Around the League: Should NHL Refs Answer for their Calls After Games?
The Stanley Cup Playoffs have exposed some issues with the NHL’s officiating, but should referees have to answer to their calls after games?
Mandatory Credit: Bob DeChiara-USA TODAY Sports - Around the League: Should NHL Refs Answer for their Calls After Games?The NHL’s officials are none too popular in Boston right now. Then again, when are they ever?
The latest issue comes from Game 4 of the Bruins’ second round series against the Florida Panthers, where Florida forward Sam Bennett scored a controversial game-tying goal. In a mere second, Bennett pushed Boston forward Charlie Coyle into his own goalie, then shoveled a loose puck into the net. He found the equalizer, and referees Frederick L’Ecuyer and Francis Charron found no fault. Explaining why it didn’t overturn the goal upon a coach’s challenge from the Bruins, the NHL released a statement saying:
“Video review supported the Referees’ call on the ice that the shove by Florida’s Sam Bennett on Charlie Coyle and the subsequent contact with Jeremy Swayman did not prevent Swayman from playing his position in the crease prior to Bennett’s goal.”
The convoluted statement caused ire from the Bruins side, only amplified by their losing result in a game they were badly outplayed anyway. After the game, the media wanted answers to explain the questionable call. And as they asked parties that had no say in the call, Boston GM Don Sweeney expressed his frustration with the situation.
“The overall premise I have, to be perfectly honest with you, is we should not be asking the coach after the game what they feel about the officiating and what happens,” Sweeney said after the game. “... Those questions should either be directed at either the supervisor of officials, supervisor of the series, and/or the officials. You want full access and transparency? Then put the officials in front of the microphone to answer the question. They’re the only ones that have the experience to be able to handle whatever interpretation they applied to Rule 69.”
Rule 69, of course, addresses goaltender interference. Perhaps if refs were made available after the game — or even the review team in Toronto — they could explain why they didn’t think Bennett’s actions constituted interference. Instead, they have to rely on the limited words of a press release, one that doesn’t tell them much that they didn’t already know about the call.
What could be different? Other leagues hold refs accountable to media questions. Pool reporters in the NBA, MLB and NFL can ask refs about calls after the game. Detroit fans likely remember whenLions offensive lineman Dan Skipper was flagged for being an ineligible receiver, wiping a two-point conversion off the table against the Dallas Cowboys. Well, a pool reporter got to ask “Why?” It’s not an uncommon practice, even if it’s foreign to the NHL.
But, let’s flip the script here. Let’s say the goal was waved off. Certainly, Panthers fans would feel snubbed by the call. They might even try to use the nuances of Rule 69 to their own advantage. But would there still be calls to make refs available to the media? Would the rage of South Florida compare to that exuded by Boston and its fans right now?
It’s a question that Sean Shapiro of Elite Prospects raised earlier today, and it’s one I wholeheartedly agree with. It’s easy to lambaste refs when there’s a controversy, but what about the other seemingly mundane issues? Where does the NHL and its refs ever look good here? Where do we draw the line?
Interviewing refs after controversial calls would really only draw more criticism to a profession that’s bound to piss off fans of different fan bases from time to time. Where’s this energy to praise referees when they get a call right?
As a rule, I’m always a supporter of expanded media access. It’s my job to connect fans with the teams, organizations and governing bodies of their sports fandoms. I’d love to be able to tell you all what the refs thought of a play. However, making refs available after every game — or setting proper criteria to make them available in exceptional circumstances — isn’t the panacea everyone is looking for. It’s the easy way to address frustrations with officiating, rather than accepting that a human system of subjectively objective reviews will have quirks. Referee interviews might demystify some calls, but it won’t make the calls different. The Bruins still would have lost Sunday’s game.
We can all recognize how the officials might have gotten this call wrong, and how it might be defining in a series that the Panthers now hold a 3-1 lead on. But whether or not officials answer to their calls after a game, it won’t change the way games are officiated. It will only give fans one more frustration with the refs they already dislike.