Larue and his non-call

Jay1982 · Guru

Larue and his non-call

superhab · Guru

There is nothing i hate more than make up calls. If you miss a call its gone there is no make up, end of story. A diffrent issue should have been what you said about how he should have confided in the other officials the call should have been made. Thats why i think that the NHL should have a similar rule as to the NFL. Each coach can complain against a call or non call and it will be reviewed if there was no penelty, goal, or what ever the other coach was arguing about that team would be assesed a dely of game penelty.

barry33 · Guru

Thanks Jay. As you know I have been in this game a very long time and always give teh officials the benefit of a doubt as I am far from perfect and make my share of mistakes in a game behind the bench. However this is beyond me, how that could have been missed, yet Stillman gets tapped by Komisarek, squeezes the blood out of a pimple, and it gets called!

Would it not have been prudent for Larue to ask his linesmen (or anyone with eyesight) what happened?!?? I thought we went to two referees for a reason. Not just to take up more space on the ice. Jay do you think they will get their knuckles rapped? According to Tony Marinaro at the Team 990, he went to the officials room after the game to ask for a comment and Larue and the other officials had a few friends in the room and weer having a few beers and a little party and refused comment. Marinaro was refrerred to the supervisor of officials at the game who was apparently Dave Keon JR. (when did HE ever ref?!??). Keon left the building with no comment.

Jay1982 · Guru

No comment means they know they are in the wrong

Jay1982 · Guru

superhab wrote:

There is nothing i hate more than make up calls.

make up calls are not what you think. A call isn't invented, its a borderline penalty that would normally slide, but in this case can be called.

Desi · Senior Member

Maybe there should be a provision by which coaches could ask for a review of plays like this one. Make it so that coaches can only ask for a video review once a game, or only in the event of an injury to a player, or make it so that the team asking for the review is penalized if there was no infraction. Or at least give officials the ability to call for a video review IF there is an injury to a player and they feel they may have missed a call -- the kind of call that can completely change a hockey game.

I know, I know, many people will hate this idea and say that it would slow the game down, etc. etc. But wouldn't you rather have real infractions that cause injuries called as they should be, rather than missed? I would, even if those calls went against the Habs. Fair is fair. Whether it was intentional or not, Williams should have been in the box for four. The fact that he wasn't cost the Habs this game IMO, as I have no doubt they would've scored in that amount of time. They were just playing too well not to.

The linesmen are supposed to have the ability to tell the refs what they see, but this only rarely happens. Why? Because they know that showboat refs like Kerry Fraser aren't going to change their minds, no matter what.

For plays like these, video review would be a good thing I think.

Les Canadiens sont la

ray · Senior Member

Just a quick question to anyone, is there any chance a suspension will be handed out. More than likely there won't be. I know it was an accident but sometimes there are knee on knee hits that receive suspensions, and they are sometimes an accident also. Just a quick reaction to stop another player who has made a move on you, and you do anything to get in his way. Just wondering and no I haven't heard of anyone mentioning a suspension, just my private thoughts.

24 Rings · Guru

On this topic, Montreal got a penalty in the corner (can't remember the details - who, offense or defense) and it was called by the official at centre ice! The guy who was right in the corner didn't even whistle it down. How was the guy at centre in a better position to see this, or see it at all? It was a marginal call, if I remember correctly. They just seem to be calling penalties for the sake of blowing the whistle and not just in this series, but in all of them. It has come to a point where debatable power plays are deciding games.

Pablo Honey · Veteran Member

I like the idea about assessing the issue based on the aftermath.

If a detective walks onto a crime scene and sees a corpse with bullet holes through it, in a pool of blood, he can more than safely assume someone was murdered (save the "it could be suicide remarks).

Basically, if Koivu streaks to the net, collapses and his eyeball is bleeding a very dark color of blood, you can more than safely assume that he got a stick to the eye.

But that's not even the issue here. It's not as if Koivu got hurt BEHIND the play. He was right in the thick of the action. How that call was missed is beyond me. I really don't understand how LaRue slept soundly last night.

-- Edited by Pablo Honey at 16:28, 2006-04-27

barry33 · Guru

superhab wrote:

There is nothing i hate more than make up calls. If you miss a call its gone there is no make up, end of story. A diffrent issue should have been what you said about how he should have confided in the other officials the call should have been made. Thats why i think that the NHL should have a similar rule as to the NFL. Each coach can complain against a call or non call and it will be reviewed if there was no penelty, goal, or what ever the other coach was arguing about that team would be assesed a dely of game penelty.

I agree with that. You should be allowed to "challenge" one play a game. Similar to calling for a stick measurement, if you challnge the play and do not win the challenge, you are charged with a delay of game penalty. Although, as obviously biased the reffing was last night, all it would have resulted in is a delay of game penalty against the habs

rwp2le · Guru

I remember back in my playing days, when the refs blew calls like they did last night, they would always take a high hard clearing attempt in the center of the back. Then maybe one in the leg for good measure. It's funny how no one shoots the puck at the refs anymore.

redlightmike · Member

I disagree with the hatred of "make-up" calls. though generally i feel they should not be made, in some cases i think they are absolutely necessary. If you are so GROSSLY incompetent that you miss a play that took a team's captain's EYE OUT........ and you see blood gushing from his eye and do not call anything on it...... are you saying it would be wrong to toss a call our way? perhaps not call komisarek when he popped a pimple on stillman's gay little lip? or PERHAPS........ JUST PERHAPS....... call the TRIP on plekanec as opposed to his retaliatory trip..... in OVERTIME????

i'm not saying side with the habs the entire game....... but in a cointoss situation, u toss it to the habs. not the other team. for god sakes, it's disturbing. it seemed to me like they were HARDER on the habs after the eye incident happened.

The Kahuna · Guru

Question for the referees here. If a linesman sees a blatant high stick foul that the refs miss, can he not bring it to their attention and the refs call a penalty based on this information?

barry33 · Guru

The Kahuna wrote:

Question for the referees here. If a linesman sees a blatant high stick foul that the refs miss, can he not bring it to their attention and the refs call a penalty based on this information?

The refs had the option last night of consulting the linesmen yes. Play was blown dead immediately after the play. All Larue had to do was go talk to Marouelli and his 2 linesmen and he could have STILL assessed a penalty. That is what pisses me off the most. He did not exercise that option. Now of course maybe NO one saw the infraction..but if there are 4 officials that blind and stupid on the ice then they do not deserve to be called NHL officials.

Gravelbourger · Member

agreed......officials are having their hand in deciding way too many games in these playoffs.....I've said my bit about our robbery last night but how about in Colarado.....Morrow lifts a Colorado players stick and he falls down.......powerplay Colorado....goal Colorado.....OT...you know the rest. Say what you want about the new NHL....I think these marginal calls are ruining our great game. So what scoring is up...it should when half the game is played on the PP. Shame on these bogus calls.

Jay1982 · Guru

rwp2le wrote:

I remember back in my playing days, when the refs blew calls like they did last night, they would always take a high hard clearing attempt in the center of the back. Then maybe one in the leg for good measure. It's funny how no one shoots the puck at the refs anymore.

Thats not true. I got dinged in the mouth a year ago, my lip was all cut up, my gums were black, and thankfully I had no teeth fall out.

rwp2le · Guru

Sorry to hear that Jay, I have never know a ref who I have liked before, but I guess there is a first time for everything.

Nil d · Guru

barry33 wrote:

The Kahuna wrote: Question for the referees here. If a linesman sees a blatant high stick foul that the refs miss, can he not bring it to their attention and the refs call a penalty based on this information? The refs had the option last night of consulting the linesmen yes. Play was blown dead immediately after the play. All Larue had to do was go talk to Marouelli and his 2 linesmen and he could have STILL assessed a penalty. That is what pisses me off the most. He did not exercise that option. Now of course maybe NO one saw the infraction..but if there are 4 officials that blind and stupid on the ice then they do not deserve to be called NHL officials.

Is it only the ref's option, or can the linsemen take their own initiative to inform the ref of what they saw, without the ref asking them to?

That would be a crucial difference, and make the situation triply galling!

Muller93 · Guru

Hey and what's with the Carolina players saying..." oh it's hard losing your top player...we are missing one of ours in Cole"

It just sounds so tastless. Like...OK now we are even. idiots!

Figaro · Guru

Bloody face + bloody stick = penalty. What suprised me was how fast play continued. The crowd didn't litter the ice, the Habs didn't go bananas because they knew they'd just end up on the wrong side of the law.