Paul Stewart: Officiating By Proxy: What You Need to Know About Skating & Positioning

Great blog!!!

My question, Gary and Colin and you 31 GMs that nodded in unison like those ceramic doggies in the back window of a Hot Rod on RT. 66: "Who the hell even thought that THIS would be an improvement?" Where is the allowance for HUMANITY? Where is the appreciation for officials doing their best. After all, you tell us that they are the best in the world. So let them decide then.....after all, humanity, personality and tradition are what this game was built on.
- Paul Stewart

That's my favorite paragraph. It perfectly summarizes a glaring issue in the NHL today. Thank you!

Good blog Paul. Scoob, I agree. What we love is the speed and quickness of the game. It is played by humans, the best athletes in the world. The officials are good and often get a bad rap.
I was an official, up to collegiate levels. Worked with a current NHL official from the Philly area.
I had some great times and horrible experiences.
Bottom line, skate to the correct position. Sell the call. Leave no doubt that you are sure.
We used to shout if the puck was loose and our partner may not see it. At least It gave us a chance to delay a second on the whistle and get closer. Never would have heard that in Nashville.
People make mistakes. It is a fast game and stuff happens.
I would still love to see the stick work called more. Hooking, slashing hands, and just general hacking. Interference is creeping up again. I want to see the speed that the game bas, not slowing it down with various obstruction tactics.

Yeah the offside reviews are a joke. Just get rid of them. Or at least take them out of the coaches hands, just have the league take a quick look on every play and call back any glaring ones i.e. a foot offside. Who cares if the difference is a hair.

Paul,
You said that Milbury didn't complain because according to the rules the call was correct.
But yesterday you pointed out that it could have been over turned as a 'continuation play' that the whistle had no effect on.
I think that 99% of the hockey people in the world don't realize that goal could have counted per the rule you quoted!!
So Milbury was wrong, as usual!! LOL

Not to dump on the officials in the finals, but on both the disallowed goal and the play where Crosby was slamming PK's head into the ice the official was nearby but didn't seem to be willing to move to get a better look as to what was going on.

I get you whistle the play dead when you lose sight but the puck wasn't playing hide and seek. It was sitting clear as day on the doorstep.

Not to dump on the officials in the finals, but on both the disallowed goal and the play where Crosby was slamming PK's head into the ice the official was nearby but didn't seem to be willing to move to get a better look as to what was going on.

I get you whistle the play dead when you lose sight but the puck wasn't playing hide and seek. It was sitting clear as day on the doorstep.
- Queenie_5_hole

because i'm fairly certain the ref also saw PK's arms wrapped around Crosby's legs not allowing him to get up and causing Sid to react with the face slams.

i mean you didn't see that?

because i'm fairly certain the ref also saw PK's arms wrapped around Crosby's legs not allowing him to get up and causing Sid to react with the face slams.

i mean you didn't see that?
- Fountain-San

So a trip is just as bad as a punch? Yea- the league will never get to that point.

Paul,
The prohockeytalk dot Com site says the nhl has declared that the puck getting knocked in the net wasn't a continuation play. It would have been a continuation if the original shto had rolled in after the whistle without being touched. Sounds like a cya by them, like the mystery memo that went out legalizing a foot in the crease when Dallas beat the sabres.

Paul,
You said that Milbury didn't complain because according to the rules the call was correct.
But yesterday you pointed out that it could have been over turned as a 'continuation play' that the whistle had no effect on.
I think that 99% of the hockey people in the world don't realize that goal could have counted per the rule you quoted!!
So Milbury was wrong, as usual!! LOL
- dansmail26

I think the whistle blew before the Pred hit the puck into the net. If so, then continuing from the whistle wouldn't have resulted in the puck going into the net since the puck was going the other way.

If the whistle had blown after the Pred made contact (while the puck was traveling toward the net), then that would be a case for a continuation play.

because i'm fairly certain the ref also saw PK's arms wrapped around Crosby's legs not allowing him to get up and causing Sid to react with the face slams.

i mean you didn't see that?
- Fountain-San

You're right. Totally forgot that rule was added that you can slam a guys head into the ice repeatedly for touching your let. I still thought it was under Rule 48 in targeting the head where it's possibly a match penalty, although maybe its just Rule 51 on roughing. But if you like you're made up rule we can use that.

http://1075theriver.ihear...ajority-decides-15900101/

You're right. Totally forgot that rule was added that you can slam a guys head into the ice repeatedly for touching your let. I still thought it was under Rule 48 in targeting the head where it's possibly a match penalty, although maybe its just Rule 51 on roughing. But if you like you're made up rule we can use that.

http://1075theriver.ihear...ajority-decides-15900101/
- Queenie_5_hole

good grief. maybe hockey isn't for you.

good grief. maybe hockey isn't for you.
- Fountain-San

No no, that play isn't for hockey. If you can't see what the hell is wrong with banging a guys head into the ice, I can't help you. It's pretty indefensible and if you're arguing it is you are just embarrassing yourself.

Yeah the offside reviews are a joke. Just get rid of them. Or at least take them out of the coaches hands, just have the league take a quick look on every play and call back any glaring ones i.e. a foot offside. Who cares if the difference is a hair.

Yeah I agree. Now when the coach challenges a goal because of a possible offside, the refs have a lot of pressure to make the right call, because if they don't, the coach loses his timeout and can't challenge anything else later in the game.

If the league reviewed every goal for offside, they could just review in real-time and make sure there's no obvious offsides.

No no, that play isn't for hockey. If you can't see what the hell is wrong with banging a guys head into the ice, I can't help you. It's pretty indefensible and if you're arguing it is you are just embarrassing yourself.
- Queenie_5_hole

It's the internet. That's what it's here for.

We get to see people defending the indefensible, and embarrassing the poop out of themselves on a minute to minute basis.

Yeah I agree. Now when the coach challenges a goal because of a possible offside, the refs have a lot of pressure to make the right call, because if they don't, the coach loses his timeout and can't challenge anything else later in the game.

If the league reviewed every goal for offside, they could just review in real-time and make sure there's no obvious offsides.
- OTHabs

You only get one challenge regardless of if you're right or not. If you're right you just get to keep your timeout, but you still can't challenge a play the rest of the game.

Paul, I'm not one to typically complain about officiating, but I really think it has been subpar for quite some time now. Why have rules on the books if refs aren't going to use them, or maybe they aren't allowed to enforce them???
NHL hockey would be much better overall if speed and skill were permitted to shine, period.

I'm a Pens fan, and what happened to Mark Methot's finger was horrible. BUT, after watching a video clip assembled by a Flames fan, which was made up of snippets from ONE game, showed Johnny Hockey getting hand-slashed close to 20 times, three of them to the point where he had to remove his glove out of concern for his own digits. This could be SO easily taken out of the game.

And during the Pens' playoff run, I'd say there were many, many instances of rushing forwards being held up by D-men scrambling to keep up... not to mention quite a few heads being slammed into the boards...

I thought the NHL cared about concussions...?

It seems the rules are in place, and yet myself and so many other hockey fans just don't understand why the game is officiated the way it is. What say you?

It's the internet. That's what it's here for.

We get to see people defending the indefensible, and embarrassing the poop out of themselves on a minute to minute basis.
- Wetbandit1

ok bud. playoff hockey.

You're right. Totally forgot that rule was added that you can slam a guys head into the ice repeatedly for touching your let. I still thought it was under Rule 48 in targeting the head where it's possibly a match penalty, although maybe its just Rule 51 on roughing. But if you like you're made up rule we can use that.

http://1075theriver.ihear...ajority-decides-15900101/
- Queenie_5_hole

"Slam the guys head into the ice". I've seen a lot of people say that but I must have been watching a different video. That was hardly 'slamming' his head. It was basically a facewash. People who think that deserved a suspension are Crosby haters.