Paul Stewart: Brind'Amour's suggestion is interesting But problematic

I think one ref two linesman on the ice. At least two refs with headsets off the ice.

The reasoning, opens up the ice more. When your heart rate intensifies and your head bobs you will lose sight and errors increase. A steady vantage point will catch a lot especially behind the play.
You can switch on off ice guy for on ice to sub and retain energy.

Refs have a difficult job. Unfortunately, too often they dont call a lot bc of managing the game. The players always adapt to the officials and that's why once again we are seeing interference, hooking and holding increase.

I think one ref two linesman on the ice. At least two refs with headsets off the ice.

The reasoning, opens up the ice more. When your heart rate intensifies and your head bobs you will lose sight and errors increase. A steady vantage point will catch a lot especially behind the play.
You can switch on off ice guy for on ice to sub and retain energy.

Refs have a difficult job. Unfortunately, too often they dont call a lot bc of managing the game. The players always adapt to the officials and that's why once again we are seeing interference, hooking and holding increase.
- BluemanGuruu

The only change I would make it to allow each ref to make penalty calls in the neutral zone, but only one referee to make calls in each attacking/defensive zone. There are many times when a referee 100 feet away sees something incorrectly as opposed to the guy 20 feet away. For example, the far ref sees a stick raised parallel to the ice and calls a hook because of his angle, while the ref closer sees that there was no hook. They could still consult after the play, but that would be my only argument about the 2 ref system.

Hello Paul, I always enjoy your perspective and I was wondering why the referee team does not wear a wireless headset to communicate with each other. I know calls are made split second and it doesn't seem to be easy to let the other ref know what you are about to call, but one would think that on-ice communication during play with each other would be beneficial. I think they tried it some years ago, and if it was a technology issue that shelved it, perhaps with the much better technology now available it might be worth a look?

I absolutely agree with having an extra ref and a linesman off ice, especially since the game has become more about speed and skill. The linesmen have to look through a screen most of the time so there's no way for them to see all the offside calls that should be made. I know most people don't like the time spent of a review of offside on a goal, but it's necessary. That's not a judgement call. I like the rule change about having a skate above the line, not on the ice.

The only change I would make it to allow each ref to make penalty calls in the neutral zone, but only one referee to make calls in each attacking/defensive zone. There are many times when a referee 100 feet away sees something incorrectly as opposed to the guy 20 feet away. For example, the far ref sees a stick raised parallel to the ice and calls a hook because of his angle, while the ref closer sees that there was no hook. They could still consult after the play, but that would be my only argument about the 2 ref system.
- jmatchett383

But often the guy 100 feet away has a clearer, unobstructed view of the play than the guy 20 feet away who’s blocked or on the opposite side of the ice.

Heading into tonight’s game Bob has 471 saves in 14 games since taking over for Lyon. Ironic, two former Flyer goalies in the final.

Feel like you have it right at this point. Better training is absolutely needed.

Two man system implemented meant a lot were moved up before they should have, or in some cases likely would not have ever moved up. Then the older, established refs started retiring. So more have to get pulled up and rushed. Toss in the whole game management and interpretation of rules etc and it gets really messy.

It also doesn't help when things are inconsistent. You crack down hard on obstruction, then let off, then put the whistles away come playoffs and have a different set of rules. Here's the rules, CALL EM. Teams can either adjust or get buried. End of story.

It really starts and ends with consistency and training and getting the officials to a point where teams just know no matter who the striped shirts are, these are the rules and it is going to be the same from one game to the next.

Feel like you have it right at this point. Better training is absolutely needed.

Two man system implemented meant a lot were moved up before they should have, or in some cases likely would not have ever moved up. Then the older, established refs started retiring. So more have to get pulled up and rushed. Toss in the whole game management and interpretation of rules etc and it gets really messy.

It also doesn't help when things are inconsistent. You crack down hard on obstruction, then let off, then put the whistles away come playoffs and have a different set of rules. Here's the rules, CALL EM. Teams can either adjust or get buried. End of story.

It really starts and ends with consistency and training and getting the officials to a point where teams just know no matter who the striped shirts are, these are the rules and it is going to be the same from one game to the next.
- Roadrunner75

Incompetence has been a hallmark of NHL officiating for 40 years.