Inconsistent Rules Contribute to Inconsistent Enforcement

Follow Paul on Twitter: @paulstewart22

Do you want more consistency with hockey officiating? So do I. But let's not pretend it's simply a matter of hiring "better" officials. It starts with an understanding across the board between coaches, players, club management and the officials. They must ALL be the same page with the same concept of fairness and interpretation of the rules. The rules must also be rewritten for greater clarity.

These agreed-upon standards must then be carried by the conduits of information within the game, filter into the press and, finally, reach the fans.

Is that realistic? Probably not. But that's what it would take.

Absolute consistency is impossible to attain. However, that doesn't mean we should ever stop striving for it. In reality, the greatest consistency an official can have is to consistently be himself. Every year at training camp, we all come out with an upbeat frame of mind. Then the games start and we use our judgment for the first time. We promptly go back to being hated again. It's just how it goes.

A hockey official is like a mailman. As the mailman, I delivered the rules as I was informed and instructed to do. That included some joke rules that I hated, such as the toe-in-the-crease rule (which, thankfully, bit the dust but not until it became part of Stanley Cup Final lore on a non-call) for disallowed goals and the attempt-to-spear double minor.

In hockey, the Rule book is the officials' mandate and shield. But what happens when the Rule book itself is filed with inconsistency, vagueness and even contradictions? Consistent inconsistency.

That doesn't mean our officials cannot -- and do not need -- to strive for continual improvement (as do all teams and players). When an official messes up, it better not be because he doesn't know a rule. What I am talking about here, though, is that we have to fix a broken process by which rules are created or amended. It would be of huge help if those who have officiated the game were given a voice in clarifying the rules. I find it galling that there are replay officials, some supervisors and the ultimate boss of officiating atop the NHL Hockey Operations who have zero on-ice officiating experience.

At the very top of the Hockey Ops hierarchy, there is a lack of understanding of what referees and linesmen actually need at their disposal in order to succeed on the ice. This inevitably results in more and more judgment being taken away from the crews on the ice in the name of "assisting" them in doing their jobs. The mistrust is palpable.

From a League standpoint, there is also a public relations agenda at work: The NHL wants to present an image to the public that it is cracking down on issues such as dangerous hits and diving/embellishment. In reality, there is very little actually being done on these issues.

Furthermore, since on-ice officials make for a convenient scapegoat, the has tried to create a cookie-cutter rules that remove more and more decision-making power from its referees and linesmen.

********

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.