Sens of Fairness

by 80 on Feb 3, 2012 11:55 PM EST

I wrote this and sent it to every high profile media member I could get an email address for. Dreger, Cullen, Lebrun, Hodge, Reda, Scanlan, MacGregor, Maclean, Kypreos, K.Fraser, Llyod, York, Schreiber... all of them got a copy. I even sent a copy to the NHL Officials Association!

I don't expect anything to come of it, but at some point it's got to be discussed. It may be a while yet, but Imo it's a highly legitimate explanation for the Sens experience with the officials (Jason Smith once got a triple minor FFS).

I tried to make it as politically correct as I could, but the reality is that most will dismiss it (wilfull denial in a many instances, Imo). I'm interested to get your take, SB Nation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"This is getting ridiculous... This is getting so blatantly obvious that it's embarassing for the stripes, and you're going to get an Ottawa Senator getting a 10 minute misconduct at some point, or I will! It's unbelievable how things have been let go, and then the Senators get tagged for another penalty with 2:45 remaining in this game."
-Denis Potvin, Jan. 31, 2012, Ottawa vs Boston on Sportsnet

I've been watching the Ottawa Senators for two decades now and I've seen my share of complaints and conspiracy theories. I ascribe to the idea of ignoring them. It's a fast game and the quality of officiating is superb. That, however, does not change the fact that I just watched the Sens go another entire game without a powerplay, this time against the most penalized team in the NHL. The Senators seem to experience this type of occurrence at an inordinate rate and I can't help wondering "why?".

I vehemently argue against the idea of a conspiracy; however, what I don't argue is human nature. I believe it is a fact that all referees strive to be as impartial as possible. I also believe that hockey is an emotional game and that no referee is immune to being swayed by the ever-changing emotional temperature of the game. Furthermore, I believe that as emotions rise, they tend to skew perception and underlying bias becomes more evident.

*Here's where you'll need to bear with me*

Why is this important? The reality of the NHL is that many of the referees grew up as fans of the only two Canadian teams that belonged to The Original 6. It is impossible to completely remove the passion and commitment that a true fan has for their team. I for one followed the Sens when they were just beginning to have success, but I was a Ducks fan. Selanne and Kariya were my two favorite players and I loved that team. I cheered on the Sens in '07 and I'm still disappointed they didn't win, but I can't look back on it without that Ducks fan in me remembering how I felt about the Mighty Ducks of yore...

That point factors into this discussion because when emotions rise and the games become more meaningful, it's not inconceivable for the natural bias of officials to show. And it's not as simple as the amount of powerplays or specialty teams' play---Watch the offside call on Spezza with 3:50 remaining in their game against Boston... How could the decision to blow the whistle have been made so quickly? It was blown before he even entered the zone! Its becoming difficult to play devil's advocate---The timing of officiating decisions is just as important as the amount of calls in favour of a team and I simply cannot help but feel like the Senators are at a constant disadvantage with regards to officiating---It's tough to dismiss the background and history of multiple NHL referees as a potential explanation. I do not believe it is a conspiracy. What I believe is that it is an inherently flawed system to have subject humans required to be perfectly impartial, ignoring their own history and inate (or inherited) biases. In my opinion, this implies the need for greater exposure and honest dialogue to maintain the integrity of the game.

Now in a season where the Sens were supposed to be irrelevant, they are sitting in a playoff spot and occupying the spot that may run the streak to 7 years of non-playoff hockey for a certain team... Ottawa has gone approximately 10 straight games with some highly questionable officiating (mostly from the same group of referees) and are on the verge of falling out of that playoff spot. Is it really that inconceivable for officials who grew up as fans of the Original 6 franchises to be influenced by their emotions in a negative way where it concerns impartiality and the little guy down the 401? They may be tasked with being impartial (and they generally do an admirable job) but they are human and are thus prone to both human error and normal human responses.

Some of you will brush this off, some of you will refute it, some of you will consider and debate it, but what I seek is simply to begin the discussion. Is there a bias against the team that never should have been (ref: Roy McGregor, Globe and Mail)?

There's plenty of nonsense in these threads, but this is just a sample of how the Ottawa fan base feels about NHL officiating:
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1088963
http://fans.senators.nhl.com/community/topic/8118-penalties-and-lack-of-power-plays/
http://www.gmhockey.com/t5616-refereeing-and-what-can-be-done#275995

That last one in particular has some interesting pics at the bottom of the page on a blown-off goal in a recent game against Phoenix. That play happens on a nightly basis and more often than not, it's a good goal. Again: fast game, ever-changing environment, decisions made in split seconds, etc. All understood... The reality is simply that only those who watch the Senators night-in, night-out seem to succumb (at some point or another) to questioning the motives of the officials. I would speculate that Denis Potvin would not have indulged such nonsense prior to becoming a Senators broadcaster. Now, he mentions it almost every broadcast.

I have sent this comment directly to http://www.nhlofficials.com/contact.asp in the hopes that it garners further consideration. There are many Sens fans that would love the opportunity to tell a few officials how they really feel, but I'm hoping this is a more tempered approach.

We are the kid brother of the Eastern Conference Canadian teams and we've suffered our initiation for years now. It would be nice if we could gain a little acceptance, and possibly... a level playing field..?

Poll

Is this a reasonable commentary on NHL officiating?

Yes

8 votes

No

11 votes

He may be retired, but I still hate Kerry Fraser

5 votes

24 votes | Poll has closed

This FanPost was written by a member of the Silver Seven community, and does not necessarily reflect the beliefs or opinions of the site managers, editors, or Sports Blogs Nation, Inc.

Tweet Comment 17 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Read More: Ottawa Senators, Anaheim Ducks

Comments

So your theory is that officials want Toronto in the playoffs instead of Ottawa because they grew up watching Toronto?

The problem I have with this theory, and with all "Officials are biased against Ottawa" theories is that it ignores the fact that officials are graded on job performance. There’s no practical justification for screwing a team, consciously or unconsciously, if the end result is that it affects your pay and possibly your employment.

For me, the bottom line is that officials are human, and therefore fallible. A poorly-called game is not an example of a bias against Ottawa any more than a poorly-played game is an example of Karlsson suddenly being terrible.

When we see more to it than that, I think what we’re really seeing is an egocentric bias. Unless we watch every single NHL game played during the season, there’s no reasonable way we can claim preferential or detrimental treatment by officials, because we have no frame of reference. As Potvin pointed out last night, the Islanders just had back-to-back games against Toronto (including OT) where the Leafs had no penalties. If officials really were biased towards the teams they watched growing up, the calls should have gone the other way considering the differing records of the Isles and Leafs during the 80’s.

The bottom line for me is that we’re seeing what we want to see, and there’s no real "discussion" to be had. Are there poorly-officiated games that affect the Senators? Absolutely. Are they indicative of a larger bias against any one team? Almost certainly not.

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Feb 4, 2012 10:55 AM EST reply actions 3 recs

We should drop this

The team hasn’t really played that well in the past few weeks. That’s not the refs fault. It seems like we’re a bit guilty of reading the press clippings a little too much when we were winning gaems that we should have lost.

by I Still Miss Hossa!!! on Feb 4, 2012 11:11 AM EST up reply actions

Well, I definitely think we've been on the end of some awful calls (and non-calls) lately

The Boston game, in particular, was mind-boggling. But I don’t think it’s indicative of anything deeper than a game where the officials didn’t call an even game, and that happens to every team.

Besides, no referee made Andy flub that red-liner, after all.

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Feb 4, 2012 11:28 AM EST up reply actions

Yes agree

Just the conspiracy thing has run its course. Let’s give it a rest!

by I Still Miss Hossa!!! on Feb 4, 2012 11:38 AM EST up reply actions

like I said in my post, it's not a conspiracy theory

It’s a commentary on human nature and the character of certain referees.

by 80 on Feb 4, 2012 2:06 PM EST up reply actions

Agreed.

The team shouldn’t have been in a position for these calls to make a difference. That being said, some of the calls recently have been atrocious. That stuff happens and we haven’t gone a week this season without some fan base crying about officiating. None of that changes the fact that I believe this has been a long standing issue for the Ottawa franchise.

From Fraser and McCreary to O’Rourke and Lee, there are a select few referees that have always seemed to do poor jobs of officiating Sens games. It’s not all of them….

by 80 on Feb 4, 2012 2:05 PM EST up reply actions

You do realize you used an example of Toronto getting no penalties called against them in two straight games as an explanation for how the refs don’t have a bias toward the Leafs, right?

And no my theory isn’t that they want Toronto in the playoffs instead of the Sens. My theory is that they have an existing bias toward the Leafs and that like all things that come from Toronto, they do whatever they can to limit the Sens. It’s similar to the treatment from Toronto sports media. They don’t outright attack the Sens, but the way they discuss the team and their accomplishments is far different than the way they discuss the Leafs.

As far as the refs are concerned, there are key intervals in each game where a call/non-call can legitimately change the outcome. The Sens are frequently on the wrong side of those calls. In other words, I’ve watched games where one team has 4 PPs and the other only 1 and had no issue with the reffing. That being said, I’ve also watched game where both teams have 5 PPs and I felt like one team got jobbed by the timing of the calls.

To be more direct, what I think is: Many of the refs live and grew up in the 416 or 905. They are human and can be influenced, even subconciously, by their peers and their surroundings. When deciding to make a call or not, I believe those decisions are occassionaly impacted by their backgrounds.

Do you really think that if a bias exists outside of their profession that it will never impact their performance, when the two are directly related?

by 80 on Feb 4, 2012 1:59 PM EST up reply actions

Even if it does, what can we do about it?

But let’s talk through this point by point, because this is an interesting discussion.

You do realize you used an example of Toronto getting no penalties called against them in two straight games as an explanation for how the refs don’t have a bias toward the Leafs, right?

I think you misunderstood me here. I was not trying to demonstrate pro- or anti-Leafs bias by the league’s officials (I thought I was clear that I don’t believe any such bias exits). I was merely pointing out that other teams have also been victims of uneven officiating this year, but unless we follow every game, we miss those instances—as Sens fans, we’re only focused on Sens games.

My theory is that they have an existing bias toward the Leafs and that like all things that come from Toronto, they do whatever they can to limit the Sens.

But that’s only a plausible theory if every referee was from Toronto and grew up a Leafs fan. We know that’s not the case. Moreover, if we were to assume officials have a bias towards the teams they were fans of growing up and we were to assume that most officials are in their 40’s, then we should see a clear bias towards the Islanders and Oilers, as those were the most successful teams of the 80’s. But, as the Leafs’ miraculous penalty-free hockey streak against the Islanders demonstrates, that is not the case.

The Sens are frequently on the wrong side of those calls.

Again, egocentric bias plays into this. You are a Sens fan. I am a Sens fan. We see bullshit calls and we get frustrated. But are we fair about the calls that go our way? The Senators beat the Maple Leafs in January in part due to a Spezza goal that could have easily been waved off for interference. Is that a good call simply because it went Ottawa’s way? If we’re going to bitch about Foligno’s interference penalty against Phoenix, we’d better be willing to admit Spezza got away with a lot more just a week before. But we don’t. We’re fans. We see what we want to see—and that makes us terrible evaluators of perceived “fairness”.

Many of the refs live and grew up in the 416 or 905

There may be something here, but not enough to declare bias. The NHL has 36 active referees. Of the 25 I could find information on, 8 were from a region near enough to Toronto that I would consider it “close.” (My threshold was 250 miles… As an ignorant American, I’m not familiar with Ontario area codes.) I’m not sure where the remainder hail from. Toronto and its surrounding areas may make up the largest single region, but it’s still a fraction of the total pool. It looks like the odds of having a Toronto-born official on any given night are somewhere around 33%.

When deciding to make a call or not, I believe those decisions are occassionaly impacted by their backgrounds.

But there’s no way to prove this claim, ever, and it runs counter to the logic that making bad calls impacts the job security of officials. Occam’s Razor: Would you make a call for the Sens if it cost you your job?

Do you really think that if a bias exists outside of their profession that it will never impact their performance, when the two are directly related?

I think there’s enough of a built-in deterrence (as mentioned above) that it wouldn’t.

I also think humans demonstrate an ability to overcome bias all the time. I’m not familiar with your job, but if you serve clients you dislike in spite of your dislike for them (as most of us do) then you have a demonstrable real-world example of your bias not impacting your performance. Alternatively, you could just watch the customer service desk at any retail store or hotel.

And if you posit that an unwillingness to go above and beyond your prescribed duties due to dislike represents bias, then I’d counter with my original question: “Even if it does, what can we do about it?” If you believe humans are not capable of overcoming bias, then changing the officials would accomplish nothing but a shift in the bias. Though it might ultimately benefit the Senators, it would still by definition be unfair. The only practical solution would be to remove the human element from the game, and if you do that…. why play at all?

Silver Seven - The Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators Blogs

by Mark Parisi on Feb 4, 2012 4:21 PM EST up reply actions

Let's start with: I don't disagree.

To simplify my life, I’m going to respond in bullet points:

- The officiating this year has been suspect across the board and I think there should be an adjustment made to the way games are officiated.

- My point about the Isles/Leafs situation is simply that the league runs through Toronto and its both far too logical and far too easy to believe any favoritism that exists would benefit that team. Them falling out of playoff contention and subsequently receiving just over 1 pk per game just looks sketchy. ..could very well be legit, but you can see where the doubt comes from.

- My point on ref biases related to birthplace is a) related directly to a select grouping of referees that I believe have shown consistent bias against and towards the Sens and Leafs, respectively.

- Agree too an extent on the egocentricity of the claim; however, the Foligno and Spezza examples don’t hold water when being discussed in this scenario: I think the Foligno situation was 50-50. It was a judgment call and that call went against us. I think it should have been a goal, given that Foligno’s path was impeded and he did all he could to avoid Smith, but I don’t think anyone can argue that Smith had no opportunity to stay with the play as a result of Foligno’s path through the edge of the crease. The Spezza goal, however, was called correctly because Spezza was pushed onto the goalie. I’m of the opinion that, as a team game, if a defending skater creates trouble for his goalie…too bad, so sad (too lazy to properly express this thought…)

- Can’t prove bias, but at least if there’s a discussion about it, they might feel like they’re being watched and thus respond accordingly.

- It’s more of a subconcious response than anything else. It’s no like the rule book doesn’t require constant interpretation. There are many things that go into a refs ability to interpret what they see, including (ex) fandom.

- Rational humans demonstrate an ability to overcome bias, but emotional humans consistently succumb to such behaviour. There is no doubt that as the emotions change in a game, all those involved (from the players and coaches to the fans and officials) are affected. It’s totally plausible that a ref allows his bias to colour his jugdment (however slightly or significantly) during one of these instances.

- It’s about how their being watched. If they believe that their motives could come in to question for reasons of bias and fandom, they are all the more likely to compensate with objective calls.

by 80 on Feb 4, 2012 6:01 PM EST up reply actions

I am sure every team's fan base complains about the refs, even the Leafs:

and if every team feels hard done by the refs, who’s benefiting? As you can guess, I voted no.

by whatsinaname on Feb 4, 2012 11:19 AM EST reply actions

Enough

The more we whine about the refereeing with all the conspiracy theories, the more we watch for it, and the more we help create this as a reality.

Please lets focus on something else. It’s enough already.

by Marvellous on Feb 4, 2012 11:30 AM EST reply actions

It's true that the reffing has been terrible, but I'm not sure it's because they want the Leafs in the playoffs.

It’s true that the refs do have biases, but I’m not sure how much of an effect they have on officiating.

That being said, I think maybe you should add a few more points to back up your position for those guys. Such as…
- No penalty to Wolski for elbowing Alfie
- Game misconducts given to Foligno and Konopka for clean hits/collisions
- Foligno taking abuse (ie. elbows from Crosby, knee on knee hits)
- Karlsson’s newfound reputation as a “diver”

by Sports Fan! on Feb 4, 2012 11:40 AM EST reply actions

I should have left the playoffs/leafs part out

That wasn’t really the point.

I could have added dozens of examples, but I spent two hours creating that email and 90% of that time was used finding email addresses…

Last year, for example, Ottawa went multiple games without a powerplay. That’s unheard of. And the one that always baffles me is that Jason Smith triple minor. There’s never been a clearer example of the bias than that… wtf is a triple minor? nonsense.

by 80 on Feb 4, 2012 2:11 PM EST up reply actions

Let's not become one of THOSE teams

One of the things that made me hate the Leafs was how frequently nothing is their team’s fault, it’s all the refs fault. I remember in those Ottawa-Toronto playoff series back in the day watching Pat Quinn bitch about the refs in every post-game conference. I watch a game with my girlfriend’s brother, and he spends the entire game screaming at the TV “That’s a penalty!” every time anyone enters a 3 foot circle around a Leaf.

There are blown calls in this game. Some work in our favour, some don’t. Over the course of an 82 game season, it usually evens out. That winning goal in Toronto a few weeks ago with Spezza intertwined with Gustavsson comes to mind.

The Sens have won 5 games in a row because, frankly, they haven’t looked all that good for the last 10 games or so. If we want to win games, play better, and stop waiting for the calls to go our way.

by spez_dispenser on Feb 4, 2012 1:25 PM EST reply actions

Whats funny is I honestly can’t remember the last time I got upset and said “That’s a penalty!” and yelled at my TV..

But I meant it when I said 10 games. Not just this last stretch of 5-6…I think the reffing has been shit ever since the Sens started to get a little seperation. They won in spite of it for the first 4-5 games, and it cost them in the last 5-6.

Not that I subscribe to the Leafs in, Sens out conspiracy theory, but the Sens had more PKs in those 5-6 games than the Leafs had in the entire month of January. That’s pretty f*d up.

by 80 on Feb 4, 2012 2:29 PM EST reply actions

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand

we’re that guy.

He was once called the worst participant Cirque du Soleil ever had.

by RogerTheShrubber on Feb 4, 2012 3:00 PM EST reply actions 2 recs

I doubt there's even a subconscious bias

I mean… sure, maybe because the Ottawa Senators are a relatively new team they don’t necessarily get the same respect as more storied teams in the NHL. But I doubt it’s anything measurable, even when examined over the course of 20 years of history.

When refs have a bad game and it hurts the Senators, those refs should be criticised and reprimanded. But there’s no need to overstate the significance of a bad game on the part of a ref.

On the other hand, if the refs did make a statement against MacLean and the Sens for bringing the Karlsson “diver” comment into the public, it would be pathetic and unprofessional. It might have happened, but I don’t think it’s the sort of thing that would carry over. More likely, the ref (was it O’Rourke?) would simply stop explaining calls or non-calls to MacLean.

Silver Seven | Twitter | Facebook | E-mail | eBay

by Peter Raaymakers on Feb 5, 2012 1:50 PM EST reply actions