Cruel Intention: The Intent to Blow Rule and Other Officiating Blunders

January 28, 2010 – Michael Frazier

First off, allow me this opportunity to say how pleased I am to be able to contribute to this rapidly growing website. I hope to help this community grow and flourish for quite some time. Now that the intro is out of the way, let’s talk a little hockey.

When it comes to this great sport, I have an opinion about everything; rules, players, teams, parody and even salaries. In any case, I happen to have an opinion about this ridiculous rule with the referees losing site of the puck in the middle of a scrum in front of the net. It kind of goes hand in hand with the “intent to blow” rule with the whistle. Since they can’t go back and reverse a call on replay in which the whistle blew AFTER the puck crosses the line. So what am I getting at here? Do you have any idea how many goals have been disallowed because of this rule? A lot.

This may seem like old news to many of you, but the most recent example comes from an MLK Day matinee with the Devils and Islanders. Without getting too bogged down in details, the official behind the Devil net tried to maintain a clean view of the puck while Richard Park of the Islanders tried to get a shot off. On the game’s telecast, it is obvious that Devil net minder Marty Brodeur never once had possession of the puck to warrant a stoppage in play. My understanding of the rule is that if at any point during a play like this that an official loses the puck, it’s at his discretion to blow the play dead. In most cases (This case as no exception), the play was blown dead as the puck crossed the line into the goal. In this case for the Islanders, the goal was disallowed immediately because the official lost the puck, though it was never covered by Brodeur. I can imagine what some of you may be thinking about if you’re reading that; the Islanders won 4-0 and this goal wouldn’t have made any difference in the end result. I’ll give you that much. However, this issue is about a matter of principle. I understand it’s probably difficult, let alone impossible to amend a rule like this. It’s a judgment call. There’s no such thing as a perfectly officiated game.

I’ve posted the game’s highlight video below for you those of you that may have missed this officiating blunder. This one ranks pretty high among missed calls, no-calls, and just blatant lapses in judgment. Pay attention to the puck and you should be able to see that it never stopped moving and was never covered up. Fast forward to the 23 second mark of the highlight. Notice Doug Weight saying his piece about the play. The guy really shows why he’s wearing that C on his jersey for an otherwise young Islander team.

Like I said, had the play rolled on and had Richard Park been awarded the goal, all it really would’ve done was make the final 5-0 instead of 4-0. However, if this rule isn’t tweaked in some fashion, some of these premature whistles and the “intent-to-blow” rule are going to pull critical goals off the board in some key situations. Lucky for this scrappy Islanders team, no harm done. It’s just one less goal Richard Park can claim to his season total.

Check Out These Hot Stories On The Web

Comments

5 Responses to “Cruel Intention: The Intent to Blow Rule and Other Officiating Blunders”

Greystoke on January 28th, 2010 3:52 pm

I have been a USA Hockey on-ice official for more than 20 years. What I have to say on this is unless you have been out there officiating a game to see what it’s like to keep track of a puck bouncing around players, don’t go critiquing people who are. It’s EASY to sit in the stands or watch on TV and say “why did he call this or that?” It’s not easy when you are trying to look around arms and legs and bodies flying around while avouding sticks. A lot of the judgments on this are made on instinct and reading body language of players. It is especially difficult if the puck is on the far side of the goaltender from where you are standing. Most of the time this play will be called correctly. Occasionally it will be wrong. Officials are human and will make mistakes. ALL games and calls in the NHL are reviewed. Not some of them, ALL of them. All on-ice officials, referees and linesmen are given ratings on their performance by the coaches after EVERY game. If an official is making a lot of mistakes, he’s not going to be in the league very long. The other indicator is getting playoffs. Only the highest rated officials get playoffs. Whoever is out there they are doing their best. We all have off days and so do they. If you can go out there and do it and never make a mistake, then let’s see you get out there and do it. I’ll expect to see you doing the Stanley Cup finals, because you’ll be the highest rated official in the league.

[Reply]
Mike on January 28th, 2010 6:19 pm

I’ve played quite a bit of hockey in my day and have been on the ice in every position to see a play unfold in front of the net. I know the puck gets lost, but I don’t think that warrants a stoppage in play when a goal could be scored. I wrote this piece because it’s happening far too often, more than it should. There are two referees and two linesman on the ice; one of those sets of eyes should be able to follow the puck. If that’s not good enough, let the play go and leave it to replay. In the play in the Islanders game particularly, what baffles me is the fact that the official to the side of the net didn’t even “intend” to blow his whistle until that puck was on the stick of Richard Park. At what point could he have possibly lost sight of the puck?

Finally, I’m sorry if you were offended by my “critique” here, but this is a hockey BLOG and that’s kind of what we do here. You have your opinion and I have mine. That’s what makes the blogging community great.

[Reply]
adam on January 29th, 2010 6:32 am

@Greystroke

It’s also easy to make excuses for poor officiating simply because you’re a referee too.

[Reply]
Bill Parr on January 29th, 2010 5:59 pm

Guy has a good point.

[Reply]
Another Ref on January 30th, 2010 2:39 pm

I understand it sucks when goals get pulled back because of a quick whistle, but think about the flipside of it for a second. Say refs are told to not blow the whistle until they can verify the puck is covered by the keeper. A keeper may have it 2 or 3 seconds before an official realizes it. What are offensive players going to do, play til the whistle and try to whack it loose from the keeper. Do you think the defensemen are going to go easy on a forward whacking their keeper because the whistle hadn’t blown? Nope, you’re going to have a huge mess on your hands, that will probably last the rest of the game, and subsequent games between teams. So the way the rule is applied, it protects keepers physically, and prevents altercations at the cost of unfortunate disallowed goals. If there is a way for altering the rule to keep those elements and let play continue until verifiable completion, I am all for it.

[Reply]