In the 1990s, the NHL scene was dominated by interfering tactics by players. This story from Feb. 19, 1994, covered the league's GMs attempting to address the obstruction issue.
The NHL’s entertainment product suffered in the 1990s thanks to an outbreak of players hooking, holding and otherwise clutching their opponents. And in this cover story from THN’s Feb. 18, 1994 – Vol. 47, Issue 22 – then-editor-in-chief Steve Dryden spoke to a number of NHL executives who recognized the serious problem obstruction had become.
(And don’t forget our daily offer: for full access to The Hockey News’ 77-year Archive, you only need to subscribe to the magazine by visiting THN.com/Free and signing up.)
The NHL’s winter meeting of GMs and league officials connected in Florida, and interference was prominent on the minds of many attendees.
“There’s no doubt in my mind there is too much interference in the game today,” said Toronto Maple Leafs GM Cliff Fletcher.
Other GMs, such as then-Oilers head honcho Glen Sather, pointed to more stringent officiating as a way to solve the issue.
“We pick guys all over the ice now,” Sather said. “Every team does. If the referees would call the rules the way they’re supposed to be called and we let them call it, then everything would change.”
“We talk about all these defenses that are taking some of the scoring out of the game,” added then-Red Wings’ GM Bryan Murray, “(but) that has very little to do with it. It’s the application of the rules. We see some teams play a particular checking style that all comes down to holding up, interfering, whatever you want to call it. I don’t think we have to change a lot of rules. I think we’ve got the rules in place.”
NHL TACKLES INTERFERENCE
Vol. 47, No. 22, Feb. 18, 1994
By Steve Dryden
PALM HARBOR, FLA. – Harry Sinden calls it “running the gauntlet” and it has the NHL running for cover.
League officials are concerned about an outbreak of restraining fouls. General managers met Feb. 7 at Palm Harbor, Fla., and a top priority was to discuss the triple threat posed by hooking, holding and interference.
“There’s no doubt in my mind there is too much interference in the game today,” said Toronto Maple Leafs’ GM Cliff Fletcher.
Sinden, the Boston Bruins’ GM and one of the game’s most-respected executives, said restraining fouls are so prevalent he calls players skating through them “running the gauntlet.”
Everybody is talking about the problem.
Apparently, the only people who haven’t noticed are NHL fans and referees. League attendance remains strong and restraining penalties were collectively down about 10 per cent from last season. Through 669 games, hooking calls were the same as 1992-93 (967 to 967), holding penalties were down marginally (972 to 932) and interference infractions had dropped by 27 per cent (834 to 610).
Figure that one out. Many say restraining fouls are dragging the game down - witness scoring, by nearly one goal per game - and, yet, there is limited punishment to fit the crime. “We’re awaiting direction from the league and officiating department as to what degree (the situation) needs to be addressed,” said veteran referee Kerry Fraser.
The NHL has been under attack for dull, defensive hockey which prominently features clutch-and-grab tactics.
Fletcher said the problem is not a new one, pointing to the Montreal Canadiens’ reaction in 1961 when the Toronto Maple Leafs ended the Canadiens’ streak of five straight Stanley Cups. “We complained bitterly in Montreal about how the Toronto Maple Leafs were ruining the game with interference and playing defensive hockey,” recalled Fletcher, who was then a scout for the Canadiens.
More than 30 years later, everything old is new again. Players routinely run interference for one another, hold up forecheckers, mug puck carriers and illegally check potential pass receivers into submission.
It is likely no coincidence super skaters such as Teemu Selanne and Alexander Mogilny have been overshadowed by plodders such as Dave Andreychuk and Ray Sheppard this season.
“We pick guys all over the ice now,” said Edmonton Oilers’ coach-GM Glen Sather. “Every team does. If the referees would call the rules the way they’re supposed to be called and we let them call it, then everything would change.”
Sather said changing the offside rule to its old form - which didn’t allow for offsides to be waved off by players exiting the offensive zone - would eliminate much of the interference.
Officiating, as always, is an issue with GMs who believe referees must be given a clearer idea of the dividing line between acceptable and unacceptable interference.
“We talk about all these defenses that are taking some of the scoring out of the game,” said Detroit Red Wings’ GM Bryan Murray, “(but) that has very little to do with it. It’s the application of the rules.
“We see some teams play a particular checking style that all comes down to holding up, interfering, whatever you want to call it. I don’t think we have to change a lot of rules. I think we’ve got the rules in place.”
Fraser said increased interference took root during the 17-day referees’ strike during which substitute officials had difficulty controlling the players. (Take note: Fraser is a member of NHL Officials’ Association executive and has something of a bias.)
Fletcher and other GMs don’t object to one brand of interference-defensemen holding up the first forechecker to provide a measure of protection for partners retrieving the puck along the boards.
“That’s part of the game,” Fletcher said. “You have to be very delicate if you’re going to eliminate that. You don’t want defensemen being run through the boards. Each team will need 10 of them.”
Fraser said there are rules to protect the defensemen. Boarding and charging penalties are in place to discourage players from launching dangerous bodychecks.
Some GMs say drawing the line on this form of interference is essential because you don’t want to discourage teams from aggressive and exciting forechecking. Some teams have given up trying to be proactive in the offensive zone because they can’t break through interference barriers.
Expansion teams-five of them have entered the league in the past three seasons-are commonly accused of compensating for shortcomings in talent by instituting tight, defensive systems that push the NHL’s restraining rules to the limit.
Winnipeg Jets’ coach-GM John Paddock said his team experienced a California nightmare Jan. 26, just one night after an entertaining 4-4 tie with the Los Angeles Kings. The Jets lost to the Mighty Ducks of Anaheim 3-1 and Paddock said the first-year team deserved credit for its effort.
But…
“It was clutch and grab and hold and tackle and trip,” Paddock said. “It wasn’t called the same (as in Los Angeles) and it wasn’t played the same.”
The NHL experimented with two referees handling games during the pre-season and it was judged a success. Some GMs - including Murray and Paddock - would like to see that avenue explored further.
Others such as Dean Lombardi of the San Jose Sharks say the one-referee system may prove more efficient in view of league plans to upgrade instruction and monitoring procedures.
“I’d like to see them try that first before overhauling the system and going with two referees,” Lombardi said. “It’s hard enough to get one guy to be consistent. How’s it going to be with two? Consistency is the thing you always go back to. I think the referees deserve more of an opportunity to be better.”
So, too, do the game’s highest-skilled players deserve a chance to be better in the opinion of NHL leaders.
The Hockey News Archive is a collection of more than 2,640 issues and more than 156,000 articles exclusively produced for subscribers, chronicling the complete history of The Hockey News from 1947 until this day. Visit the archives at THN.com/archive and subscribe today at subscribe.thehockeynews.com