The sports world has been buzzing about controversial calls from officials this week. And in the NBA and NFL, the referees at the center of firestorms were made available to the media to explain their line of thinking.
In the NBA, a pool reporter was able to ask referee and crew chief Tony Brothers about LeBron James’ disputed three-point play on a potential game-tying shot.
Meanwhile, NFL referee Brad Allen answered three questions from a pool reporter after the Detroit Lions had a two-point conversion negated because of an illegal touching penalty against the Dallas Cowboys.
Hockey fans are likely sitting back and watching this type of transparency and accountability from game officials with some degree of envy. After all, NHL protocols do not allow for referees to be made available to the media following games. As it currently stands, reporters can send an email request to the league office for a comment on a disputed or controversial call.
The referees on the ice, however, are strictly off-limits.
So after watching the other leagues put their referees in the direct line of questioning, it’s worth pondering if it’s time for the NHL to do the same.
The initial response might be a resounding yes.
During the NHL/NHLPA player tour last September in Las Vegas, Edmonton Oilers superstar Leon Draisaitl was on board with the idea of making referees available to the media following controversial rulings on the ice.
“It’d be a great idea,” Draisaitl said. “There’s no ref out there that’s trying to purposely make the wrong decisions.”
Putting a referee on the hot seat and making them accountable seems like a terrific idea on the surface. If coaches and players need to be accountable to the media for their mistakes during the course of a game, logic dictates that same responsibility should be extended to the on-ice officials.
Every fan base can think of at least one instance in which a referee’s botched call has directly affected the outcome of a game for their favorite team. So the notion of that referee being held accountable through a direct line of questioning seems a delicious idea.
But before moving to this type of system in the NHL, we need to examine the fallout from the other leagues this week.
In the NFL, Lions fans have only become further enraged by Allen’s explanation of events. In Detroit this week, they put billboards off the freeway that read “Decker Reported” — a clear shot at Allen’s decision to call Lions offensive tackle Taylor Decker for an illegal-touching penalty.
In the NBA, James went off on the league’s video review system, saying, “Somebody over there eating a ham sandwich or (something) made the call.”
According to the pool reportreferee and crew chief Brothers said James’ shot was “ruled a two-point field goal on the floor during live play. After video review, there wasn’t clear and conclusive evidence to overturn it from a two to a three, and that’s why it stood as a two-point field goal.”
But that did nothing to stop James from being critical as he added, “There’s a space in between the front of my foot and the 3-point line. Stevie Wonder can see that, champ.”
These explanations from the referees — while transparent and forthcoming — did nothing to lower the temperature around the related controversies. In fact, an argument can be made that Allen’s comments only served to pour gasoline on an already raging fire.
So we should probably tread cautiously on this front in the NHL.
Retired referee Dave Jackson, who officiated more than 1,500 regular-season games during a career that spanned from 1990-2018, says he could be on board with this idea — with a significant caveat.
“I don’t have a problem with a pool reporter who goes into the officials’ locker room,” Jackson told The Athletic. “But it should only be used when it’s a rule explanation.”
Jackson pointed to a specific example from this week as to when he could see some value in an explanation from a referee to a pool reporter.
During the Vancouver-Ottawa game on Tuesday, Senators defenseman Jacob-Bernard Docker appeared to close his hand on the puck while breaking up a potential “Michigan-style” play from Canucks forward Nils Hoglander.
Many fans were adamant that Bernard-Docker’s actions should have led to an automatic penalty shot for Vancouver, considering he closed his hand on the puck while standing in the crease. But Jackson says this is one instance in which he would have been happy to explain to a pool reporter why this wasn’t a penalty.
“The crease only extends up to the crossbar. So (Bernard-Docker) grabbed that puck above the crossbar, which means the puck is technically not in the crease,” Jackson said. “And he dropped it right away, so it’s not a penalty. That’s one that would be easy to explain to a pool reporter, because I’m explaining a rule interpretation.”
What Jackson doesn’t want to see is a situation in which every single missed call from a referee becomes the subject of a postgame line of questioning.
“Let’s say a player gets a high-sticked in the face and the ref doesn’t call it,” Jackson said. “The pool reporter goes into the room and says, ‘Why didn’t you make that call?’ The referee would simply say, ‘I missed it.’ Nobody is going to be satisfied by that. I don’t know what answer a referee can give you on a judgement call that is satisfactory. I don’t see the upside on that.”
In the early portion of his career — at some point in the late 1990s or early 2000s — Jackson does recall being interviewed by a pool reporter following a controversial call in Chicago. He and his fellow linesman were adamant that the puck crossed the goal line on a particular play, but their decision was overturned upon video review in Toronto. Jackson remembers hearing a knock on the officials’ door after the game. It was a pool reporter from Chicago requesting a comment.
“I called Toronto and they said, ‘By all means. Go ahead and talk,’” Jackson said. “And I enjoyed it. It took the heat off me. From where I was standing, I thought the puck crossed the line. But the situation room had a better look.”
The league has stopped that practice altogether, opting for statements from the league’s hockey operations department in lieu of direct comments from an on-ice official. Depending on the situation, the off-ice supervisor may also be available for a comment if he is present at the game.
Jackson pushes back against the notion that NHL referees are not being held to a high degree of accountability because they can skip direct questioning from the media, unlike their counterparts in the NFL and NBA.
“People seem to think NHL referees aren’t accountable, which couldn’t be further from the truth,” Jackson said.
He says each game is watched in the NHL situation room in Toronto by a person who logs every significant moment related to that contest. Anything egregious — such as a missed call or an incorrect call — is logged and sent to the league’s director of officiating, Stephen Walkom. Referees are strongly encouraged to watch those logged clips of their previous game before they take the ice again. And if there is anything blatant that is missed, they will hear directly from Walkom.
Jackson adds that approximately 40 percent of the games will have an on-site supervisor, who will go down to the locker room afterward and discuss how things unfolded with the on-ice officials. The supervisors are retired referees such as Bill McCreary and Don Van Massenhoven, who evaluate from the press box and then come down and offer direct feedback.
On a weekly basis, referees are sent examples of good and ball calls from their colleagues around the league. They are told what tendencies are creeping into the game and how they should appropriately call those infractions. And then, at the halfway point of the season, each official receives a detailed report about what they’re doing right and what they’re missing. Officials are rated on everything from their conditioning to their positioning on the ice to the amount of calls they’ve made.
“At that point, you know if you’re on track or not,” Jackson said.
Jackson says the internal mechanisms are in place to hold referees accountable, without the need for media to be peppering them with questions or fining them for each missed call.
“People talk about officials being fined for a bad call,” Jackson said. “Well, you can’t fine an official for a bad call any more than you can fine a goalie for allowing a soft goal. It’s not intentional. It’s a mistake. But it does hit them in the pocketbook eventually. And if your work is not up to par, then you won’t work the playoffs. And that costs you money. So they’re absolutely accountable.”
Jackson, who now serves as a rules analyst for ESPN, says most hockey fans don’t realize how emotionally distraught referees are after they make a mistake on the ice. Just because they’re avoiding media responsibilities doesn’t mean they aren’t carrying some of the weight and burden of controversial calls afterward.
“I can’t tell you how many sleepless nights I had, staring at a hotel ceiling. Just fretting over the call I missed or made,” Jackson said. “It really affects an official. We don’t just laugh it off and move on.”
(Photo of Florida Panthers’ Matthew Tkachuk and referee Jake Brenk: Norm Hall / NHLI via Getty Images)
2024-01-04 17:11:40
#NHL #follow #NBA #NFLs #lead #referees #explain #calls #media
