Follow Paul on Twitter: @paulstewart22
It has been said many times over the years that NHL games are often officiated differently at the beginning of the season than they are during the stretch drive and playoffs. There is a reason why this happens.
Just like every team and player in the league, officials have a training camp before the season. In a hockey team's training camp, there are main facets that are heavily emphasized and themes that get repeated frequently; for instance, breakout and forechecking systems and the importance of players keeping their feet moving and supporting the puck.
With officials, there are also themes that get stressed heading into the season. There are directives from the league on certain areas of rulebook enforcement that should be emphasized; such as calling interference penalties to crack down on defensive teams hitting or holding up opposing forecheckers after the puck is dumped into the corner.
At its root, Hockey is a game of adjustments and of trying to establish momentum and repeatable results. Again, this goes for both the playing and officiating sides of the game.
During the season, all hockey teams have stretches where the coaches need to reemphasize areas that are still trouble spots or had seemingly been corrected but have begun to slip. Perhaps the team has let its defensive discipline slip and they've been giving up a lot more goals of late. Maybe the forechecking -- and goals scored -- have taken a downturn. Corrections and adjustments are needed.
On the officiating side, what tends to happen is that the enforcement bar gets set high early in the season. Sometimes it even gets set a little too high on marginal infractions. Over the course of the season, there are corrections made. However, it is also possible for things to start getting a little too lax again in areas that were called tightly earlier in the season. This is where the "October Rulebook vs. April Rulebook" phenomenon happens.
When I was an active official, I developed a style of overseeing games. I always believed -- and still do -- that flow is paramount. I prided myself on calling games the same way all season, regardless of the venue or the date on the calendar.
Throughout the season, I would self-critique my work. I also never minded constructive criticism from peers or supervisors; in fact, I welcomed it. What I objected to was higher-ups who put their officials in position to fail rather than succeed.
Former NHL and major junior hockey coach Vic Stasiuk used to be notorious for giving his players incompatible instructions. He'd insistently order his skaters to "check but don't check" and his goaltender to "challenge them but don't challenge". The players would look at each other in confusion, shrug and wonder what the hell their coach actually wanted them to do.
In the NHL, it has been that way with the management of officiating ever since the tragic death of John McCauley. One of the ways that the league habitually hurts the flow of play in their games and set up their officials to fail is through conflicting directives and critiques. Simultaneously, the NHL create too many "automatic" calls that take away officials' discretion to judge the play and, meanwhile, also issue ambiguous instructions on the enforcement of penalty-calling directives.
As a result, the NHL often instantly dooms itself to creating -- not reducing -- inconsistency among its officials. I think a significant part of the problem has been in the choice of people chosen for the oversight role and supervisory positions.
For one thing, there are decision-makers and supervisors with no on-ice officiating experience in their resume. There are some others who officiated on the ice but are not well suited to being supervisors but get promoted to these roles and enjoy job security because they are friends or relatives with the right person and hail from north of the St. Lawrence.
Ever heard of the Peter Principle? Organizations have a tendency to promote unqualified people to management positions and then keep promoting them until they reach their level of obvious incompetence. Well, within the NHL officiating hierarchy, some folks have surpassed even the boundaries of the Peter Principle. Call it the Soupy Axiom.
At any rate, I want to give you a good example of a rulebook area that the NHL has consistently dropped the ball (or, if you prefer, fumbled away the puck) season after season: the rules for pins against the boards.
Under the rules, defensive players are NOT allowed to pin and hold opposing players along the boards. Now, if officials are properly trained and instructed, they know how to tell the difference between what should and should not be a penalty.
A few keys to determining this call is a stick in front of the player and a hand on the back and the offensive player's legs continuing to move trying to get free. Meanwhile, a penalty CAN NOT be called if the offensive player stops moving his feet.
In the course of my work supervising officials in the ECAC, I try to offer guidance on how to apply these standards. One good way is through video teaching, which is one of the elements I incorporate in an email newsletter circulated among league officials.
Specific to the management of the flow of play and rule enforcement on scrums along the boards, below is a video compilation we circulated earlier this season as one of our teaching tools. Hopefully, this can help illustrate the way that I think these routine game situations should be officiated on the ice:
OK, so what are we looking at here in the video?
Segment 1 - No penalty, as the offensive player doesn't move his feet.
Segment 2 - No penalty. The player doesn't wrap him or hold the offensive player. Rather, he guides him to the wall as a defensemen.
Segment 3 - There is a penalty on the near side as the offensive player keeps working and isn't allowed to move.
Segments 4 & 5 - Again, no penalty as the player doesn't move his feet.
************
Paul Stewart holds the distinction of being the first U.S.-born citizen to make it to the NHL as both a player and referee. On March 15, 2003, he became the first American-born referee to officiate in 1,000 NHL games.
Today, Stewart is an officiating and league discipline consultant for the Kontinental Hockey League (KHL) and serves as director of hockey officiating for the Eastern College Athletic Conference (ECAC).
The longtime referee heads Officiating by Stewart, a consulting, training and evaluation service for officials, while also maintaining a busy schedule as a public speaker, fund raiser and master-of-ceremonies for a host of private, corporate and public events. As a non-hockey venture, he is the owner of Lest We Forget.
Stewart is currently working with a co-author on an autobiography.
Blogger •Former NHL Referee • 
Join the Discussion:
»