Old Farts Thread

[Maggie3and Me]

Originally Posted by Killah_punk

The 2007 season, the NHL goal judge was moved from his perch behind the net, where he had sat for 90 years. With contentious goals handled entirely by video, he can now be found tucked away in remote corners of arenas or in press gondolas, far from the action, and reduced to a token button-pusher. All that remains is his red light.

Originally Posted by fansince65

I thought they had fazed out the goal judge in the NHL back a few years ago , just wasn't shore and just didn't have the time to look it up .
So on looking it up I find they are still being used , like you say , in higher places , except for Boston Gardens , one is still posted behind their net according to the report I found .

The reason they gave for no longer using the Goal judge right behind the net , was so they can "SELL MORE TICKETS" by putting in more seats where the judge used to sit ..

Good post guys.

It was my understanding that the reason for moving the goal judge was to put more seats in also.

A reason I heard, which supposedly was floated by the league, was because of new technology available, they could move the goal judge and rely more on the technology.

If that is true, why the hell are we paying a goal judge to begin with. Is it just for the sake of tradition? Consider, all goals are reviewed by the boys in the booth in Toronto any way. Between the cameras, reviews, and the “technology” that allowed for the moving of the judge, why is the league paying for their services when no longer necessary?

I don’t know how much a goal judge makes a game or a year. For the sake of argument, let’s say $60,000. Take that times the 30 teams and it is $1.8M a year. Since 2007 it would times 5, which would equal $9M. That begins to equal serious money.

While I am a traditionalist, I have moved with the changes made to the game. I have not embraced all of them, but, I have changed with the game. Hell, football, baseball, and basketball have all changed too. No sport is the same as when I first watched the 8 team National and American League, the NFL before the NFC and AFC, or basketball before the three point play.

I just cannot see the extra pay for a position that does not really matter anymore.

[fansince65]

Originally Posted by Maggie3and Me

Good post guys.

It was my understanding that the reason for moving the goal judge was to put more seats in also.

A reason I heard, which supposedly was floated by the league, was because of new technology available, they could move the goal judge and rely more on the technology.

If that is true, why the hell are we paying a goal judge to begin with. Is it just for the sake of tradition? Consider, all goals are reviewed by the boys in the booth in Toronto any way. Between the cameras, reviews, and the “technology” that allowed for the moving of the judge, why is the league paying for their services when no longer necessary?

I don’t know how much a goal judge makes a game or a year. For the sake of argument, let’s say $60,000. Take that times the 30 teams and it is $1.8M a year. Since 2007 it would times 5, which would equal $9M. That begins to equal serious money.

While I am a traditionalist, I have moved with the changes made to the game. I have not embraced all of them, but, I have changed with the game. Hell, football, baseball, and basketball have all changed too. No sport is the same as when I first watched the 8 team National and American League, the NFL before the NFC and AFC, or basketball before the three point play.

I just cannot see the extra pay for a position that does not really matter anymore.

Maggs , to my knowledge all the OHL goal judge's where volunteer's , they got perks like two season tickets for as long as they worked for free , that's around $1800 hundred dollars for most teams .
Some of them have been doing it for 50 or more years .At a recent Junior "B" game the goal judges did not show up , they where protesting the loss of their season tickets , a couple of us fans did the job for the night , it's not the most difficult job too do but I dont like siting down that low for a game , I like the view from higher up in the rink ..

Here is a bit of trivia that has nothing to do with hockey.

The first "THANKSGIVING" was celebrated in 1578 , it was held in "NEWFOUNDLAND" !!! 43 YEARS BEFORE THE PILGRAMS !!!!

[fansince65]

Here is a real good trivia question for some thinking fans .

Name the player that scored on his first - second - third shot in his first NHL game ,and the team he played for .
And no it wasn't Mario ..

[fish7]

Originally Posted by fansince65

Here is a real good trivia question for some thinking fans .

Name the player that scored on his first - second - third shot in his first NHL game ,and the team he played for .
And no it wasn't Mario ..

wild guess is al hill from the flyers

[Maggie3and Me]

After the topic of NHL goal judges came up, I thought I would do some background regarding their position.

The first noted use of goal judges, who were called umpires at the time, dates to about 1877. According to the NHL, this was their responsibilities:
“Goal Judges are stationed behind the goals during the progress of play, in properly screened cages, so that there can be no interference with their activities; and they cannot change goals during the game. Goal Judges will not be replaced during the game unless after the start of the game it becomes apparent that either Goal Judge, on account of partisanship or any other cause, is guilty of giving unjust decisions, in which case the Referee may appoint a replacement“.

I also found this article and thought it would be worth posting.

New York Times
By DAVE CALDWELL
Published: November 27, 2007

Bottom Line and Replays Replacing Tradition

Lou Lamoriello, the Devils’ chief executive, president and general manager, considers himself a hockey traditionalist, which should come as no surprise to those who have watched the teams he assembled win three Stanley Cups.

“I’d still like to see the boards white,” he said with a chuckle not long ago.

The boards at arenas are covered with advertisements these days, and now Lamoriello has to deal with another change in tradition: When the Devils moved to Prudential Center in Newark this season, the goal-judge booths did not make the trip.

The N.H.L. still has goal judges, but they do not all still sit in Plexiglas boxes behind the end boards in back of the goals. In at least 20 of the 30 arenas, the judges sit in the lower stands or in press boxes.

After 90 years, goal judges were moved for two reasons:

¶With instant replay available and a second referee next to the goal, goal judges are not exactly judges. They still push a button to turn on a light to let the crowd know a goal was scored, but they and the referees can be overruled by conclusive replay evidence. “People want to see the right calls made,” Mike Murphy, a former player and coach who is the N.H.L.’s vice president for hockey operations, said in a recent telephone interview from his office in Toronto.

¶The second reason, not surprisingly, was money. The booths took up space that could be filled with seats — choice seats that can fetch high prices. At Prudential Center, for instance, the Devils can sell six extra front-row tickets at $200 each.

At Wachovia Center in Philadelphia, where the goal judges sit in the press box, 12 goal-judge seats — 6 at each end of the rink — are sold for at least $500 apiece, far more than the $89 face value of all the other lower-bowl seats.

“Any time we can add a new experience or create a new product, it generates fan exposure and enhances the product,” said Shawn Tilger, the Flyers’ vice president for marketing and communications.

At Nassau Coliseum, the booths were in front of the first row of seats, but they were taken out because they obstructed fans’ views. The judges now sit in boxes at the top of the lower bowl, the same area they occupy at Madison Square Garden.

“We know it’s a tradition, and it was not something we take lightly, but in the end, we decided it was better for the customers,” said Chris Botta, an Islanders spokesman.

Lamoriello said he was disappointed to see the booths go. But he understood the economics behind the N.H.L.’s decision to recommend relocating the judges. He also understood that TV cameras could do what the judges did, only better.

“With modern technology and television available, we’d be under so much criticism if there were mistakes made if we didn’t use these things,” Lamoriello said.

In the time before television and computers that can replay, magnify and freeze frame questionable goals, goal umpires stood on the ice or on a nearby snowbank, the hockey historian J. W. Fitzell said.

“It was a hazardous trade,” Fitzell said in a telephone interview from his home in Kingston, Ontario.

Besides the risk of standing in the middle of the action, goal umpires were often chosen from the home crowd and were often threatened by visiting players after a questionable goal. Often, they were replaced in the middle of a game.

The goal light made its debut in 1917, Fitzell said, and the judges soon moved to safer booths outside the boards, and these days they are part-time employees of the N.H.L. For many years, they were integral to the game; referees often consulted the judges to verify that a goal had been scored.

“They were your eyes, particularly in amateur games played in smaller arenas that were often smoke-filled,” Fitzell said. “The light was the answer that set off the crowd.”

But the N.H.L. implemented video reviews in the 1991-92 season and added a second referee seven years later. Goal judges were only there to turn the red lights on, and the N.H.L. figured they could do that as well from other places in an arena.

First, though, the league did some research. At the All-Star Game last season in Dallas, the goal judges sat in the press box. Murphy, the N.H.L. vice president for hockey operations, said the judges were moved to higher locations in four or five arenas.

“We found out it worked,” Murphy said. “It was O.K. It wasn’t prohibitive in identifying a goal in timely enough fashion.”

The league even experimented with not turning the goal light on at all, but Murphy said the crowd’s response to a goal was much less immediate — not to mention much quieter. So the lights stayed atop the glass on both ends of the ice.

“The value of the light is significant,” Lamoriello said. “You want to get people excited, enthused.”

Murphy said about 600 goals — about one every two games — were reviewed last season in a room at N.H.L. headquarters in Toronto that is manned by a staff of 10, Murphy included, with access to every television angle. They have access to a video goal judge and to the referees.

“We really are the eyes and ears of the league,” Murphy said.

He said that he had been in contact with someone who had developed the technology to set off a goal light by sensing that a puck had crossed the goal line. “We’re still trying to figure a way to get the light on electronically,” he said.

And when they do, the goal judge, like white boards, will probably disappear, too.

[fansince65]

Originally Posted by fish7

wild guess is al hill from the flyers

Thanks for the guess , but no not Hill .

I have a player listed that played for the Islanders that scored on his first shot in his first NHL game , his name is Neal Coulter , he also scored on his second and third shot , I can't find another player in the history of the game that scored goals on all of their first three shots ..

[Maggie3and Me]

Going to be out of town for the weekend. My wife and I are going to South Bend, In. to see the Notre Dame V BYU football game and go to a few wineries in Michigan, near where we are going to stay. I wanted to put this up so you guys know all is well, but will be away from my computer.

I will try to check in from the hotel, so don't be bashful, continue to put stuff up. Don't let what is going on with NHL and the players keep us from posting. If you do that, they win. Let's continue to put items up for US to see and comment on.

Regarding the strike, I feel that it isn't going to be settled for awhile. Fehr and Buttman's ego haven't even come into play yet, so you know it isn't close.

It's hard to give back what you have won in past CBA's, or try to take away what you have already given up, depending which side of this mess you are on.

As you are reading and hearing, one of the points being discussed is what they call HRR, or hockey related revenue. The players do not trust the owners (and rightfully so), on what constitutes this money and how it is reported. The league says it will stay as it has been, but who knows.

I hope that despite what they do, we can generate interest and keep it going here.

Thanks for your responses,
M3M

[BENNETTWOLF]

Yeah it makes me very wistful (is that the word i want to use) to realize a hockey opening day just should have occurred and i barely noticed. I was such a diehard hockey fan for so long, nearly 30 years, which, of course, pales in comparison to many in our thread.

Something about hitting middle age and looking back recalling what a priority the caps were to me. I'd watch virtually all of their games, even stay up to see late replays after a party on weekend nights. Would catch playoff games instead of anything else. It just makes me a little sad to realize it isn't that important to me anymore.

I guess at least most people here know how the rule changes and evolution of the sport have diminished some of our interest without having to feel like a neanderthal. I miss the competition and passion of hockey at its finest..........the way the game should be played. I'm sorry but every NHL team should have a Milan Lucic type along with a backliner who tries to emulate any version of Scott Stevens.

Everyone should have multifaceted interests. It just makes me sad that hockey, as currently constituted, isn't very high on the list.

I'm sure that i'll be interested when it comes back but how strong a run of 2-1, hitless, scrumless, passionless, fightfree games will hold my interest is another matter

[Maggie3and Me]

Now that we have seen what is coming out in the CBA negotiations, have any of you changed your opinions on who is more to blame for prolonging the delay of the season?

The owners, regardless of how the team performs, has a much greater liability than the players in a teams hockey operations.

The owners pay for all the support staff and office personnel it takes to market the product, including ticket sales, promotions, and security to name a few things. Also, they pay all over head on the arena, even if leased. They pay for insurance, and they pay for all utilities.

Don't forget, it is the owners, not the players, who pay for all travel costs, including planes, cars, and buses. Add in the hotels, meals, and other conveniences, too.

The owners are the ones who take it in the shorts if the team has a bad season and attendance is down. They suffer the lost revenue of snow outs and other weather related events that cause lower attendance or even cancellation of games.

When a player gets hurt or injured, they pay nothing for medical attention or hospitalization. Yes, the owners have insurance policies to cover this, but it is the owners, not the players who pay for the premiums on those policies.

It doesn't matter if you are for the players or the owners, these facts must be taken into consideration. A 50/50 split is even tilted a bit in the players favor. The Hockey Related Revenue that has been tossed about, helps to defray some of the owners costs on the overhead mentioned here.

With the track record of NHL owners, it is hard to take their side in any labor talks. You have only to go back to the days of Ted Lindsay in the late 1950's, to see there was not a players union and the players were treated more as indentured servants, with no say in the sport. Thanks to Mr. Lindsay, one of the founders of the players union, that all changed.

With the greed and apparent lack of concern for the game itself, it is getting harder and harder to root for the players in these negotiations.

I also put this up in the NHL chat thread.

[BENNETTWOLF]

Yeah, i posted a while back that it seemed from a very limited knowledge base that the players might have to sacrifice for the health of the sport. Hockey is a a pretty fixed revenue sport and salaries need to be within the scope of reason for the viabilty of the game. It isn't a cash cow like other sports. Not too many ways to increase the cash stream without raising ticket prices. Not adding seats, no billion dollar TV deal to split up.........................

[mikebflorida]

By the way, the owners have to pay injured players no matter what so Mathias Ohlund of the Lightning is making $5,000,000.00 to do nothing and the owner has to pay it. I think you could find every single NHL team has a player or 2 it is paying right now.

The lockout is just repugnant, more now on both sides than before. The players were offered a 50/50 deal and it wasn't good enough and though I can't blame them for being upset that the owners locked them out 8 years and they settled on a deal which is now not good enough for the owners, the players need to loosen up too.

They are both wrong at this point and to read in the paper that the players offered to talk and the owners rebuffed them is just disgusting. How can a fan have any faith when they won't even talk to each other to settle any differences.

It's beyond stupid at this point. I like hockey, I like talking about hockey but honestly, I can watch clips from the 80's to get my fill of hockey, it was 100 times better in my opinion, more goals, more fights, more goons, it was wonderful and just destroys the product they aren't even putting on the ice today, again, in my humble opinion.

[BENNETTWOLF]

The really sad and ironic thing is that i'm not sure if anyone has actually noticed the situation but people like us, hockey fans. Hockey has always been a "cult" sport (although very well attended which, as i pointed out, is a fixed thing) and with so many entertainment and/or sporting options it needs to be relevant. I mean, i personally didn't see the explosion in popularity of nascar, golf or the poker tour etc in the last decade.

The NHL has some serious issues with finite problems here and it is depressing that the fans are the ones who always get screwed

[Johnny Pie]

Haven't been posting for a little while . I do keep up with the crap thats going on. My own opinion is while obviously both sides bear some blame Bettman the worm and the owners are the major reason for this . Can't understand how some fans side with the owners. This would be over in a minute if you just honor the contracts that were signed. Bettman thought he destroyed the union last time but he didn't think the game was going to grow financially like it did. He gave them the big percentage not thinking it would be worth what it is worth today. Tough sh-t. You got exactly what you wanted but you were wrong. He got the roll back ,the cap etc but the owners still fuked it up. Now he wants another roll back no matter what he calls it. He doesn't want to pay the full amount of the contracts. Talk about trust do you think JJ of my bruins gives out the contracts to Lootch, Marchand, Seguin if he doesn't think he gets a chunck of it back in the new CBA ? What he is counting on is the new CBA gets a roll back and limits the players ability to move via UFA,RFA etc. The players know they can't keep 57% and they shouldn't. BUT they would go 50-50 for real if it started from now on going forward. There is a reasonable deal here. if they gradually get to 50 % the players I think would be willing to lose 4-5 % of current contracts. Make it 53,52,51 then 50,50,50. Thats not good enough for the two misers Bettman and JJ. They want it all.

[Johnny Pie]

By the way know how the Isles owner Wang plans on making up the difference in gate money from losing 3000 seats moving to Brooklyn. Raise tickets 25% as reported on nhltraderumors.com. Again the fans come first

[Leaf2717]

The two posts above [J Pie] succinctly and accurately provide my thoughts on this topic. Well done sir!

All the best.