Why Games are Managed

It's Saturday morning, and I have a choice between writing this post or watching this crap.  So I'm writing.

My last post explored the concept of Game Management by NHL referees.  Basically, the theory is that the referees try to make games more palatable to fans by calling penalties according to certain formulas (or patterns).  There was no groundbreaking revelations in that post - intelligent hockey fans have made those deductions for themselves and have probably detected more formulas than was listed.

This post is to be more conspiratorial.  Let's discuss "Why".  Why does the NHL want their games managed?

Well, the first reason is easy enough to determine.  The NHL argues that exciting hockey is generated by games that are close.  Like casual hockey fans, the NHL would like the score of the game with 5 minutes remaining to be withing one goal.  In their opinion, which has been expressed in interviews, fans enjoy games more when the score is close.  Which is correct, of course.  The NHL, however, will take steps to ensure that games remain close in order to increase attendance which increases their revenue make it more exciting for the fans.  So, the first reason is that they believe "close games make money".  I can write a 1000-word post on how wrong this is, but will leave that for another day. (Quickly: referees are contributing to the game's outcome - BAD).

The other reason we'll explore is more of an theory, because no actual physical evidence exists.  No newspaper would touch this.  Gambling.  I am not accusing any active referee was involved in a points-shaving scheme, but I'm raising the question.  If an NBA referee could do it, what would stop an NHL referee?  We've already proven that NHL referees have a direct impact on the outcome or score of games and have identified the formulas that they use to do so.  What stops a referee from betting on a game and then calling the game's penalties to influence the score?  How easy would it be for a referee to call the game to keep the score close to help his bet?  Or worse, how easy is it for organized crime to be involved?

The next post will look at what can be done.  Because something needs to be done.

Nick Kypreos is obviously a reader

Article

I understand that Nick Kypreos is a pretty passionate guy, but I don't think I'm whining.  Or am I?  It doesn't matter, I'm just proud of Nick that he could write an article - if you believe that he did it by himself.  I think he had help, he sure ain't (yes - i wrote "ain't") no Chris Shultz.

It's pretty obvious that Nick had somebody read some of these blog posts to him.  He doesn't come across as being somebody who would read a, um... anything. 

Here's a quick rebuttal to Nick, that he'll probably have that same person read to him:

The problems started with expansion.  The NHL started to expand in 1991, and continued to add teams over the next decade or so - Columbus joined the NHL in 2000 as the last expansion team of the era.  Prior to expansion, the NHL was ruled by speed, scoring and saves.  The NHL changed during the expansion years to allow the new teams to compete with the established teams.  Would an owner who just paid 50 or 80 million dollars want to have their new toy get broken 82 times every year?  Would they want to have their new hockey team lose every game by lopsided scores?  They dreaded becoming the 2009-2010 Toronto Maple Leafs.  So what was the answer?

Create conditions during gameplay that gave less talented teams the ability to keep the score close.  Sensible, except it makes for boring hockey.  What can we look at as evidence?
* Don't call so many penalties for obstruction.
* Game Management by referees.  See upcoming blog.
* Lou Lamouriello Lamerilo Lamorillo.  Damn! New Jersey Devils.
* Gary Bettman's repeated explanation that he believes exciting hockey is dictated by the score of the game.  He would smugly cite the close score of the game, instead of talking about the exciting plays or great flow.  That's because there were no exciting plays or great flow to games.  We're actually still waiting for that to return.

Nick, you apparently subscribe to the old adage "If something ain't (!) broke, don't fix it". It is 'broke'.  You just can't read the signs.

Goalies are Special

The Position of Goalie is a special position in hockey.  Goalies have special privileges, they have special rules, they have special equipment.  Even other hockey players will tell you that goalies are a special breed.  The position of goalie IS a special position and should be treated as such.  Here are just some examples of how Goalies are special:

Some Examples of how Goalies are Special

1. The position of Goalie is to ensure that goals are NOT scored.  All other hockey players are trying to score.  Goalies are the only players on the ice who think "scoring sucks".
   
2. They are allowed to stop the play of the game by 'covering' the puck.
3. They get to wear equipment that is specifically designed to protect them while they play the role of Killjoys.  
4. They have a really big stick.
   
5. They have their special 'blue ice'.
6. Opposing players are not allowed to interfere with Goalies at any location on the ice.  Its like "Roughing the Kicker", but with more equipment.

Here's the problem - Goalies can also kill forechecks.  That isn't their job.  Their job is to ruin the opposing team's party by stopping the puck from entering the net behind them.  Forechecking, as explained in previous posts is DESIRABLE.  By using their trapper on their stick to handle and pass the puck, they can essentially act as another defenseman - which gives the defending team an advantage of the attacking team.  Not exciting.  The first time I saw this was with Billy Smith in the '80s.  This is not a 'part of hockey'.  This is a modification made by players that was not curtailed at the beginning and now precedence has been set.

Now what?
OK, the cat is out of the bag.  What changes can we make?  It's simple - If a player on the ice uses their equipment for anything other than it was originally designed for, that player is assessed a two minute "Unsportsmanlike Conduct" penalty.

As soon as a goalie uses their trapper (aka CATCHING GLOVE) on their stick (which is designed for stopping pucks, not shooting them) they are assessed a two minute penalty.  Goalies can still stop pucks behind the net to aid their defensemen, or scoop pucks with one hand but this would put the end to the forecheck-killing goalie.  Goalies have the right to safe, reliable equipment and protection from interference, but they do not have the right to play as other players play.