Refs and biases

[herman]

I'm saying that unless you have clear evidence of nhl referees exhibiting bias due to race, you're spitballing, and it doesn't look good on you.

I appreciate that the topic has made you uncomfortable. I?m slightly amused that this is what it takes for you to actually require substantiation for an internet opinion being posted.

Here?s how it works out in my head:
One player is the son of a former player and current broadcaster. I think we can agree that hockey is Nepotistic to the Nth degree.

Hockey has a preference for the type of player it promotes and the type of player it castigates. See Hrudey?s interesting segment comparing Nylander (soft Swedish lazy super skill) and DeBrusk (son of his broadcasting colleague, absolutely not dirty according to himself).

Refs have a hit list they circulate, which is a list of players they especially focus on in games. I don?t know who is on the list, but Kadri most assuredly is. And confirmation bias is a thing. They believe he?s a bad egg and therefore everything he does is seen through that self-confirming lens.

All people have biases, implicit or explicit, consciously or not. It comes out in the decisions they make. A racial bias stemming from systematic ideaologies is written into everyone?s mental fabric whether we like it or not. I have to catch myself and correct those thoughts and feelings when they come up, and I definitely still screw up from time to time.

Refs are people. They have documented biases. Is that what?s happening here? ?\_(ツ)_/?

Who is going to get the benefit of the doubt on the ice and in the media?

In my mind, being a referee is hard and thankless and I generally try to understand their perspective. This was the first game where I felt inclined to sound off on them.

 

[Phileas Fogg]

I'm saying that unless you have clear evidence of nhl referees exhibiting bias due to race, you're spitballing, and it doesn't look good on you.

I appreciate that the topic has made you uncomfortable. I?m slightly amused that this is what it takes for you to actually require substantiation for an internet opinion being posted.

You're amused that your implication of racism requires a higher standard of substantiation than, I don't know, an opinion on Matthews' compete level?

You're on your own, pal.

 

[herman]

I'm saying that unless you have clear evidence of nhl referees exhibiting bias due to race, you're spitballing, and it doesn't look good on you.

I appreciate that the topic has made you uncomfortable. I?m slightly amused that this is what it takes for you to actually require substantiation for an internet opinion being posted.

You're amused that your implication of racism requires a higher standard of substantiation than, I don't know, an opinion on Matthews' compete level?

You're on your own, pal.

Like I explained, racial bias is universal. I think you?re conflating what I?m saying with racism (which is a malicious version).

 

[Bullfrog]

...

Refs have a hit list they circulate, which is a list of players they especially focus on in games. I don?t know who is on the list, but Kadri most assuredly is. And confirmation bias is a thing. They believe he?s a bad egg and therefore everything he does is seen through that self-confirming lens.

All people have biases, implicit or explicit, consciously or not. It comes out in the decisions they make. A racial bias stemming from systematic ideaologies is written into everyone?s mental fabric whether we like it or not. I have to catch myself and correct those thoughts and feelings when they come up, and I definitely still screw up from time to time.
....

I can 100% agree with the bolded part. But I agree with Frycer that you're making quite a stretch to assume racial bias is a contributing factor here, significantly or not. With no offence intended, I think you're waxing poetic here. We understand that racial bias, and confirmation bias in general, is real and affects all things in life.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

I'm saying that unless you have clear evidence of nhl referees exhibiting bias due to race, you're spitballing, and it doesn't look good on you.

I appreciate that the topic has made you uncomfortable. I?m slightly amused that this is what it takes for you to actually require substantiation for an internet opinion being posted.

Here?s how it works out in my head:
One player is the son of a former player and current broadcaster. I think we can agree that hockey is Nepotistic to the Nth degree.

Hockey has a preference for the type of player it promotes and the type of player it castigates. See Hrudey?s interesting segment comparing Nylander (soft Swedish lazy super skill) and DeBrusk (son of his broadcasting colleague, absolutely not dirty according to himself).

Refs have a hit list they circulate, which is a list of players they especially focus on in games. I don?t know who is on the list, but Kadri most assuredly is. And confirmation bias is a thing. They believe he?s a bad egg and therefore everything he does is seen through that self-confirming lens.

All people have biases, implicit or explicit, consciously or not. It comes out in the decisions they make. A racial bias stemming from systematic ideaologies is written into everyone?s mental fabric whether we like it or not. I have to catch myself and correct those thoughts and feelings when they come up, and I definitely still screw up from time to time.

Refs are people. They have documented biases. Is that what?s happening here? ?\_(ツ)_/?

Who is going to get the benefit of the doubt on the ice and in the media?

In my mind, being a referee is hard and thankless and I generally try to understand their perspective. This was the first game where I felt inclined to sound off on them.

I don't believe Kadri is treated differently because of his race. I think he's treated differently(rightly or wrongly) because of his past reputation of being a dirty player that also dives.
The refs had no choice but to give him a 5 and boot him out. What DeBrusk or other bruins got away with has nothing to do with what Kadri did. It's inexcusable to cross check someone in the face. He could of answered Marleau's check in so many different ways than that.

 

[herman]

I guess it's on me for not phrasing it clearly. I'm not saying the referees are collectively racist.

If you'll allow me to wax poetic once more:
What I am saying is that there is a propensity for people/players of colour to not receive the benefit of the doubt in a given situation. See 5K fine for Marchand's retaliatory crosscheck to MacDonald's head while he was prone on the ice. If the situation were reversed, what are the odds it'll be played off as DeBrusk heroically jumps to the aid of his elderly teammate and Kadri's a faker?

Kadri does himself no favours by letting his emotions get the better of his decision making. Why does it always seem to get to this stage whenever the refs selectively 'put away their whistles'?

Is this an uncomfortable topic? Sure, feel free to disagree.

 

[Bullfrog]

I guess it's on me for not phrasing it clearly. I'm not saying the referees are collectively racist.

If you'll allow me to wax poetic once more:
What I am saying is that there is a propensity for people/players of colour to not receive the benefit of the doubt in a given situation. See 5K fine for Marchand's retaliatory crosscheck to MacDonald's head while he was prone on the ice. If the situation were reversed, what are the odds it'll be played off as DeBrusk heroically jumps to the aid of his elderly teammate and Kadri's a faker?

Kadri does himself no favours by letting his emotions get the better of his decision making. Why does it always seem to get to this stage whenever the refs selectively 'put away their whistles'?

Is this an uncomfortable topic? Sure, feel free to disagree.

herman, I'm always glad to discuss uncomfortable topics; it's how I learn to be empathetic. I just think you're wrong on this one.

I'm not sure if you're not explaining clearly or if I'm just not understanding. What point are you making with Marchand's 5K fine? He's had multiple suspensions before, so DOPS isn't shy to suspend him. If there's any bias, it's probably because he's now a superstar player.

For Kadri, I'm 100% convinced it's due to his attitude and past history.

 

[Bullfrog]

oh, and thanks for the link. It's good to see that even habs fans agree the officiating was terrible and one-sided.

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

FWIW:
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/02/sports/basketball/02refs.html

 

[Highlander]

Herman the German, how did we miss this?

Idi Amin Herman

 

[herman]

herman, I'm always glad to discuss uncomfortable topics; it's how I learn to be empathetic. I just think you're wrong on this one.

I'm not sure if you're not explaining clearly or if I'm just not understanding. What point are you making with Marchand's 5K fine? He's had multiple suspensions before, so DOPS isn't shy to suspend him. If there's any bias, it's probably because he's now a superstar player.

For Kadri, I'm 100% convinced it's due to his attitude and past history.

Thanks Bullfrog

I point to Marchand's incident because it's a curious contrast. Here's a repeat offender who, in retaliation of a check to the boards, crosschecks a guy in the face. 5K wrist slap.
Kadri is run by the Bruins all night due to the free rein they received and when he retaliates with a crosscheck to the face for a hit to Marleau that he perceives was dirty, it's an in-person hearing because he's a repeat offender.

What's the difference? I like that you brought up the word attitude as well; what constitutes an attitude problem? Marchand and Wilson don't have attitude problems, they just play tough hockey and sometimes cross the line. Joe Thornton doesn't have an attitude problem, he's just Jumbo and everyone's head happens to be at his elbow level.

It's not just hockey:
School Discipline
Wages
I'm not even going to bother with linking to instances of criminal convictions and the prison system.

In my view, that's the milieu we and this game currently exists in. Kadri's 'attitude' is shaped just as much by how the system interacted with him over the decade of his NHL career. Repeated non-calls or blatantly unjust calls leads to an escalation of action (diving, headshots). I'm just arguing that his race is an implicit factor in the reputation he now has, not the explicit reason he's getting the banhammer.

 

[herman]

FWIW:
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/02/sports/basketball/02refs.html

Also FWIW
https://www.sbnation.com/2017/1/26/14385842/mls-refereeing-racial-bias

 

[Bullfrog]

I wonder if we can have this broken off into a separate thread? I think it's a conversation worth continuing. Unconcious bias, and not just racism, is becoming an important topic in so many areas. In a large organization that I'm part of, understanding and addressing it is one of our strategic priorities.

It would be interesting to see how this bias applies to the NHL, where 100% of the referees are white (I believe) and 93% of the players are white (as of 2011).

 

[herman]

I wonder if we can have this broken off into a separate thread? I think it's a conversation worth continuing. Unconcious bias, and not just racism, is becoming an important topic in so many areas. In a large organization that I'm part of, understanding and addressing it is one of our strategic priorities.

It would be interesting to see how this bias applies to the NHL, where 100% of the referees are white (I believe) and 93% of the players are white (as of 2011).

Good idea.

CAAARRRRLLLLLTTTTTOOOOONNNNNNNNNN

 

[herman]

 

[herman]

Mm hmm.

 

[Bullfrog]

?

 

[herman]

https://twitter.com/shecalledmerick/status/1533290267503054848

Edit: originally took this down because I couldn?t directly verify it was real and I didn?t see it live.

But here some others that looks like way too much work to fake:
https://twitter.com/amit916j/status/1533297374025527297