Wanna blog? Start your own hockey blog with My HockeyBuzz. Register for free today!
 

Rinaldo, Lion Tamers and Reputation Penalties

February 24, 2015, 10:20 AM ET [16 Comments]
Paul Stewart
Blogger •Former NHL Referee • RSSArchiveCONTACT
Follow Paul on Twitter: @paulstewart22

In recent days, I have gotten several questions from reporters and fans alike asking for my take on whether I think NHL officials are being "instructed by the league" to "target" controversial Philadelphia Flyers forward Zac Rinaldo for penalties and whether his reputation as a player who frequently shows reckless disregard for fellow players' safety plays into marginal calls that go against him.

The answer to the first part of the question is no. During my officiating career, I was never once instructed by anyone either to target or "protect" a certain player. As for the second component, I have the same sort of very strong feelings against so-called reputation penalties that I do for makeup calls.

Hockey referees are like lion tamers. We have various tools -- a whistle, a rule book and our own psychology -- to take control of a situation. We can't stop the lions from being lions but we can do things that make them less lion-like for a while.

There are certain players on the ice -- and every team has a few -- who are more likely to cause trouble. They are more likely to chop at someone behind the play or throw a bad hit or otherwise do something to justifiably enrage others and cause a game to get out of control. Such players need to be watched more closely. That's just reality.

That does NOT mean, however, that we as officials should issue reputation penalties strictly because of who is on the ice. We are here to JUDGE the game, not to MANAGE it. The latter leads to officiating out of fear for what might happen rather than basing it on what actually happened.

Likewise, the rule book empowers us to penalize a variety of actions with punishments that fit the crime but it does not justify mentally filling in the blanks that just because Player A is on the ice he was bound to do X, Y, or Z even if we did not have a proper vantage point to see what happened.

As a referee, I always believed that the buck stopped with me to exercise proper judgment about whether to make a call or to let something slide. There are three components to making a call: 1) the action of a player, 2) the rulebook definition of that action's legality, 3) the effect of that player's action on an opposing player and/or the flow of the game.

Some officials weigh the third factor more heavily than others. I was always one to use my feel for the game and the flow of play as a guiding factor in making a judgment call. In doing that, I knew full well that the buck would stop with me. I had to be accountable and my attitude was bring it on -- they gave me a sweater and a whistle and I knew the rulebook, so let me judge.

Now, contrary to popular belief, a player need not kiss up to a referee to achieve acceptability. What he DOES need to do is learn to heed warnings. He needs to establish a degree of a trust factor in the relationship. For instance, if I think this guy might spear someone as soon as my back is turned, you'd better believe I'm going to keep a closer watch on him throughout the game.

Rinaldo and players like him aren't going to get the benefit of the doubt because they haven't earned the benefit of the doubt. However, that does not mean a reputation call is merited just because they were on the ice when there was some commotion going on during the shift.

Final thought: There is no justification for an official not to know the rule book or to misapply the rules. Misjudging a play is one things. Applying the wrong criteria or misusing the correct one is not acceptable under any circumstances. It does not matter whatsoever what player is involved, what his reputation may me or what your own interactions with him have been like in the past.

************

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 ECAC.

The longtime referee heads Officiating by Stewart, a consulting, training and evaluation service for officials. Stewart also maintains 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.

In addition to his blogs for HockeyBuzz every Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday, Stewart writes a hockey column every Wednesday for the Huffington Post.
Join the Discussion: » 16 Comments » Post New Comment
More from Paul Stewart