HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Disappointing seeing refs affect outcomes of games. Ref at the net signals goal. Goal judge turns the light on. How in the hell can the refs at the blue line overturn the goal. There was no evidence to over turn. Truly disappointing. These refs need to go back to U10 girls.

Is it possible he saw something you didn't? Usually in these cases the refs discuss the play and make a decision based on what everyone saw. Was someone in the crease? You didn't even bother to mention which game you are talking about, although I can only guess Burnsville...

Yep, Burnsville. Burnsville played well, enjoyable game. However, refs from the blue line aren't going to see what the ref to the side of the net will see. Hence, in the crease isn't the issue when the puck is in the crease. Hopefully, Burnsville goes far. That will make east ridge feel better. Good luck to Burnsville.

Bad call. I was at the game and yes I was on the East Ridge side. Play happened at the end of the first overtime. Goal is scored by East Ridge, Burnsville player knocked the puck into the net. Goal was signaled by referee, goal light went on signaled by goal judge and celebration by ER ensued. No end of period buzzer sounded. Burnsville coaches pointed at clock which showed 0.00 on the clock. Referees talked it over for 10 minutes and waived off the goal. I was told by my daughter that the referees said that two referees said it was a goal and one said it wasn't. They asked the clock keeper and he said it wasn't. Then why didn't the buzzer go off? Why is the final say given to the penalty box? Why do we need refs? Game was poorly refereed throughout for both teams. Referees just want to be noticed and decide the outcome of games. I've seen it for years.

Hockeyguy365 wrote:... No end of period buzzer sounded. Burnsville coaches pointed at clock which showed 0.00 on the clock. Referees talked it over for 10 minutes and waived off the goal. I was told by my daughter that the referees said that two referees said it was a goal and one said it wasn't. They asked the clock keeper and he said it wasn't. Then why didn't the buzzer go off? Why is the final say given to the penalty box? Why do we need refs? Game was poorly refereed throughout for both teams. Referees just want to be noticed and decide the outcome of games. I've seen it for years.

It is interesting what we hear in the heat of the game. I was there as well, on the other side. In real time I had no idea that there was any question about the legitimacy of the goal since I didn't hear the horn either and didn't even realize the clock was at 0.0 until the coaches pointed it out. I left the rink having no clue whether the right call was made or not. I have video of the game and have now watched it multiple times. The horn did in fact go off, a full 11 video frames (0.36 sec) before the ref made his first move to signal the puck crossing the goal line. From the angle of my video, which was set up at the far end of the rink, it looked like the puck was still about two feet from crossing the line when the horn started to sound, so in the end the refs actually got the call right.

What I heard from my daughter is that the Burnsville captain who was communicating with the refs was told by the second ref shortly after the call was made that neither he nor the linesman thought it was good. It appears that the four minutes of deliberation were needed to convince the ref who made the call that he got it wrong. I'm not sure how official the "goal judge" was who turned on the light since there wasn't one at the other end of the ice (at least there wasn't in the 2nd period), but the ref who signaled the goal did go and talk to him near the end of the deliberations. My daughter, who was standing just a few away, could hear part of the conversation and believes the goal judge said he thought it was late, too. So, in the end it looks like it took the combined input of three or four others to convince the ref who mad the call that he got it wrong.

It was definitely an enjoyable game. Hard fought on both sides.

Please post the video, that would make everyone accept the defeat.

ERhockeydad wrote:Please post the video, that would make everyone accept the defeat.

The defeat must be accepted with or without the video.

SECoach wrote:

ERhockeydad wrote:Please post the video, that would make everyone accept the defeat.

The defeat must be accepted with or without the video.

True, but could most importantly be some much needed closure for those young ladies that played their hearts out......on both sides.

RailingWizardofOZ wrote:

SECoach wrote:

ERhockeydad wrote:Please post the video, that would make everyone accept the defeat.

The defeat must be accepted with or without the video.

True, but could most importantly be some much needed closure for those young ladies that played their hearts out......on both sides.

Agree it should be accepted (it has to be) however if a post is made citing the video, making the video public would close the door on this. Otherwise all credibility of said mysterious video just adds to the controversy.

Since you asked. Here is the video showing that the horn actually sounded and that it sounded before the puck crossed the line. I'm still not sure how it could be argued that the other officials would have any reason to overrule the ref who made the call, or, more accurately in my opinion, convince him that he made the wrong call if the horn had never sounded.

The last couple of seconds at regular speed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuvXbdVuyjs

And the last fraction of a second slowed down to one-fifth speed:
http://youtu.be/9O_seNnu5bo

OnTheBench wrote:Since you asked. Here is the video showing that the horn actually sounded and that it sounded before the puck crossed the line. I'm still not sure how it could be argued that the other officials would have any reason to overrule the ref who made the call, or, more accurately in my opinion, convince him that he made the wrong call if the horn had never sounded.

The last couple of seconds at regular speed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuvXbdVuyjs

And the last fraction of a second slowed down to one-fifth speed:
http://youtu.be/9O_seNnu5bo

AWESOME! Thank you!

Good luck in the section finals!

I would say the video is inconclusive. Without a camera on the goal line there is no way to tell where that puck is when the buzzer sounds.

I would add that not one Burnsville player reacted like they thought the goal shouldn't count. That's usually a pretty good tell.

OnTheBench wrote:

Hockeyguy365 wrote:... No end of period buzzer sounded. Burnsville coaches pointed at clock which showed 0.00 on the clock. Referees talked it over for 10 minutes and waived off the goal. I was told by my daughter that the referees said that two referees said it was a goal and one said it wasn't. They asked the clock keeper and he said it wasn't. Then why didn't the buzzer go off? Why is the final say given to the penalty box? Why do we need refs? Game was poorly refereed throughout for both teams. Referees just want to be noticed and decide the outcome of games. I've seen it for years.

It is interesting what we hear in the heat of the game. I was there as well, on the other side. In real time I had no idea that there was any question about the legitimacy of the goal since I didn't hear the horn either and didn't even realize the clock was at 0.0 until the coaches pointed it out. I left the rink having no clue whether the right call was made or not. I have video of the game and have now watched it multiple times. The horn did in fact go off, a full 11 video frames (0.36 sec) before the ref made his first move to signal the puck crossing the goal line. From the angle of my video, which was set up at the far end of the rink, it looked like the puck was still about two feet from crossing the line when the horn started to sound, so in the end the refs actually got the call right.

What I heard from my daughter is that the Burnsville captain who was communicating with the refs was told by the second ref shortly after the call was made that neither he nor the linesman thought it was good. It appears that the four minutes of deliberation were needed to convince the ref who made the call that he got it wrong. I'm not sure how official the "goal judge" was who turned on the light since there wasn't one at the other end of the ice (at least there wasn't in the 2nd period), but the ref who signaled the goal did go and talk to him near the end of the deliberations. My daughter, who was standing just a few away, could hear part of the conversation and believes the goal judge said he thought it was late, too. So, in the end it looks like it took the combined input of three or four others to convince the ref who mad the call that he got it wrong.

It was definitely an enjoyable game. Hard fought on both sides.

Based on the YouTube footage, I'm wondering how neither of you heard the horn real-time...perhaps it's just easier to distinguish on video vs. being there live and in the heat of it.

I've bolded some interesting comments above from OnTheBench. Does anyone have any idea on the policy regarding the use of goal judges in section games? I'm not sure how you can have a goal judge on one end of the ice but not the other throughout the entire game. Does MSHSL have rules on this, or maybe it's section by section? And is it the same for Boys Hockey?

I attended both Section 4AA games on Saturday and they didn't have any goal judges -- and they really could've used some as North St. Paul had 2 possible goals that were disallowed vs. Stillwater (NSP was outplayed by Stillwater overall but ended up losing by only 1 goal). I didn't get a great look at either of these plays, one was a hard shot that went in & out quickly (inside post/netting or outside post, that is the question - I heard no "ding" like a typical outside post would've produced) and the other was a puck along the goal line that it looked like the goalie may have pulled back out after crossing the line. In my opinion, the closest ref was not in a good position on the ice to make either of these calls. I honestly don't remember how this has been done in past years, but I guess I would've thought that all section games would have a goal judge at each end. Not that the goal judges would always get it right either, but I think it would certainly help as many girls H.S. refs have a tough time keeping up with the game and getting in the right position on the ice.

Don't have a dog in this fight at all, but can only say that I hope in the future that as many section games as possible are played in arenas that have overhead video replay technology in place. I have no idea how much installing this equipment costs, but in these days of ever-declining prices for everything electronic, it can't be all that much. Perhaps in the future the MSHSL should give at least some consideration in awarding section playoff games to just those sites that do have such equipment in place - just a thought. For sure, in this instance of the disputed goal, it would have definitely allowed the refs to come to a more informed decision.

Also, a couple of observations/questions: with the above video replay equipment in place, it pretty much renders the position of a goal judge as obsolete, does it not? But without such video replay equipment in place, is it not the goal judges' sole responsibility to turn the light on, or keeping it off, depending on whether, in his or her judgement, the puck completely crosses the red line, or not?

It is my understanding that the goal judge bears no responsibility to also keep an eye on the clock, in determining whether or not to press the goal light on. And if time has in fact expired, I also believe that a properly working system will not allow a press of the "goal button" to turn the light on to "red" when time has expired, i.e. the system renders the light inoperative the instant the time remaining reaches zero. Not sure about that, but that's always been my understanding.

Of course, it is always possible that a goal judge anticipates a goal being scored a fraction of a second early, causing him or her to press the button prematurely, which signals the goal as "good" even though time has already expired when the puck actually crosses the goal line. Or, the reverse may be true, when a "good" goal is scored a fraction of a second before time is expired, but the goal judge is a bit late, pressing the "goal good" button but it does not register because of the lock-out built into the system. Again, I am not making any judgement in this situation, as I was not there; I'm just pointing out some possibilities.

As a fan, when in attendance watching a game live, I am not generally supportive of no interruptions in the action - keep it moving, with no timeouts to review questionable penalty play calls, etc. But in critical situations such as this - when a single goal can determine whether or not your team is done for the season, or not - I think using such camera and replay technology makes a lot of sense. And, given the added cost for such equipment, whatever that may be, I completely understand that at the high school level it may not be feasible to install (and monitor) such equipment at each and every game. Each school will be different, depending on geographical school budgets, etc. But, on the other hand, it would seem that for sectional play the question of a critical goal, or a no-goal, is so important that in the future the location of section playoff games should definitely take this into consideration and, whenever possible, give such capability a pretty high priority. You do see such technology being used extensively in the higher levels, as in D1, so it's just a matter of time I think before it filters down to the high school level, especially for the all-important sectional playoff system that we have here, where it's if you lose, your done for the year.

I spoke to a ref that refs for the boys high school games and that I have known for years. He said the goal lights are supposed to be wired to the game clock and the goal judge is not able to signal goal if time has expired. Hence, goal for east ridge. However, the light clearly went on after the buzzer.

I wish Burnsville girls the best, but I doubt there will ever be closure, as I agree the video shows nothing for overturning the goal. It is safe to say biased views will remain.

I've watched this 20 more times, I am convinced that puck was within 6 inches of the goal line when the buzzer went, and I am now leaning towards it being outside the goal line. That being said, I have no idea how any ref other than the one down low could have a say in whether that was a good goal or not.

At least the ref was in position, the guys we get for our conference games couldn't keep up with U12s.

Hmmm this is a hard one. The video is great but inconclusive. It is so close and the ref in the video is right in position and made the call...goal. Unless there is overwhelming evidence to overturn the call then the call on the ice should stand. The ref that made the call was the only ref I saw in the video and he was right there. IMHO the goal should have counted.

ERhockeydad wrote:I spoke to a ref that refs for the boys high school games and that I have known for years. He said the goal lights are supposed to be wired to the game clock and the goal judge is not able to signal goal if time has expired. Hence, goal for east ridge. However, the light clearly went on after the buzzer.

I wish Burnsville girls the best, but I doubt there will ever be closure, as I agree the video shows nothing for overturning the goal. It is safe to say biased views will remain.

As they say in poker, it was a "bad beat" either way (whether it was a right or wrong call). Just part of the anual reminder of how quick the season ends for most. As a parent your with these groups of kids for about 10 years then in a heart beat the season and for some the hockey journey is over. A bunch of years ago a poster on here told me to enjoy every second because it goes fast, man was that true. Best of luck to those still in, good season and show up and cheer for your section the rest of the way to those that are out.

Look at the defender's feet in relationship to the crease when the horn starts in the slow motion video. The crease has a six foot radius. Looks like a no goal.

East Ridge must have its own video?

IMO it was not goal. However, I had the luxury of watching it several times in super slow motion. I agree with the Power Player. The ref down low had the best view and he called it a goal. Bottom line it was going to suck for one of the teams. too bad the season had to end that way for one of them. In regards to the goal light being wired to the score clock. Not in our Fred Flinstone rink. We are lucky we have lights and no longer have to wait for it to be cold outside to flood.

In the end all everyone asks for is to have 3 competent Refs (Male or Female) that actually give a crap about what is going on out there! Either my attention to the games has increased or there is a real problem with the quality of officiating our Girls games are getting this year!
Have the ability to keep up with the play, be in position the entire game, understand the rules, and be consistent...

A few observations.

1 - It's difficult for the official down low to see anything other than if the puck crosses the goal line in relation to the clock since he's looking directly at the goal line. With crowd noise, it can be difficult for anyone to hear the buzzer.

2 - The linesman and outside official have a better view of the clock and net combination, as well as how the buzzer may sounding off in relation to the puck movement. That's the reason we see 3 officials today, instead of 2. Supposed better communication and viewpoints on situations like these.

As for the quality issues, that goes back to youth hockey and the old good vs bad equation. More than 50% of first year officials quit during their first season or directly after. They have to spend a good amount of time learning and going through the process of becoming an official.

Their first season doesn't see a great return on investment of time or dollars since they have little to no experience and mostly do lower level games.

In addition to that, they will encounter abuse from coaches, players and fans. Most of this will be from uneducated points of view and not make much sense to a younger person trying to do a good job.

With all these youngsters giving up officiating early on, the likelihood of having a large number of competent up and comers lessens.

The people on the ice do the best they can, just as the players and coaches try the same. At the end of the day, someone isn't going to be happy with the outcome.

Just my personal opinion as a hockey parent, I think every player should have to officiate for at least one season. Once each hockey parent witnessed their child working a game, the attitude in the stands would have a significant new light shed..

Inthestands, I agree with you.

I have coached, watched, parented and officiated for a long time, and I while I don't defend poor officiating (and I didn't attend the BV-ER game), anyone who suggests that the refs were trying to get noticed by calling off a late goal is either trolling for comments or doesn't understand human nature. Every referee is trying to get it right, whether or not he/she is a competent ref.

I say hats off to that crew who made the difficult call to get it right (in their collective opinion), knowing there would be lots of scorn heaped on them in places like this.

The "other" refs must have felt strongly that the goal should be waived off. Takes some courage to go that direction.

The "down low" ref who signaled goal ... he/she would be watching the goal line - correct ? How could he/she also be watching the clock or for that matter hearing the buzzer.

College and pro goals are reviewed all the time. These professional refs and goal judges don't always get it right.