Paul Stewart: NHL GMs Need to Better Understand Officiating and Rule Book

Get a goalie, a forward, a defenseman,a ref, a coach and a GM in the room and don't let them out until they figure it out.

The only thing I want included is that ANY contact by a defending player that forces an attacking player into the goalie negates any possibility of goalie interference.

Get a goalie, a forward, a defenseman,a ref, a coach and a GM in the room and don't let them out until they figure it out.

The only thing I want included is that ANY contact by a defending player that forces an attacking player into the goalie negates any possibility of goalie interference.
- scottak

I thought you were going to say....don't let them out until one walks out, then he gets to write the rule.

But anyway, the other issue about learning the rulebook, is you can know it top to bottom, but when a coach makes a challenge (based on 1 rule), the authorities can always use another rule to make the ruling.

Just like the off-side challenge the Blackhawks made against Minny, where the puck deflected off of Seabrook's skate. The authories ruled that control, where most everyone else would have called that incidental contact. Q had the rule correct, and was correct to challenge that.

1. A goalie who is entirely out of the blue paint should be fair game.

2. Why even discuss the offside change. It is absolutely fine now but they want to introduce gray area with the skate off the ice bs? Nonsense

1. A goalie who is entirely out of the blue paint should be fair game.

2. Why even discuss the offside change. It is absolutely fine now but they want to introduce gray area with the skate off the ice bs? Nonsense
- Just5

I bring the offside thing up because Paul brought up the fact that everyone should learn the rulebook. That is an example where it doesn't matter if you know it or not.

Having a ref in on the negotiations has another side benefit, the referees enforcing the rule would know someone who has skated a mile in their skates had a say in it. It give it more credibility for the guys on the ice.

I agree that the refs should have a voice in some capacity at these meetings. Even if it's just in an advisory position as Paul suggested.

1. A rules committee with X number of coaches/GM's and officials to glean the rule book, come to a clear and universal understanding AFTER they clean up the rule book. Then bring it to the NHLPA and allow them to review it and make any/all needed clarifications and venting then print it.

2. Have all referees go through a yearly training, retraining and that is mandated and agreed on by the Owner's rules committee. The referees have to perform up to an agreed on by the owner's/GM and NHLPA committee; referees that cannot and do not show an ability to make clean and "Universal/objective calls" year after year and game after game, are not retained by the NHL.

Require ongoing and universal training for all referees/linesmen yearly.

*Referees includes linesmen.

They also decided to bring a retired referee into the Toronto video room to assist with reviews and have set the wheels in motion to do it as soon as possible. The new process will be in place by the playoffs, barring an unexpected snag.

Is the problem the rule? Or the replay review of the calls? I suggest that clarity of the rule is essential, and then they should get rid of replay of goaltender interference to speed up play and let the referees referee.