I have many friends in the hockey media, both on the broadcasting and print media side of the business. Most of them are good people and I respect the difficulty of the jobs they do. I will also say they are knowledgeable of their audiences and many facets of the game.
I will tell you, however, that there is one area of the game where many in the hockey media are rather weak: their knowledge of the rule book. That includes many former players and coaches who change careers after leaving the ice.
I can't tell you how many games I see over the course of a season where plays happen and the national and local announcers and in-studio hosts act like they are puzzled as to why certain calls get made the way they do (example, wondering aloud "Why wasn't that a penalty shot?!" even though the attacking player never had full control of the puck) or why penalties are meted out in specific ways.
Quite often, the guys who shout the loudest -- such as Messrs. Cherry and Milbury -- are pretty shaky on their knowledge of what the rulebook actually says about situations, nor are they inclined to actually go into the rulebook to research the answers they seek. While Cherry bloviates on HNIC, partner Ron MacLean (a certified referee in the Canadian Hockey Association who has refereed junior, minor pro, senior, and university leagues across Canada and once refereed part of an NHL preseason game) actually knows the rules.
Let's return to the example of penalty shot rulings. There are five criteria for a penalty shot to be called: 1) the attacking player is fouled from behind, 2-3) the attacker is past the red line and has passed everyone on the defending team except the goalie, 4) the attacker has possession and control of the puck and 5) the attacker loses a reasonable scoring chance as a result of the foul.
There was one time when I was working as a between-periods color commentator for NESN where I opined that Kerry Fraser had made the correct penalty shot ruling in a game between the Bruins and Canadiens. I caught a lot of flak for it afterwards. The call had gone against the Bruins and I was told I should "have been on our side, been a Bruin" rather than backing Kerry. It got me fired, actually.
Listen, Fraser got it right, and I said so. If he had made the wrong call, then I would have said "Kerry is one of the best but he got that one wrong." My belief was and will always be, call it right and to hell with the critics.
There is also rather widespread ignorance of the rulebook within the hockey press at large. Just once, I'd love to see members of the media cover a refereeing training camp or attend a rules symposium in a journalistic capacity or simply for research purposes. Maybe more could keep a paper copy of rulebook handy for reference as they work or, alternatively,
download a copy for their computer or bookmark the
online rulebook on their Web browser.
After the Ray Emery-Braden Holtby incident a few weeks ago, many national and local outlets wrote words to the effect that "there are no rules in the NHL rulebook that deal with this sort of situation." That was incorrect, and all anyone had to do was look up the Aggressor Rule (Rule 46.2) to see the standards that got applied.
Now, I personally think what Emery did was worthy of a match penalty apart from the aggressor penalty but don't go telling people that there's "no rule in the book" that deals with someone fighting an unwilling opponent. Do some research first before declaring a rule doesn't exist at all.
Now, there actually are many instances in which the rulebook gets amended to address ways players and coaches try to stay one step ahead of the rules.
For example, Roger Neilson -- a coach who absolutely knew the rulebook inside and out and how to exploit the letter of the law -- was singlehandledly responsible for many loopholes being subsequently closed. One of the most famous Neilson rules is what is currently part of Rule 24.2 in the NHL's rulebook: "Only a player designated as a goalkeeper or alternate goalkeeper may defend against the penalty shot." That rulebook language was put in place because Neilson used to send out a defenseman to rush at try to disrupt the shooter before he could get off a shot.
Back during the early portion of Dave "the Hammer" Schultz's playing days, he used fighting tactics that were not outlawed at the time -- fighting with his hands taped, sometimes grabbing a handful of hair or even leading with his head to headbutt an opponent , all of which he did in his infamous beatdown of New York Rangers defenseman Dale Rolfe in Game 7 of the 1974 Stanley Cup Semifinals -- but which were put in the rulebook to combat Schultz and copycat players. In fact, the Broad Street Bullies era Flyers brought about other rule changes designed to prevent teams from using fights as a game tactic.
As a matter of fact, studying the changes in the rulebook over the years is a real good way to learn about hockey history. If you want to trace the ways teams have tried to push the envelope -- and then found new loopholes when the rules were amended to outlaw whatever they were doing -- there's no better way to learn about it than by learning about the evolution of the rulebook.
Final thought: Referees and linesmen on the ice get one initial look at a play at full speed, and have to make a split-second ruling. Has it ever occurred to folks when they are looking at a replay five or more times from multiple angles and with slow-motion and stop-motion, that the officials they are blasting for "blowing the call" had a real tough call to make? The fact of the matter is, more often than not, the call on the ice was correct even on split-second calls.
Of course mistakes get made. Officials make mistakes, the same as players, coaches, general managers and the press. But before someone can criticize, that person should at least know the rule they're taking the official to task for failing to enforce correctly.
************
Recent Blogs by Paul Stewart
Leagues Need More International Refs
Kadri and Refereeing by Result
Skate, He Said: Why Today's NHL Refs Get Bad Coaching
Bad Dreams Are Made of This: Some of Them Want to Abuse You
Pat Burns, Anti-Homerism, and the Hall of Fame
A Debt of Gratitude to the Fog
Officiating Teams and Two-Man Ref System
************
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 only American-born referee to officiate in 1,000 NHL games.
Today, Stewart is a judicial 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:
»