One thing we can all agree on - NHL officiating needs a makeover - but how?

[HuGo Sham]

But you're unintentionally illuminating part of the difficulty.

Perry's high stick should not have been a major. It wasn't a baseball swing. The player was swinging at the puck, it rode up Perry's stick and struck him in the face drawing blood. A player is still responsible for his stick, so that should have been a double minor.

Calling that a major penalty would been bad officiating the other direction.

fine. double minor. He didn't receive anything. That's the issue. There are no rules

 

[HuGo Sham]

here's a prediction, because player opps is an old boys club = f***ing joke.
As mentioned by some, they're going to give coaches a chance to contest / challenge
one penalty call or non call - like the NBA

 

[Sgt Schultz]

There is never going to be consistency from game to game. Different officials see thinks differently, have different levels of experience, take different angles (especially if they had to avoid the play beforehand), focus on different things based on their experience, etc. What they can control is the extremes on both ends. Truth is, during the regular season it does not matter much. What is more important is consistency by the individual officials during the game.

If a team sees that one of the referees for their January 17th game is Lipshitz, and they know Lipshitz historically calls a tight game, they adjust. If they have McGooligan on January 20th and they know he has historically been more inclined to let them play, they adjust. It's that way in all sports. What you don't want is Lipshitz or McGooligan bucking their own trends and become random when they are on the ice.

The consistency from game to game in the playoffs is more sensitive.....but the league controls that by who they put on the ice. It is much easier for the league to control the difference between the extremes when they are selecting a smaller pool of officials.

The other thing people do not widely recognize is that all leagues (at pretty much all levels) issue "rules clarifications," "interpretations," and "points of emphasis" all the time, and we generally do not hear about them. If you find yourself asking how none of the officials ever calls xxx, it is quite likely because they have been told not to. The NBA is traditionally the worst at this, largely because some of their points of emphasis would ruin the integrity of the sport (and probably have). MLB once "interpreted" the strike zone, which was plainly defined at the time as from the armpits to the top of the knees, to be the belt to the top of the knees.

When the league went to the four-man system, it was sorely needed. The game had gotten much faster and the athletes much better, making the idea of one referee watching the whole thing, including the play away from the puck (while telling him to watch the puck) impossible. The game is now faster still, and there really is no room to add anybody else without them getting in the way more often. So now we have two guys able to police the action of 10, plus watching the puck, and watching the area around the net. Some of that can be resolved by broadening what the replay official can look at, but be careful what you wish for. I really do not want them stopping at every frozen puck to talk about something.

To give the NHL officials some credit, they are the best of all the sports and what is termed "preventative officiating." You hear it all the time. "Let him go," "don't hold him," "get your sticks down," etc. Players generally appreciate that a lot more than having the guy just raise his arm right away.

And the "equal and opposite reaction" to calling everything is that they will also start calling things that didn't really happen because they are basically told to err in that direction, or things that they expected to happen. Expectation bias is the enemy of any official in any sport. You can ask the NFL how that worked when they informed their officials that anybody failing to call an illegal hit on a QB would be dealt with. They still have that mess to clean up.

 

[WatchfulElm]

It's easy : apply the rules!

It works pretty well during international tournament and olympics. Players adapt and you don't see as many controversies. Why should it be different in the NHL playoffs?

As long as there will be people repeating the "let them play" mantra, every call and non-call will continue to be subjective and controversial, because they aren't based on the rulebook, but on other factors nobody knows about.

If you want a different rulebook during the playoffs, then be transparent about it. Write the damn book and make it public!!!

 

[Windy River]

Crazy line of thinking here. Given the frequency of some infractions, and how consequential a 2 minute powerplay can be, maybe we need to rethink the punishment for a penalty? Refs get involved in game management because they don't want to influence the game too much one way or another.

To call the game fairly, what if there was a simple and quick punishment for smaller infractions, say, give the other team possession of the puck or a distanced shot at net the way soccer does it? That way, teams don't get away with smaller infractions, and it system isn't abused as you can still reward 2 minute penalties.

This is a full nuclear option, and hockey wouldn't have any semblance to the traditional game. But I do think there's something to the 2 minute penalty that causes refs to get involved in game management, and also have their mistakes magnified.

I dont agree with the solution however I think you have identified one of the major roots of the problems, that being the ‘grey area’ between what has been well established as ‘allowable infractions’ (particularly with regards to roughing) and the seemingly arbitrary line-crossing that we inevitably observe.

 

[NHL Review]

I don't agree. The game is fine. It's been fine. If every call were called it would turn into some half-iced, half-assed, power play game without any flow.

Players will adapt as they always have, and we aren’t talking about literally everything. Some penalties like holding or interference that obviously need to have a standard that is realistic.

 

[Brobust]

It's easy : apply the rules!

It works pretty well during international tournament and olympics. Players adapt and you don't see as many controversies. Why should it be different in the NHL playoffs?

As long as there will be people repeating the "let them play" mantra, every call and non-call will continue to be subjective and controversial, because they aren't based on the rulebook, but on other factors nobody knows about.

If you want a different rulebook during the playoffs, then be transparent about it. Write the damn book and make it public!!!

'Apply the rules' means Edmundson, Chiarot and Weber spend half the game in the box.

 

[WatchfulElm]

'Apply the rules' means Edmundson, Chiarot and Weber spend half the game in the box.

They will adapt their game too! Why do everybody assume players are stupid?

 

[Brobust]

They will adapt their game too! Why do everybody assume players are stupid?

Maybe they'll adapt. My point is that Montreal fans haven't ever complained about their style of play because it suits them. So don't complain now.

 

[Whoshattenkirkshoes]

I honesty believe its comes from the Owners/Betman wanting more parity.
The skill teams/better teams should get more power plays period. Instead we have to keep lesser teams "in the game" by doing game management and by letting certain crap go uncalled.

For example there won't be many penalties called in tonights TBL/NYI game because the power play drastically favours Tampa.

This is a big problem with the league going down the sports gambling avenue.

 

[Whoshattenkirkshoes]

Is it time for video review/challenge of a penalty or will that not happen because It will put more of a spotlight on the incompetence of the officiating

 

[Whoshattenkirkshoes]

The IIHF is officiated very well so I don't want to hear "its a fast game crap"


They just call a penalty as they see one. It's a different style of officiating the NHL seems like they don't want.

We gotta keep Arizona competitive, don't we?

 

[VivaLasVegas]

IMHO, it is the same with all major professional sports, which is that the human limits of on-field/court/ice officiating may have been reached. A solution would be to have the game reviewed remotely by officials in some tech center somewhere who can correct bad calls more quickly, flag missed calls, and alert the lead in-game official by dedicated cell phone. Hockey seems to be particularly amendable to this solution because it already has the delayed penalty. Because you're not paying for these "tech refs" to travel, their cost comes way down to where even the cheap owners can not complain too much. My $0.02.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

Refs should be subject to interviews just like anyone else, both pre and post game.

 

[noo]

1. Remove game management. It shouldn't matter if team A has 5 penalties and team B has 0, or if it's the third period or overtime, next infraction on either side should get called
2. Keep the rules consistent throughout the season & playoffs. Having a new set of relaxed rules in the playoffs makes no sense, teams that play a certain way all season and do well are suddenly trash (or vice-versa) come playoffs because the rules changed is just stupid

I get that each ref is different and will interpret the rules in his own slightly different way or might miss a call or make a phantom call every now and then and that's fine, they are human after all and having 2 officials should help balance that out in theory. Having different refs with different ideas of what a penalty is AND it changes throughout the game AND it changes as the season goes on.. absolute mess imo

 

[CupsOverCash]

Maybe just be more consistent with how you call it in the regular season. Would probably be less upsets but maybe the idea of putting the whistle away in the playoffs kind of helps that happen more. And people like upsets. You gotta do something and it will likely take away from an aspect of it but I think consistency is key.

 

[TrufleShufle]

We as fans, see a trip or slash at super slow-mo 20 times and still argue whether it was a penalty or not. Expecting someone, no matter their profession, to see that and make the right call in real time, all the time is impossible. Even if they did, we would still argue about it.

But pretend they did "call it by the book," (which is impossible.) Over the glass is "by the book," no debate, intention be damned, just like people are asking for every other penalty to be called. There isn't a week that goes by that there isn't a thread complaining about over the glass.

Remember a few years ago when they were cracking down on face off penalties and "they called it by the book?" It was horrible, the players barely adapted and they abandoned the cause by almost the end of the pre-season.

Another "by the book" thing that people don't seem to like is when one team gets an insane amount of penalties and the other gets none. We saw that a few times after the hot mic debacle. Thread after thread saying how lopsided the penalties were.

I get it's all different people, but as fans, we whine, and a lot of time don't even realize what we are whining for and what we will get if we do end up "getting what we ask for."

The only argument that makes sense in any of this is wanting consistency from regular season to the playoffs. I get it, I just don't feel that strongly one way or the other with it. Devil's not being in the playoffs for a while might or might not have anything to do with it, idk.

 

[ItsFineImFine]

THREE pages of this thread and no one has mentioned Stephen Walkom who's been in charge as director of reffing for like 7 years now or his boss Colin Campbell who's been in charge of the Department of Hockey Ops forever? Or Daly/Bettman who employ both and are complicit.

Seriously, you can talk about all the changes you want to make but if those who have been in power have been in power for so long, they would've made the changes by now. It's clear they don't see a problem with it. No single owner is powerful enough to force their hand from what I see so it would take a group of them, or balls.

 

[CupsOverCash]

I honesty believe its comes from the Owners/Betman wanting more parity.
The skill teams/better teams should get more power plays period. Instead we have to keep lesser teams "in the game" by doing game management and by letting certain crap go uncalled.

For example there won't be many penalties called in tonights TBL/NYI game because the power play drastically favours Tampa.

This is a big problem with the league going down the sports gambling avenue.

Teams with good pps are definitely punished in the playoffs. Too bad too because Tampa has a fun pp to watch.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Call it by the book. If a team is stupid enough to commit so many infractions that they're in the box 8 to 10 times per game, then that's on that team to smarten up and not up to the officials to ignore stuff just so they're not always in the box.

 

[tardigrade81]

Bottom line. I just want to see more consistency. I’m so tired of “these refs allow this, these refs don’t all this” depends on which officiating crew you get. I’m also tired of certain teams can play more rough and certain teams can’t

The same happens in the NFL. Go watch a Steelers/Ravens game. Those are as nasty as it gets and the refs purposely hold off on calls so they can play physical. At the end of the day, call what needs to be called according to the rule book and don’t call what doesn’t need to be called. This shouldn’t depend on which officiating crew you get or which teams are playing. The inconsistency in NHL is ridiculous. Half the time I don’t even know what a tripping or slashing is anymore. Sometimes the weakest call is made, and other times a player is Damn near killed and nothing is called. I don’t have an exact answer as to how this should be changed, but I just want to see a bit more consistency with the calls and non calls.

 

[overlords]

They will adapt their game too! Why do everybody assume players are stupid?

We've heard them in interviews.

 

[IndustryLeech]

This really isn't all that difficult to fix. Score every single official for their performance every single game they work. If they fall below and acceptable score threshold remove them.

 

[McGees]

I think:
1. Refs need to be accountable in some way. They don't do post game interviews and the NHL shields them by forcing anyone who criticizes them to pay a hefty fine...Sounds like a mafia.
2. Have a ref up top with a better view who they can be in contact with, allow them to change calls they get wrong in real time.
3. A penalty in exhibition should be the same penalty in game 7, leaves less room for 'managing game' and subjective calls. This works for World cup/Olympics so the argument of 'just let them play' is getting old and gives meatheads leverage over skills.
4. I respect the solidarity and voice against bias, discrimination and cheating put out by the CN tower today.

 

[Jeune Poulet]

It's pretty simple: as long as some people will have the outdated (and completely wrong) view that a non-call is a way of NOT influencing the game, the refereeing is gonna suck. The referees have to stop being chicken shits. Whether they are calling the penalty or ignoring. it, they are influencing the game. They really are.

They should call the same things, regardlesss of the score, regardless of veteran status of the players involved, regardless of the teams, regardless of the clock and period. Regardless of the crowd.