Inside the NHL War Room

The National Hockey League has a review process that is truly unique and unparalleled within major professional sports. The game moves at a break-neck pace, and the NHL War Room in Toronto has become an absolute necessity. The crew in the War Room monitors every game in real time, and they stay in constant communication with the on-ice officials in order to insure fair competition. It’s not a perfect system by any means, but the current NHL review process adds checks and balances into a system that clearly needs it. The CBC aired a report on this topic, and it gives us a rare look into the inter-workings of the league.

The War Room is like the NHL’s all seeing eye – they closely follow each and every game, double-checking questionable penalties and goals. The on-ice officials, however, still remain in complete control of their game.

“The review may only be initiated by the on-ice referees or by the video replay judge; neither team can initiate a review. Such a review must take place immediately (if play is stopped) or at the next stoppage in play (if play continues). In the Winter Olympics ice hockey tournament, all goals scored are automatically reviewed to ensure they were legitimate. The NHL also reviews all goals. In addition to goals scored, many plays in the NHL are monitored in “the war room” at the NHL league office in Toronto by head replay official (and former Winnipeg Jet) Kris King and his assistants, who can contact replay judges at games (usually high-level local referees) and ask them to review the plays, or to mete out punishments to players for illegal on-ice actions that were not noticed by the on-ice officials”.

So the War Room can’t initiate a review without the officials or video replay judges permission – unlike the NFL, the coaches can’t request a review or challenge a call made on the ice. This is one of the critical flaws of the current system; why can’t the coaches challenge a call that they think is questionable? Why can’t they use their own discretion? The War Room exists to keep the officials from missing penalties and goals, but what good is it if the on-ice officials are the only ones who have the authority to institute a review?

I think the League needs a new instant replay protocol – let’s give each team two challenges, and the play in question will be collectively reviewed by the War Room. Just like the NFL, if a team loses a challenge, it costs them one timeout, and no challenges can be used past the 2:00 mark in the third period. This procedure would make the officials much more accountable for the judgments they make on the ice. Sure, no one wants every call micromanaged, but if the system doesn’t change soon, it’s going to cost a deserving team a playoff series, or worse, a Stanley Cup.

A perfect example of this dysfunction took place last night during the Blues – Hawks game. St.Louis forward Brad Boyes was carrying the puck through the neutral zone, and Patrick Kane swept in and forced a turnover, but his pokecheck went high, and his stick clipped Boyes in the face. The on-ice official called a delayed penalty, and once Kane touched the puck, the play was blown dead. The referees converged near the penalty boxes, and subsequently waived off the penalty. The replay was quite conclusive; Kane’s stick clearly hit Boyes up high, but the Blues didn’t have a chance to challenge the ruling, so play continued. Even the announcers on the CSN Hawks feed admitted that Chicago ‘got away with one’. If the Blues had any recourse to challenge the play, there’s no way that penalty gets waived. Some were arguing that Boyes embellished the high stick, but if that was the case, call him for the dive, don’t cancel the penalty. As it currently stands, the teams are still at the complete mercy of the on-ice officials, and it’s a poor excuse for objectivity.

Secondly, the league needs to take advantage of existing technology to insure accuracy. The challenge procedure in professional tennis utilizes multiple camera angles to generate a computerized rendering of an individual shot:

In tennis, systems such as Hawk-Eye and MacCAM calculate the trajectory of the ball by processing the input of several video cameras. They can play a computer rendering of the path and determine whether the ball landed in or out. Players can appeal to have the system’s calculation used to override a disputed call by the umpire. In March 2008, the International Tennis Federation, Association of Tennis Professionals, Women’s Tennis Association and Grand Slam Committee agreed unified challenge rules: a player can make up to three unsuccessful challenges per set, and a fourth in a tie-break. Television broadcasts may use the footage to replay points even when not challenged by a player.

The NHL can get its hands on a similar setup. If you’re an older hockey fan, the idea of computer chips makes you shudder – the FoxTrax puck trail was an abject failure, and the purists hated it for good reason, but don’t compare this proposal to that disaster. The Foxtrax puck was meant to lure causal fans into the game; pro tennis uses their tech to insure accurate officiating, and this is precisely what the NHL needs to do. A digital rendering of the goal line, the puck, or the interior of the net would help sort out the questionable goals the War Room struggles with. The NHL has yet to utilize anything like this, however, and they probably won’t until a bad call costs a team its season.

The NHL should be praised for the War Room – it is a excellent way to keep their referees accountable, and we shouldn’t overlook its success, but like any good concept, it needs to adapt and evolve. Adding a challenge system and more advanced technology to the review process would take this good idea and make it great.

Check Out These Hot Stories On The Web