NHL Should Follow NFL’s Lead in Holding Officials Accountable for Questionable Calls

With about two and a half minutes remaining in the second quarter of Sunday night’s Patriots-Packers game in Foxboro, Green Bay had the ball, first down and goal to go at the New England 1-yard line following a pass interference call in the end zone. While the Patriots ran a handful of substitutions onto the field, the Packers were attempting to snap the ball, possibly catching the Pats with too many men on the ice — well, whatever football’s version of the rule is.

Whistle. Stoppage.

Referee Ed Hochuli steps over the ball. He turns on his wireless microphone, which is hooked up to the Gillette Stadium public address system and the NBC production.

“We were coming out of a penalty and the team has the opportunity to line up. There was no timeout called. There was no timeout called. I came in and stopped the play, because coming out of an administrative stoppage, both teams need to come out and be set.”

We definitely were not watching a hockey game. We could understand exactly why the referee stopped the action. We learned something about the game. And although a bunch of fans booed, Hochuli’s explanation was a positive addition to the experience of watching the game.

So how ’bout a little A/B comparison?

In 2008, the Bruins were chasing a playoff berth in the final couple of weeks of the season. New Jersey’s Dainius Zubrus wrapped around Tim Thomas‘ goal and the puck disappeared. Thomas seemed miffed. The Bruins’ defenseman snapped the puck to the side boards in anger. The referees made no signal and play continued. At the next stoppage a few seconds later, the NHL’s decision-makers in Toronto reviewed the action. For more than five minutes!

While the men in the “war room” (I’m not fond of the term, but the league uses it) pored over their TiVo recording of the feed from New Jersey, no one in the Prudential Center had a clue as to what exactly they were looking at — or looking for. Near the end of the delay, our NESN production team zoomed in on a corner of the goal from the overhead camera replay and found the puck clearly bulging against the inside of the netting. Because of the geometry of the goal, with the apron arcing away from each post, the puck cannot cause the net to bulge unless all of the puck is across the line (the definition of a goal). It wasn’t circumstantial evidence, it was conclusive video showing that New Jersey had scored a goal. Not only did Toronto get it wrong, but when the on-ice official received the decision, all he did was to signal the washout with his arms — no goal. No explanation, no description of what caused the remarkable delay, just “no goal.”

Now, how about the Buffalo game at the TD Garden earlier this month? Dennis Seidenberg let loose a rocket in overtime with Mark Recchi on the doorstep. Everyone at home could hear the puck go “clunk!” Recchi held his arms and stick aloft in celebration. The referee on the goal line signaled an emphatic washout. In the Versus booth, Joe Beninati bellowed, “No goal!”

Play continued for another minute or so. On the stoppage, Toronto reviewed the play. The Bruins and Sabres already had started their marches down their respective tunnels, having seen the conclusive evidence on the Garden HDX screen above center ice.

Explanation? Acknowledgment of getting it wrong? Description of any kind? What do you think this is, $115-dollar-seat patrons and cable subscribers? It’s the NHL! After passing the phone back through the porthole in the timer’s bench glass, the referee turned and pointed to the center dot, took his whistle off his wrist and skated off. That’s it, game over, have a safe drive home.

No reasonable person would expect perfection from any official, although I suspect that if Thomas Jefferson had written the Declaration of Independence a century later than he did, he would have included among the inalienable rights, “Life, Liberty, the Pursuit of Happiness, and the right to yell ‘Kill the Ump!'”

But since mistakes happen, and since fans and announcers often make mistakes in their perceptions of this fastest game in the world, isn’t a better and deeper explanation of the rules and interpretations in the best interest of the game?

We raised this issue to the NHL in 2008, face-to-face with commissioner Gary Bettman and then-head of officiating Stephen Walkom (who, amazingly enough, after returning to on-ice duty, was the ref in the Buffalo game). We asked for more transparency in all aspects of officiating, especially in the explanation of hard-to-understand calls and video reviews. For the record, Ottawa and CBC announcer Dean Brown was one of very few to join us in this polite but forceful request.

The answer from the podium at the NHL broadcasting meetings was quick and clear: “No.”

How about just video review? What if the 30 regional sports networks combined to pay a pool reporter to staff the “war room” so he or she could relay information to the broadcasters, letting us know what they’re looking at?

“No.”

So you’re telling us that NHL Network isn’t soon likely to have a programming counterpart to the NFL Network’s Official Review?

I guess not.

If you haven’t seen it, Official Review is an excellent example of accountability, transparency and administrative confidence. NFL Network puts the league’s VP of officiating through a Q-and-A each week. When a ref makes a bad decision or just plain misses something he is paid to see, there’s no, “He’s beyond reproach and the matter is closed,” as we have heard from the NHL.

Yeah, hard to believe, but the NFL actually calls out its own refs on the network that the league owns. And even Hochuli has felt his feet in the fire. No one is exempt.

The NFL trusts its fans to be intelligent and understanding. It doesn’t expect them to be happy about bad calls, especially when calls change outcomes. But better than lip service and actions that indicate insincerity, far better than pretending there is never anything wrong, the NFL owns up to its mistakes and makes an honest, public, good-faith effort to wash the slate clean once a week.

Really, it’s a great service to any fan. And, Mr. Bettman, isn’t it the fans who put the roofs over both of our heads? Aren’t they the people who the game should serve first and foremost?

Tell you what: I’ll volunteer to host the show for a reasonable fee plus expenses as long as you cover the cost of blood pressure medicine if I develop symptoms.

I’ve heard “No” before. But I’m asking again, for my own curiosity, for the fans’ understanding, for the good of the game. Why can’t the NHL be every bit as accountable and transparent as the league whose profits it so envies?