Many who know me are well aware that my knowledge and interest in most sports tends to be below that of the typical college student. Over the past year, however, my attendance at hockey games and reading through most (if not all) of the articles in the Sports section of The Polytechnic have built my knowledge in the area. In addition, my interest in hockey from years ago is back and I’ve yet to miss a home hockey game—save the Holiday Tournament. Given my relative interest and knowledge, though, it is ironic that I’m choosing to write an editorial on a sports-related topic; the irony is even greater because this my last Editor’s Corner—this weekend will bring about our semesterly Editorial Board elections.
Since I’ve been going to hockey games here, my understanding of the rules has certainly increased—I’ve even come to recognize some of the referee hand signals. While occasionally I see the referees make calls I think are wrong, I realize that there is probably logic behind them. Having said that, there are calls made that I’ve disagreed with for a completely different reason—those made (or not made) because the officials did not fully see what was occurring on the ice. In a couple of cases, this has meant the wrong players get sent to the box—or worse, a goal is not tallied. This leads one to wonder why there is not an ECACHL or NCAA mandate that there be cameras around the ice available for replays when needed for all Division I hockey matches.
If you’ve been to a hockey game here, you’re probably aware that the officiating is left to one referee and two linesmen. In addition, there are goal judges who sit behind each of the two nets, who are there to ensure that a decision can be made as to whether or not a goal was scored. This, however, has proven on several occasions to be inadequate, and it would seem that having cameras available for an occasional instant replay could fix this.
It could easily be argued that having replay available would slow the game. Since that’s true, it’s certainly not something that should be used more than a couple of times each game. If there is something strongly in dispute, though, the cameras would allow for another look at what actually happened.
Last spring, RPI lost to Colgate 2-1 in its last game of the regular season, even though almost everyone not officiating saw RPI score a second goal. In fact, The Polytechnic even reported that Colgate’s head coach admitted it went in. This season, there was another goal that probably went in that was ruled no goal, and there have been several penalties called that just didn’t seem to match what had occurred on ice. In one example, one of our players appeared to be down on the ice, face down and being punched. Another one of our players, however, was called on a penalty. It certainly makes fans think that the referees only saw part of what was going on on the ice.
Cameras certainly would not be a cure-all, but they are becoming more and more of the norm in today’s sports, and they need to be seriously considered for college hockey. They’re even being used now for NCAA D-IA football. Since many say that hockey is among the fastest college sports, and no three people can be reasonably expected to see everything that occurs during a 60 minute game, it’s about time for either the ECAC or NCAA to at least try adding cameras to the officials’ repertoires. If money is a concern, perhaps they’d be better off with just a head ref, a linesman, and the cameras instead of the current three-ref setup. Whatever the case, I’d take the camera over “three blind mice” any day.
