I have been involved, either as a player or a fan, in ice sports such as ringette and hockey since I was 8 years old. I am now 37, which gives me 29 years experience and observation. One on-ice occurrence in these sports that continues to perplex me is the retaliation penalty. Take the following situation as an example.
Two opposing players, player A and player B are battling one-on-one in the corner for the puck. Player A is using her stick a little too freely on player B, who continues battling for the puck despite player A's cross-checks to her forearm and back. Player B finally breaks free with the puck, or so she thinks, only to find Player A's stick blade hooked underneath her arm and around to the front of her chest, clearly impeding her forward motion. Player B looks to the referee and notices that no penalty is indicated. Out of frustration, Player B turns and punches Player A.
REFEREE's REACTION: Player B is penalized.
THOUGHTS: Player B should clearly be penalized. What is frustrating is that if the referee had called the initial penalty, this never had to happen in the first place. More often than not, by only punishing the retaliators, the referee loses total control of the game, opening the door for unnecessary violence and frustration.
The situation described above is frustrating but not perplexing. Let's take the same situation with a different call by the referee.
Two opposing players, player A and player B are battling one-on-one in the corner for the puck. Player A is using her stick a little too freely on player B, who continues battling for the puck despite player A's cross-checks to her forearm and back. Player B finally breaks free with the puck, or so she thinks, only to find Player A's stick blade hooked underneath her arm and around to the front of her chest, clearly impeding her forward motion. Player B looks to the referee and notices that no penalty is indicated. Out of frustration, Player B turns and punches Player A.
REFEREE's REACTION: Player A and player B are penalized.
THOUGHTS: This perplexes me! The referee had already clearly decided that player A's actions were not deserving of a penalty so why is player A penalized only after player B decides to take matters in her own hands? If player B had not turned and punched player A, no penalty would have been called at all but player B turns and punches player A and now both are penalized. How does this even make sense?
No comments:
Post a Comment