Monday, March 16, 2015

NHL GM Meetings taking place in Boca Raton, FL, no agreeable consensus on goalie interference

The General Managers of the NHL have begun their annual three days of meetings today (March 16) in Boca Raton, FL.

One of the issues that is on the docket is goaltender interference. I find this really interesting that this is being brought up, considering I wrote about this in a previous article (link to it is here). The question is should goalie interference be subject to video review. Given what I stated in my previous article, it should be up to a video review. 

NHL.com senior writer Dan Rosen wrote this:

"The main question being discussed in regard to the goaltenders is should video review be expanded to include goals scored as a potential result of goalie interference. The NHL does not allow for video review of goals scored where there is the potential of goaltender interference having occured. Those calls are left to the discretion of the on-ice officials." 

If you ask me, there needs to be a clear consensus on what goaltender interference is and I don't think there really is one. The 2014-15 NHL Rule book states:

(NHL rule book can be found on NHL.com and downloaded)
Rosen went on to state that "The managers have watched video clips of goals which likely would be covered by an expanded review and discussed those plays, formally and informally, but rarely have reached a consensus. Often on GM thought a play should be ruled a goal only to have another argue passionately for a clear-cut case of goalie interference." 

If there isn't clear consensus among NHL GM's on what goaltender intereference is? What about the refs? Is there clear consensus among the NHL refs on what it is? That is a topic that needs to be discussed.  Rosen stated " There has been some hesitancy by the managers to allow video review on goals scored where goaltender interference could be an issue because of the lack of role interpretation plays in such cases, as well as the time added to the game with the potential for additional reviews."

That statement in Rosen's article is a clear argument for needing an agreeable consensus of what goaltender interference is and what has been reported from the first day of these GM meetings shows that consensus isn't there at all.

In reading Rosen's article and other articles on the first day of the GM meetings, there are a wide range of opinions on this subject alone. Ottawa Senators GM Bryan Murray stated "I don't think we're going to video replay, for example, with goaltender interference...I think that has to be left to the officials to make a judgment call on the ice. Some nights we're not happy, but the majority of the calls that I've seen anyway so far have been the right call." 

A judgment call by the officials? If that is going to be the consensus, then what is the point of having a rule on goaltender interference? 

It is going to be real interesting to see what, if anything, comes out of this year's GM meetings about goaltender interference. There are other topics being discussed--such as the diving and embellishment penalties and possible changes to the overtime format. 

This is just the first post on the NHL GM Meetings and there will be another blog post on this subject sometime next week after these meetings wrap up. 

Dan Rosen's entire article can be read here.




No comments: