Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
DOPS
Oct 27, 2017 18:31:58 GMT
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2017 18:31:58 GMT
That wasn’t aimed at you, that was a general post aimed at everyone. Apologies. I actually know where to get the rules but, being online on the Cage, I thought it easier to ask here! I still don't get Fitzgerald's ejection though. Can’t comment on that as no footage is available of it.
|
|
dp
Jim Keyes
Posts: 966
|
Post by dp on Oct 27, 2017 19:18:41 GMT
The new ruling is spot on. Particularly in terms of exonerating Hicks - and it all explains why the Steelers bench and other players don’t react to the hit - because it was legal!
|
|
bobness
Les Strongman
Posts: 5,084
Member is Online
|
DOPS
Nov 2, 2017 17:07:47 GMT
Post by bobness on Nov 2, 2017 17:07:47 GMT
To give this a bump.... Anyone else think this week's rulings are spot on, much more coherent and somehow "feel" better? Like someone's clearly spent some time thinking about them? The "check" on Lord was a very nasty elbow to the head, and is a reckless, dangerous play. 3 games is about right, although the penalty called, a 5+G (not a Match), stands and has not been upgraded. The rest are Ok from on the night, job done.
|
|
|
DOPS
Nov 14, 2017 16:01:35 GMT
Post by brodeurfan1993 on Nov 14, 2017 16:01:35 GMT
DOPS released the following statement a few minutes ago. Personally I think this is all (if a little late) a fantastic development for the league. Glad they have made serious changes moving forward:
The Elite League Board of Directors met on Wednesday November 8th 2017 to discuss the future of the Department of Player Safety and officiating in the league for the remainder of the 2017/18 season and beyond.
The Board have agreed to continue to outsource all Player Safety matters to former NHL linesman Lyle Seitz and the Player Safety Committee (PSC).
Seitz and the PSC will also oversee education and development for Elite League officials over the next season. This will include video analysis and feedback of current officiating.
The Board has also unanimously agreed to introduce the 4-Man officiating system for all Elite League, Challenge Cup and Playoff games from January 2018.
The need to continue to develop, educate and improve officials has been recognised by the Board and the move to a 4-man system is seen as a major step forward in that regard.
The new system is expected to come into effect from January to allow sufficient time to consider the logistics of the change and to ensure that enough quality officials are available to work EIHL games.
The plan is for the EIHL to use senior officials working in tandem with officials who are new to the league, to ensure the transition to the UK’s top flight is smoother than the 3-man system has previously allowed for.
This is part of a long term plan to improve officiating standards within the UK and to grow the number of officials available.
Members of the Elite League Board will be meeting with Joy Johnston, Refereeing Chief and Director of the Officiating Education Programme for Ice Hockey UK (IHUK), on November 28th to further discuss these plans.
“We feel that the EIHL is too good of a league to be running the 3-man-system going forward.” Cardiff Devils Managing Director Todd Kelman said.
“All of the top leagues around the world are using the 4-man system, and this change should result in a speeding up of games and improved player safety.
“We can’t make the change to the 4-man system overnight. We have to look at what is out there and how we transition to the 4-man system, but the aim is to start using the 4-man system in January, if we can find enough quality officials that are ready to make the jump to the EIHL.”
Furthermore, the Board has agreed to increase the scope of which penalties will be automatically reviewed by the Department of Player Safety with immediate effect.
As well as continuing to automatically review all 2+10 and 5+Game penalties for Checking to the Head, all 2+10 and 5+Game penalties for Checking from Behind and all Match penalties, the Department of Player Safety will now also automatically review all 5 minute Major penalties and any body contact penalties which result in an injury.
|
|
Yotes
Forum Admin
Posts: 16,405
Member is Online
|
DOPS
Nov 14, 2017 16:14:38 GMT
Post by Yotes on Nov 14, 2017 16:14:38 GMT
"...if we can find enough quality officials..." I suspect this may be an issue, unless the rumoured Moray Hanson cloning facilities that I've just made up are actually real? On the face of it though, good news. The PSC lot have seemed a better setup so far.
|
|
iginla
Chick Zamick
Posts: 13,422
|
DOPS
Nov 14, 2017 21:11:55 GMT
via mobile
Post by iginla on Nov 14, 2017 21:11:55 GMT
Excellent news. And let's invite Lyle Seitz over here for a little hands on training too. 👍
|
|
|
DOPS
Nov 15, 2017 9:32:34 GMT
Post by Big Popper on Nov 15, 2017 9:32:34 GMT
2 refs, 3 refs, 4 refs. It won't make a difference unless the standard of referees is raised. Having 2 poor refs will only double the amount of bad decisions made. negative 1 plus negative 2 equals ....... I'll let you do the maths.
|
|
rjc
Jade Galbraith
Posts: 30
|
DOPS
Nov 15, 2017 13:49:35 GMT
Post by rjc on Nov 15, 2017 13:49:35 GMT
So the Department of Player Safety will now also automatically review all 5 minute Major penalties and any body contact penalties which result in an injury, they are going to be busy. 1. Why does a fight need to be reviewed? Both drop their gloves they are both willing participants, if one is forced to fight or protect himself that's what the instigator rule/penalties are for!
2a. How can the body contact penalty/injury be effectively policed? What if a player gets dubious cross check towards the end of the game but after some "magic water treatment" continues and finishes the game. A day later he's properly assessed and has a more serious strain or concussion, given the Monday PM deadline for clubs to request a review, what action is taken if they are late in submitting it? 2b. So a player accidentally, clumsily or intentionally (often only the offending player really knows which) cross checks with an elbow to the head, ref only calls 2 minutes but the player can't continue, ends up being out for several weeks with concussion. At what point is the offending player assessed on any subsequent penalty?
I fully support player safety but have the EIHL fully thought this process through...?
|
|
|
DOPS
Nov 29, 2017 17:36:57 GMT
Post by thebestpanthers on Nov 29, 2017 17:36:57 GMT
Looking at the latest round of reviews by the DOP's it looks like they have actually grown a pair - their descriptions of the offences and reasons for the additional penalties (where applicable) are first class - hopefully the EIHL will now address the other issues that annoy people (although with fiasco of CC Q/f games I will not hold my breath)
|
|
|
DOPS
Nov 30, 2017 11:47:25 GMT
Post by Flying Viking on Nov 30, 2017 11:47:25 GMT
Even Belfast's equipment manager got a 2 game ban, following a 10 minute bench misconduct penalty! "The Equipment Manager’s role does NOT include verbal content directed at opposing players." That was a busy week for DOPS. And they seem to have done a great job.
|
|
|
DOPS
Dec 28, 2017 20:12:49 GMT
Post by fishman on Dec 28, 2017 20:12:49 GMT
DOPS - GAGNON 2 games AND FITZGERALD 1 game SUSPENDED FOLLOWING REVIEW
|
|
|
DOPS
Dec 28, 2017 20:17:33 GMT
via mobile
Post by wgray on Dec 28, 2017 20:17:33 GMT
DOPS - GAGNON 2 games AND FITZGERALD 1 game SUSPENDED FOLLOWING REVIEW that’s fair punishment for both
|
|
|
DOPS
Dec 28, 2017 20:29:55 GMT
Post by Bagheera on Dec 28, 2017 20:29:55 GMT
DOPS - GAGNON 2 games AND FITZGERALD 1 game SUSPENDED FOLLOWING REVIEW that’s fair punishment for both Is it? I fully expected Gagnon to get more than Fitzgerald but 1 and 2 games respectadly? No mention of Fitzgerald engaging in a fight with a full face mask on. I don't actually know if it is in the rules or not, perhaps somebody can enlighten me. It should be if it isn't. Why release a DOPS statement on just the one incident? Neither team play until Saturday so no immediate rush. At least sumarise the whole game. Brisbois got a checking to head penalty but no mnetion in the DOPS update as it just focus' on that incident. DOPS is still probably ahead of where it was a few months back, but it is going backwards again. The over the top, overly opinionated comments in the statements are laughable.
|
|
|
DOPS
Dec 28, 2017 21:08:54 GMT
via mobile
Bagheera likes this
Post by wgray on Dec 28, 2017 21:08:54 GMT
that’s fair punishment for both Is it? I fully expected Gagnon to get more than Fitzgerald but 1 and 2 games respectadly? No mention of Fitzgerald engaging in a fight with a full face mask on. I don't actually know if it is in the rules or not, perhaps somebody can enlighten me. It should be if it isn't. Why release a DOPS statement on just the one incident? Neither team play until Saturday so no immediate rush. At least sumarise the whole game. Brisbois got a checking to head penalty but no mnetion in the DOPS update as it just focus' on that incident. DOPS is still probably ahead of where it was a few months back, but it is going backwards again. The over the top, overly opinionated comments in the statements are laughable. I very much doubt that there will be any rules relating to fighting with a cage, I mean fighting is illegal whether you’ve got a helmet on, no helmet, grid, cage, so I’m guessing they won’t consider it. In terms of the players ‘code’ it’s a pretty crappy move to make, I’m sure Gagnon will be looking to do a number on him once it’s off and test how weak his jaw is now. I agree with you as well they don’t need to make the reviews so opinionated, it’s just childish if anything.
|
|
|
DOPS
Dec 28, 2017 21:21:10 GMT
via mobile
Post by dill1015 on Dec 28, 2017 21:21:10 GMT
Is it? I fully expected Gagnon to get more than Fitzgerald but 1 and 2 games respectadly? No mention of Fitzgerald engaging in a fight with a full face mask on. I don't actually know if it is in the rules or not, perhaps somebody can enlighten me. It should be if it isn't. Why release a DOPS statement on just the one incident? Neither team play until Saturday so no immediate rush. At least sumarise the whole game. Brisbois got a checking to head penalty but no mnetion in the DOPS update as it just focus' on that incident. DOPS is still probably ahead of where it was a few months back, but it is going backwards again. The over the top, overly opinionated comments in the statements are laughable. I very much doubt that there will be any rules relating to fighting with a cage, I mean fighting is illegal whether you’ve got a helmet on, no helmet, grid, cage, so I’m guessing they won’t consider it. In terms of the players ‘code’ it’s a pretty crappy move to make, I’m sure Gagnon will be looking to do a number on him once it’s off and test how weak his jaw is now. I agree with you as well they don’t need to make the reviews so opinionated, it’s just childish if anything. Thats a rubbish argument. You could do anything or use anything if thats how it worked. Just because it illegal doesnt mean there arent rules around it.
|
|
iginla
Chick Zamick
Posts: 13,422
|
DOPS
Dec 28, 2017 21:26:49 GMT
Post by iginla on Dec 28, 2017 21:26:49 GMT
DOPS - GAGNON 2 games AND FITZGERALD 1 game SUSPENDED FOLLOWING REVIEW that’s fair punishment for both I don't think so.....are Gagnons actions twice as bad as Fitzgeralds ? Fitzgerald jumps Gagnon. He is 3rd man in. Also breaks free from a linesman. I'd have given Gagnon 3 and Fitzgerald 2. But how does Shudra get away with nothing ? We've seen lesser checks than that incur suspensions.
|
|
|
DOPS
Dec 28, 2017 21:31:38 GMT
via mobile
Post by wgray on Dec 28, 2017 21:31:38 GMT
I very much doubt that there will be any rules relating to fighting with a cage, I mean fighting is illegal whether you’ve got a helmet on, no helmet, grid, cage, so I’m guessing they won’t consider it. In terms of the players ‘code’ it’s a pretty crappy move to make, I’m sure Gagnon will be looking to do a number on him once it’s off and test how weak his jaw is now. I agree with you as well they don’t need to make the reviews so opinionated, it’s just childish if anything. Thats a rubbish argument. You could do anything or use anything if thats how it worked. Just because it illegal doesnt mean there arent rules around it. I’m speculating, I agree it’s wrong but with regards a rule that states something like ‘if a player is involved in a fight with a cage on they receive a ban of X’ I don’t know. Can you provide evidence of such a rule?
|
|
|
DOPS
Dec 28, 2017 21:34:48 GMT
via mobile
Post by wgray on Dec 28, 2017 21:34:48 GMT
that’s fair punishment for both I don't think so.....are Gagnons actions twice as bad as Fitzgeralds ? Fitzgerald jumps Gagnon. He is 3rd man in. Also breaks free from a linesman. I'd have given Gagnon 3 and Fitzgerald 2. But how does Shudra get away with nothing ? We've seen lesser checks than that incur suspensions. all Gagnon did was instigate a fight with Shudra and then roughed up Valdix a bit, he might have been aggressive with Shudra, but he doesn’t deserve 3 games for that.
|
|
dp
Jim Keyes
Posts: 966
|
Post by dp on Dec 28, 2017 21:35:35 GMT
Another rubbish statement from DOPS full of massive contradictions. Saying Gagnon started the whole incident? Just after you've clearly shown and stated that he was reacting to a check to the head on Lee?? So Shudra started it then?
|
|
dp
Jim Keyes
Posts: 966
|
Post by dp on Dec 28, 2017 21:40:43 GMT
I don't think so.....are Gagnons actions twice as bad as Fitzgeralds ? Fitzgerald jumps Gagnon. He is 3rd man in. Also breaks free from a linesman. I'd have given Gagnon 3 and Fitzgerald 2. But how does Shudra get away with nothing ? We've seen lesser checks than that incur suspensions. all Gagnon did was instigate a fight with Shudra and then roughed up Valdix a bit, he might have been aggressive with Shudra, but he doesn’t deserve 3 games for that. Exactly. Saw some people on Twitter saying "how come Fretter got 6 games for the same thing?". Well Gagnon doesn't cross check him to the back of the head for a start. This is just hockey. It's not even "old-skool hockey", it's just hockey. Someone checks your captain to the head then they have to take the consequences. And the consequences here were nothing more than the minimum you'd expect really. Same with Fitzgerald - if he'd done any less than this in retaliation then he'd have been letting his club down. Game penalties to Gagnon and Fitzgerald, possibly Match for Shudra. There also used to be a rule that you couldn't get an instigator penalty, even in the last two minutes, if it was in response to an incident that was deemed a game penalty (or match, can't remember which). That was a good rule.
|
|
|
Post by Bagheera on Dec 28, 2017 21:43:02 GMT
Another rubbish statement from DOPS full of massive contradictions. Saying Gagnon started the whole incident? Just after you've clearly shown and stated that he was reacting to a check to the head on Lee?? So Shudra started it then? One of my biggest frustrations with the instigator rule for me. Usually just in game. It should only be used when a guy clearly no choices somebody with no real prior incident. When a guy starts a fight in reaction to a bad hit/penalty then that is the instigating facfor.
|
|
iginla
Chick Zamick
Posts: 13,422
|
DOPS
Dec 28, 2017 21:46:06 GMT
dp and MPW! like this
Post by iginla on Dec 28, 2017 21:46:06 GMT
I don't think so.....are Gagnons actions twice as bad as Fitzgeralds ? Fitzgerald jumps Gagnon. He is 3rd man in. Also breaks free from a linesman. I'd have given Gagnon 3 and Fitzgerald 2. But how does Shudra get away with nothing ? We've seen lesser checks than that incur suspensions. all Gagnon did was instigate a fight with Shudra and then roughed up Valdix a bit, he might have been aggressive with Shudra, but he doesn’t deserve 3 games for that. Yeah i know 3 would be harsh on Gagnon. What I'm saying is i see them as pretty much equal,so why does Gagnon get twice what Fitzgerald got. And how does Shudra walk away Scot free !
|
|
|
DOPS
Dec 28, 2017 21:48:25 GMT
via mobile
Post by wgray on Dec 28, 2017 21:48:25 GMT
all Gagnon did was instigate a fight with Shudra and then roughed up Valdix a bit, he might have been aggressive with Shudra, but he doesn’t deserve 3 games for that. Exactly. Saw some people on Twitter saying "how come Fretter got 6 games for the same thing?". Well Gagnon doesn't cross check him to the back of the head for a start. This is just hockey. It's not even "old-skool hockey", it's just hockey. Someone checks your captain to the head then they have to take the consequences. And the consequences here were nothing more than the minimum you'd expect really. Same with Fitzgerald - if he'd done any less than this in retaliation then he'd have been letting his club down. Game penalties to Gagnon and Fitzgerald, possibly Match for Shudra. There also used to be a rule that you couldn't get an instigator penalty, even in the last two minutes, if it was in response to an incident that was deemed a game penalty (or match, can't remember which). That was a good rule. I was arguing with some Sheffield fans on there about this, how they can view that incident and this in the same way shows how deluded they are. As you say in the past this wouldn’t have even been punished, more than likely 5+G for both and we move on, it was instigated by Shudra being stupid who should receive the harshest punishment for the most dangerous play of the whole debacle, a check to the head.
|
|
|
DOPS
Dec 28, 2017 21:49:33 GMT
via mobile
dp likes this
Post by wgray on Dec 28, 2017 21:49:33 GMT
all Gagnon did was instigate a fight with Shudra and then roughed up Valdix a bit, he might have been aggressive with Shudra, but he doesn’t deserve 3 games for that. Yeah i know 3 would be harsh on Gagnon. What I'm saying is i see them as pretty much equal,so why does Gagnon get twice what Fitzgerald got. And how does Shudra walk away Scot free ! yes I agree completely, Shudra did the most dangerous act in all of this.
|
|
|
DOPS
Dec 28, 2017 21:55:18 GMT
via mobile
Post by tootootrain on Dec 28, 2017 21:55:18 GMT
And how does Shudra walk away Scot free ! I'm not sure that DOPS have finished reviewing yet.
|
|