NHL ref caught making bogus calls

[rajncajn]

This isn't NFL, but if you think this sort of thing doesn't happen in other leagues as well then you may want to get your rose colored glasses checked. What's worse is that he was talking with another person about it openly during the game as if it were coordinated. So who was the other person?

 

https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/31127110/referee-tim-peel-banned-hot-mic-call-nashville-predators-penalty

[Big John]

The NBA had their own scandal: https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/25980368/how-former-ref-tim-donaghy-conspired-fix-nba-games

[stevegrab]

10 hours ago, rajncajn said:

This isn't NFL, but if you think this sort of thing doesn't happen in other leagues as well then you may want to get your rose colored glasses checked. What's worse is that he was talking with another person about it openly during the game as if it were coordinated. So who was the other person?

 

https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/31127110/referee-tim-peel-banned-hot-mic-call-nashville-predators-penalty

 

From what I heard, the NHL ref was talking to a member of the Predators, the team he had penalized.

 

Was talking a college hoops ref I know online who often gives his feedback on these kind of stories. He says that view of make-up calls is more of an old school thing, mentioned an NBA ref he's talked with before who has done this kind of thing. But he says they are taught not to do that and frequently discuss how avoid that concept of a make up call. He did explain that at times a very close play comes down to who is already at an advantage, siting one from a basketball game and that since the one team was leading and player from the other team already had more fouls they called the foul on the leading team. 

 

I have to say the more I learn about officiating the less impartial I feel it is. But if I start to feel it is all rigged, games decided in advance by somebody (league HQ, Vegas, etc) and refs work towards that outcome I'd simply stop following that sport. 

[purplemonster]

I am sure many sports do it, to keep games close. Calling a game correctly may mean 8 penalties on Team A and 1 on team B but the fans will be upset and say the refs decided it when it may have been called perfectly. To avoid that type of criticism I have no doubt some try to keep it somewhat even. And the leagues probably aren't going to stop it if isn't egregious because it keeps the games more interesting. They have shown this in studies I believe that teams that are ahead tend to have more penalties called on them, a difference that can't be explained by differences in play with an advantage. There is also a slight home team edge, something like 8-10% more penalties called on away teams based on one study I saw.  Refs don't want to deal with getting yelled at either.  Those are understandable somewhat given what we know of human nature, these refs are human. What is different is actually picking winners and losers in a pre determined fashion and that would be catastrophic. So they better not have someone come out with that. 

Idk what this ref was referring to but there are instances where a team has committed multiple borderline offenses so they are getting the next one called. The ref was talking directly to a team I think so that may have been part of it. 

 

Edited March 25, 2021 by purplemonster

[Finn5033]

I was listening to the radio and they were talking to a former NHL coach. The coach was saying this basically happens in every game you just don’t hear about it because it’s either not said out loud at all, or the ref isn’t dumb enough to leave his mic on when he says it. 

[rajncajn]

49 minutes ago, purplemonster said:

They have shown this in studies I believe that teams that are ahead tend to have more penalties called on them, a difference that can't be explained by differences in play with an advantage.

I'm extremely skeptical & would love to see some sort of proof of that, especially proof that outlines the types of penalties & when they are called.

[purplemonster]

16 minutes ago, rajncajn said:

I'm extremely skeptical & would love to see some sort of proof of that, especially proof that outlines the types of penalties & when they are called.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.rob-mcculloch.org/data/penpap.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiZ9PL04MvvAhVpEFkFHVp9D7EQFjAKegQIFxAC&usg=AOvVaw3B8lNXn0qV40hZcaPDuwgf

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.sfu.ca/~tswartz/papers/penalty.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiZ9PL04MvvAhVpEFkFHVp9D7EQFjANegQIHBAC&usg=AOvVaw0hVkmUSb_4WniWae43Vrxb

[League_Champion]

Happens all the time in Hockey. This one just happened to be caught on audio. They always try to keep calls even or call BS calls when it gets "chippy". 

 

That's why Hockey is still an Alien sport to most. 

[purplemonster]

This is from the first paper fyi. This is for the NHL, idk if these results are generalizable to other sports but I wouldn't doubt they are somewhat. 

 

Discussion:

Using a variety of techniques, we have found strong evidence for the existence of patterns in penalty calls.

 

Most striking is the tendency to not call a penalty on the same team “too many” times in a row. We also find evidence that whether a team is the home team, the score, the time since the last penalty, the time in the game, and the number of referees have effects on which team is penalized next. We compared games using one referee with those using two and found that there is less of a tendency to reverse call with two referees. Our basic hypothesis is that the speed and physical nature of the NHL game, combined with the expectation that many infractions will go uncalled, put the referee in a very difficult situation. Since penalty calling can be largely subjective, it is easy for teams, coaches, and fans to view referees’ calls as unfair to their side. In order to keep control of the game and avoid being blamed for the outcome of the game by the loser, it would seem logical that referees would adopt the following strategies:

 

• make fewer calls later in the third period when the game is on the line

• avoid making repeated calls on the same team

• avoid penalizing the team that is behind

• avoid penalizing the home team

• avoid calls on the same team in quick succession

 

The empirical findings of this paper are consistent with each of these strategies. In addition, there is evidence that these factors may interact with each other. For instance, the avoidance reverse calls appears to be more acute early in the game and the effect of the score is larger late in the game. We also find that the overall tendency to reverse call is lower in games with two referees. Of course, this paper represents an “observational study,” and there may exist other explanations for the patterns we find. In particular, some of our findings may be due to player behavior rather than referee behavior. Here are some possible player-based explanations of the patterns in penalty calls:

 

• Prevalence of reverse calls: If a penalty call on one team causes the other team to play more aggressively (or seek retribution), a reverse call would be more likely than arepeat call. This theory seems less convincing than the referee-based theory since the team with the power play has a huge incentive to avoid taking a penalty and losing their man advantage. In contrast, our analysis shows that reverse calls would be most likely during the power play (a low value for timebetpens). Also, the reverse-call probability gets larger with additional repeat penalties.

 

• Penalty calls influenced by score: The basic pattern is that penalties are more likely to be called on the team that is ahead and less likely to be called on the team that is behind. One player-based explanation would be that the team with the lead may feel less apprehensive about giving the other team a power play; they may take “lazy penalties” (hook a player rather than skating hard to catch him) or take the opportunity to even a score (not the one on the scoreboard). However, other plausible player-based explanations would be consistent with the opposite pattern of penalty calls (more calls on the team behind). For instance, the team behind may play a more desperate physical style that could lead to penalties. The evidence that the effect of the score on the reverse call is larger when it has been a long time since the last penalty seems more consistent with a referee-based theory than any player-based theory we can think of.

 

• Fewer calls on the home team: The “home-field advantage” is a phenomenon common throughout sports. In hockey, if players play better at home and commit fewer infractions in front of their fans, the finding of fewer penalties on the home team could be explained without a home-biased referee. Alternatively, if the visiting team plays very aggressively in an attempt to get a tie or win on the road, it would be reasonable to expect more calls on the visiting team. Unlike the referee-based theory, however, there are plausible stories regarding player behavior that would be consistent with more penalty calls on the home team. For instance, the home team might play more aggressively in an effort to entertain its fans, or the visiting team might play more carefully to avoid penalties and playing shorthanded on the road.

 

• Different play during the penalty kill: It is possible that a team on a power-play plays differently, in a way that encourages penalties. It may also be that the team killing the power-play is more defensive, does not have control of the puck as much and is more likely to be guilty of a subsequent infraction.

 

• Fewer calls late in the game: Both teams may play more carefully when the game is on the line.

 

Finally, we point out that two of our basic findings have no obvious player-based explanation: (1) the significant difference in reverse-call probabilities between one-referee and two-referee games, and (2) the variation in reverse-call probabilities across referees. It would be interesting to perform an experiment to explore these issues further. For example, referees could be shown videos of infractions coupled with a description of the game situation. Would referees make the same calls watching a video in safety as they do on the ice?

Edited March 25, 2021 by purplemonster

[stevegrab]

Wow that was quite a write up. The first thing that stood out to me as I beg reading it (don't have time to read let alone digest it all now) was talk about different number of referees, I don't follow hockey at all, and this part sounds like they have a different number of officials doing some games compared to others. Maybe I'm missing some nuance in the specific position or title they hold as some are referees and others are not. 

 

"We compared games using one referee with those using two and found that there is less of a tendency to reverse call with two referees"

 

The one thing my official friend (on another forum) helped me to understand were what often look like delayed calls, especially in basketball. Player drives to the basket, gets hit, continues shooting motion and isn't until after the shot is missed and rebounded that they call the foul. Always seemed to me like they were only making the call if he missed, and would not bother if the shot went it. My friend that can happen in some cases, but more often the official is simply waiting for the play to conclude before making the call. Similar thing with a PI in football, only called after the catch isn't made. They have a tough job, and at the lower levels take a ton of abuse from nasty parents and kids who have zero respect for an authority figure. 

[purplemonster]

52 minutes ago, stevegrab said:

 I don't follow hockey at all, and this part sounds like they have a different number of officials doing some games compared to others. Maybe I'm missing some nuance in the specific position or title they hold as some are referees and others are not. 

 

"We compared games using one referee with those using two and found that there is less of a tendency to reverse call with two referees". 

 

Yeah I thought about taking that out bc it isn't really relevant to what we are discussing here but the other stuff is. I am surprised there hasn't been a NFL study. I would imagine there would have to be somewhere. 

Edited March 25, 2021 by purplemonster

[purplemonster]

Here's one from the NFL, if a ref is between the 30's, there is up to 50% increased chance of calling an offensive or defensive holding depending on what team's bench he is in front of.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fivethirtyeight.com/features/nfl-coaches-yell-at-refs-because-it-freakin-works/amp/

[stevegrab]

1 hour ago, purplemonster said:

Here's one from the NFL, if a ref is between the 30's, there is up to 50% increased chance of calling an offensive or defensive holding depending on what team's bench he is in front of.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fivethirtyeight.com/features/nfl-coaches-yell-at-refs-because-it-freakin-works/amp/

 

Interesting. But there's one thing I've learned in life, many of these studies have an desired outcome, and are conducted in a way that makes that more likely. 

 

And when they attach a headline like "NFL Coaches Yell At Refs Because It Freakin’ Works" it has me even more cautious in just taking it at face value. 

[purplemonster]

55 minutes ago, stevegrab said:

 

Interesting. But there's one thing I've learned in life, many of these studies have an desired outcome, and are conducted in a way that makes that more likely. 

 

And when they attach a headline like "NFL Coaches Yell At Refs Because It Freakin’ Works" it has me even more cautious in just taking it at face value. 

538 in my experience is pretty good. They are top flight pollsters.  The headline may have some emotional elements but their work is generally good. I don't think this needs to be surprising, context matters with almost everything. We are social creatures, not computers. That's not necessarily bad but you want to minimize it for things like this. Generally things should even out over time.  In Cajun's case maybe that egregious no-call in the Saints-Rams game gets called if the ref was between the 30's and not near the end zone.  The roar of the Saints sideline may have been enough for him to pull the trigger. 

 

Also, if you are a ref by the sideline you are going to hear "Hey ref watch #65 he is holding on every play". And the ref will give extra attention and maybe call it. So some of this is pretty understandable. 

 

"A pair of German researchers showed actual referees old video clips of possible soccer infractions, with crowd noise played at high or low volume. Refs looking at the exact same interactions were more likely to hand out a yellow card when they heard a lot of crowd noise than when the volume was low.

It follows, then, that screaming and hat-throwing football personnel may also have an effect on referee choices."

Edited March 25, 2021 by purplemonster