutes to get dressed and undressed, plus the hour ice time, shows no one does it for the pay. Its something we (I) personally still enjoy. Main reason I hear officials (even coaches for that matter) quit is they say "their not enjoying it anymore". The reason this game is hard to get all of us to agree on is because its a fairly fast moving game based on a lot of "judgments", and quick decisions making. We typically do not get time to think about it. React Yes! or no! If my "Judgment call" is questioned, I am ok with that, from my position, my angle, my experience, so on and so on. It was my decision to call or not make the call. If you were in my position, you may have called it something different. That would be your judgment. however at this time and place I am the one who is put in the position to make the decision so I'm sorry we do not agree.

All I am trying to say by adding to this post is do not take officials for granted and be quite so hard on us and our judgments. I know my officials association is down this year as to the number of officials registering for youth hockey. Some choose, high school, juniors or collage over little Johnny's or Julie's youth games. The pay is better and the people running the clock and score books have plenty of experience so things typically run smoother, and the arena doors are not opening early because the hour clock is up

enough said, Enjoy the game, Happy Holidays !!

JoltDelivered · Post by **JoltDelivered** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 3:19 pm

So having watched youth / HS hockey for the past 15 years it's just a fact that refs will get it wrong once in a while. And that includes the 2 referee one linesman system at HS.

With that said I have used bad calls as a development opportunity for the players that live in my home. Overcoming adversity during competition is a skill that is rarely talked about or even developed these days but extremely important in my eyes. And overcoming the negative, ticked off feeling you feel in your gut when a bad call is made or even worse when a call is missed is huge. If you are unable to move past that sour feeling, even in the short term, you lose focus and players without focus can't execute. Most hockey coaches these days rarely stress it and would prefer to focus you on chopping lettuce in the garage for an hour every night after practice.

I have spent hours talking to my kids about having short memories during the game and to look at every situation, bad calls included, as an opportunity. An opportunity to affect the game through execution. Maybe that means after a bad call you are going out on the PK and you have been working on stealing the puck during the PK at practice and creating a short handed scoring chance. I say go prove that you can do it. Here's your opportunity.

You guys ever watch Parise get crossed-check in the back multiple times in the game? Do you ever wonder what you would do if that was you? Parise peels himself off the ice multiple times a game and never, ever once says a word to the opposing player or referee. How do you suppose he controls that emotion? Could you control that emotion? I doubt many could. I will tell you how he does it...that is a skill he has developed over the years. He actually has learned to use it to his advantage. If the defender it hitting him, then the defender's focus is on Parise's back and off the puck. Parise however is watching the puck like a hawk, even when he's laying on the ice. Advantage...Parise.

Everyone would be better served to forget about the refs and expect bad calls. Watch how your player reacts to the situation and then use it as an opportunity to develop an often underdeveloped skill.

Section 8 guy · Post by **Section 8 guy** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 11:54 pm

My question wasn't to complain about officials FWIW. Most officials do a great job. Having two referees that can call penalties reduces the likelihood of games occurring where there's a football game on ice happening and you have one single ref that refuses to call anything so the game gets out of hand. That's all.

Plus, I've not really heard a good version yet for why it makes sense to have an on ice official see a very blatant penalty and not be able to call it.

zambonidriver · Post by **zambonidriver** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 7:19 am

The reason I asked the question was safety of the players. It would only make sense to have as many sets of eyes on the kids at this level especially as they are just learning to hit. The inconsistency of what is a clean hit and what is a penalty and also some of the obvious penalties that are missed.The missed elbow calls are what is most concerning.

BadgerBob82 · Post by **BadgerBob82** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 7:40 am

This is about player safety and lack of rule enforcement.

So, there are no District Directors, Referee Coordinators or even referees that can post the merits of having 1 set of eyes calling the game?

Yet 2 sets of eyes calling icing and checking that all mouth guards are fully in the kid's mouth?

MN Hockey sets their own age rules and USA Hockey allows it. Why not show USA Hockey that MN Hockey takes player safety seriously?

jg2112 · Post by **jg2112** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 9:25 am

I guess it's worth mentioning here. MN Made uses 2 referees and 0 linesmen. While sometimes there are a lot of penalties called, I think that goes to the speed and nature of their games (at my daughter's level, there is checking).

I've heard enough horror stories about officiating (Bantams reffing tournament games up north, a horribly officiated local game last night with 16 penalties) to give me serious pause about returning to Association hockey next season.

QuackerTracker · Post by **QuackerTracker** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 10:33 am

The 1-2 system is still used in the NAHL, USHL and AHL, till next season when the NHL contract with the AHL has them going all 4 man. It's the same reason that baseball does not use 3 or 4 or up to 6 umpires like MLB does. Peewee football does not have the same number of officials as college or the NFL. I don't watch basketball but I'm guessing youth bouncy ball has less officials than the NBA.

It's youth hockey! Everybody take a big deep breath and relax! The ref is not going to cost your kid a scholarship! Cheer for your son or daughter! Take them to DQ after the game and tell them you are proud of them even if they had a bad day!

Then sign up to be an official. Go to the seminar. Buy the equipment. Become involved in the officials association. Go to the meetings. Go to instructors camp for officials.

Heck to officiate at Made I don't know if you even have to pass a test...

jg2112 · Post by **jg2112** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 10:49 am

QuackerTracker wrote:The 1-2 system is still used in the NAHL, USHL and AHL, till next season when the NHL contract with the AHL has them going all 4 man. It's the same reason that baseball does not use 3 or 4 or up to 6 umpires like MLB does. Peewee football does not have the same number of officials as college or the NFL. I don't watch basketball but I'm guessing youth bouncy ball has less officials than the NBA.

It's youth hockey! Everybody take a big deep breath and relax! The ref is not going to cost your kid a scholarship! Cheer for your son or daughter! Take them to DQ after the game and tell them you are proud of them even if they had a bad day!

Then sign up to be an official. Go to the seminar. Buy the equipment. Become involved in the officials association. Go to the meetings. Go to instructors camp for officials.

Heck to officiate at Made I don't know if you even have to pass a test...

What a red herring. The concerns we all have and share is seeing that rules are enforced to the best of their ability, and that referees control the game such that rules are followed and the game's participants are not injured because games are allowed to be out of control.

Of course it's just a game. Of course my daughter's going to DQ afterwards. Of course a scholarship is not at issue.

But part of learning the game is playing and understanding what is permissible and what is forbidden. If refs don't help with that process they are a barrier to learning and helping these young players become smarter players.

The Next One · Post by **The Next One** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 11:15 am

I believe they are stuck to the 1-2 system because they believe it is a better development tool for referees. I disagree, but I am too old to be worrying about advancing to nahl tier 7, ushl, or anything beyond high school.

As far as refs not controlling games, when is the last time you saw a coach tell a player u can't do that even though it wasn't called? Umm never.
When is the last time u told lil jonny that slash behind the play was really stupid that the ref didn't see? Ummm never.

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 12:28 pm

BadgerBob82 wrote:This is about player safety and lack of rule enforcement.

So, there are no District Directors, Referee Coordinators or even referees that can post the merits of having 1 set of eyes calling the game?

Yet 2 sets of eyes calling icing and checking that all mouth guards are fully in the kid's mouth?

MN Hockey sets their own age rules and USA Hockey allows it. Why not show USA Hockey that MN Hockey takes player safety seriously?

Okay. I'll chime in.
This has been discussed at MH board meetings.
The refs representatives state they like (at least some refs) like the system.
Okay, but (question asked by a certain MH board member), isn't easier to be in position with two refs on the ice, isn't it....???
No, we are trained in this system (another question, are you not trained in two ref system for HS and collage games, also?)......
Safety of players... well linesman can call penalties after the whistle is blown.

So, the answer is - its what USAH wants. If the Intl Federation says to change it then USAH will probably change it. If MH asks them to change it, then no.

Bucking the USAH rules is not as easy as some believe it is.
MH follows USAH age rules, so I am not sure where that is coming from. Well, I do. Our bantams (FOR EXAMPLE) are not bantams but are midgets (or for reference MH bantams- midgets). The exception comes when playing non-MN teams USAH has given approval (since its 6 months difference and a t one time MN kids played out of state teams that had that advantage over us).

BadgerBob82 · Post by **BadgerBob82** » Wed Dec 16, 2015 3:31 pm

Thank you Elliot.

So at the MH Board meetings, the Referee Reps say they like the system? Do you expect they would say differently in a public meeting? Talk to them in private and you get a different answer. The good refs like the system and it works perfectly with good refs. But then put a weaker ref and maybe two younger inexperienced linesmen where the referee is also helping them make line calls. And it's not so good.

As for linesmen calling penalties. You are making my case. Linesmen can't call penalties. But during the "injury" stoppage, the conversation goes like this. Ref: I didn't see anything, did you guys? Linesman: Yes, #12 saw you weren't looking, and slashed the guy across his head. Ref: Really? Linesman: Yeah, it was when you were going by the bench dodging the players as they changed. Other linesman: Yeah, and you missed the goalie pull the puck out of the net cuz you were still outside the blueline trying to catch up after dodging the changing players. But, if you are going to call the penalty, then you should disallow the goal since if you had seen the penalty, you would have whistled the play. Ref: Oh OK. Thanks guys! Great System!

MN Hockey doesn't use birth year, so not sure where you're coming from saying we following USA Hockey age levels? USA Hockey allows us to use July 1st... And they would "allow" us to use a 2 ref system also.

goldy313 · Post by **goldy313** » Fri Dec 18, 2015 12:09 am

If safety is a priority as USA Hockey says it is then we should go with more officials who can call penalties. Hockey needs to do away with linesmen entirely and just go to zone coverage like football, baseball, and basketball. Triangulating a play in hockey is fairly easy, why the thought process in hockey high culture is counterintuitive is bewildering to me in this day and age where so much emphasis has been put on player safety.

Wet Paint · Post by **Wet Paint** » Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:13 am

goldy313 wrote:If safety is a priority as USA Hockey says it is then we should go with more officials who can call penalties. Hockey needs to do away with linesmen entirely and just go to zone coverage like football, baseball, and basketball. Triangulating a play in hockey is fairly easy, why the thought process in hockey high culture is counterintuitive is bewildering to me in this day and age where so much emphasis has been put on player safety.

Totally agree here. I watch some of the youth games and these kids are getting smart. They wait until the ref turns his back to take their shots and then if the ref is watching them the ones on the front end of the play are at it. Make all three of the guys on the ice a ref who is expected to make calls and assign them a zone of control to monitor.

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Sun Dec 20, 2015 11:36 am

BadgerBob82 wrote:Thank you Elliot.

So at the MH Board meetings, the Referee Reps say they like the system? Do you expect they would say differently in a public meeting? Talk to them in private and you get a different answer. The good refs like the system and it works perfectly with good refs. But then put a weaker ref and maybe two younger inexperienced linesmen where the referee is also helping them make line calls. And it's not so good.

As for linesmen calling penalties. You are making my case. Linesmen can't call penalties. But during the "injury" stoppage, the conversation goes like this. Ref: I didn't see anything, did you guys? Linesman: Yes, #12 saw you weren't looking, and slashed the guy across his head. Ref: Really? Linesman: Yeah, it was when you were going by the bench dodging the players as they changed. Other linesman: Yeah, and you missed the goalie pull the puck out of the net cuz you were still outside the blueline trying to catch up after dodging the changing players. But, if you are going to call the penalty, then you should disallow the goal since if you had seen the penalty, you would have whistled the play. Ref: Oh OK. Thanks guys! Great System!

MN Hockey doesn't use birth year, so not sure where you're coming from
saying we following USA Hockey age levels? USA Hockey allows us to use July 1st... And they would "allow" us to use a 2 ref system also.

First, I talk to refs all the time, public and private.

Second, if they didn't want to use 3 man in playoffs they would say so and 2 man system would be used. They are not gutless guys.

Third, your case is nonsensical.

As far as USAH is concerned we play midget and bantam. We are not breaking their rules. I do not recall seeing you among the USAH or MH people in the room when this was discussed. That's the bottom line.

As far as bad officials. Yes there are bad officials. We need more officials.

As far as the 3 man versus 2 ref system....
MH looks to the ref leadership for their opinion and what is dictated by USAH. If there was some basis for other decision, well everything stated here was discussed... So that's your answer.

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Sun Dec 20, 2015 11:37 am

goldy313 wrote:If safety is a priority as USA Hockey says it is then we should go with more officials who can call penalties. Hockey needs to do away with linesmen entirely and just go to zone coverage like football, baseball, and basketball. Triangulating a play in hockey is fairly easy, why the thought process in hockey high culture is counterintuitive is bewildering to me in this day and age where so much emphasis has been put on player safety.

Goldy, can you give me an email with a description, I will see if mh can get a pilot program.

zooomx · Post by **zooomx** » Sun Dec 20, 2015 12:24 pm

Refs have a tough job, so I try not to rip on them, and I trust their opinion on this topic.

My one issue is how refs are assigned for regions. We were in a northern town for regions last year and got knocked out in a game in which a local crew of officials were assigned to a game in which we played the local team. One of the officials was a coach of some of the players the previous year. Not saying the official consciously miscalled the game, but I think it doesn't make sense for local officials from an association call a regional game involving their association, especially when there is another crew in town.

goldy313 · Post by **goldy313** » Sun Dec 20, 2015 9:25 pm

elliott70 wrote:
goldy313 wrote:If safety is a priority as USA Hockey says it is then we should go with more officials who can call penalties. Hockey needs to do away with linesmen entirely and just go to zone coverage like football, baseball, and basketball. Triangulating a play in hockey is fairly easy, why the thought process in hockey high culture is counterintuitive is bewildering to me in this day and age where so much emphasis has been put on player safety.
Goldy, can you give me an email with a description, I will see if mh can get a pilot program.

I'll be traveling this week, I'll bring some of my officiating and NFHS material along and try and get something to you next weekend.

elliott70 · Post by **elliott70** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 8:36 am

goldy313 wrote:
elliott70 wrote:
goldy313 wrote:If safety is a priority as USA Hockey says it is then we should go with more officials who can call penalties. Hockey needs to do away with linesmen entirely and just go to zone coverage like football, baseball, and basketball. Triangulating a play in hockey is fairly easy, why the thought process in hockey high culture is counterintuitive is bewildering to me in this day and age where so much emphasis has been put on player safety.
Goldy, can you give me an email with a description, I will see if mh can get a pilot program.
I'll be traveling this week, I'll bring some of my officiating and NFHS material along and try and get something to you next weekend.

No big rush.
3rd weekend in January is next MH meeting and then it would only be a discussion point. Looking at April meeting before it would move in any one direction.

And I am leaving Christmas day for a week or so in Mexico.

Thanks.

C-dad · Post by **C-dad** » Mon Dec 21, 2015 1:51 pm

elliott70 wrote:
And I am leaving Christmas day for a week or so in Mexico.

Thanks.

How is that Mexican hockey looking these days?