Let's get one thing straight here. This isn't just about the game between the Montreal Canadiens and the Edmonton Oilers. Yes, the refereeing was not good in that game. Not even close.
And no one is asking for perfect refereeing. That just isn't possible, especially when there are calls that are somewhat subjective. Not every call is as black-and-white as a puck over glass delay of game, or hand over the puck call. No one wants every little bit of stickwork called.
But is it a little too much to ask for a little consistency?
Make up calls
It's hard to believe that it has already been three years since Tim Peel has refereed in the NHL, being let go because he was caught red-handed participating in the most open secret in NHL officiating.
"It wasn’t much, but I wanted to get a (expletive) penalty against Nashville early in the-"Tim Peel
This was during the third period of a game between the Detroit Red Wings and Nashville Predators, where Peel admitted the refs were stretching calls, and Matt Duchene put it pretty perfectly after the game:
"I’ve always been frustrated when I’ve seen even-up calls or stuff like that. If one team is earning power plays, you can’t punish them because the other team is not."Matt Duchene
I am tired of trying to claim that all games and all teams are equal. You look at the box scores of most games, and the penalties are pretty darn close to the same. It isn't as bad as it used to be, but there was a time when a team got a penalty or two, you could expect a reciprocating call coming soon.
It's ridiculous to think that every team is as clean or as dirty as every other team. Why play clean if the refs are just going to force calls against the other team to keep the penalties even and "not affect the outcome of the game."
Playoff hockey
The NHL playoffs are the best. Out of all the sports, there isn't anything that matches the speed, skill, physicality and intensity that is the Stanley Cup Playoffs. It's two months of the most gruelling physical sport in the entire world.
It is an open, not-so-secret that the NHL officiates playoff games differently than regular season games, and I don't have a problem with that. Everything is heightened in the playoffs, and calling a playoff game just like a regular-season game would definitely take some of the oomph out of the game.
But not every playoff game is officiated equally. Especially when it comes to game sevens.
There are some penalties that are cut and dry, like a high-stick. If you hit a player with your stick above the shoulders, outside of a shot follow-through, that is a penalty, but is every little slash and cross-check created equal?
No one really wants every little hook and slash called, especially in the playoffs, but what people want is consistency. If you look at game 7s in the past two years, you will see something pretty interesting.
In 2024, the Maple Leafs lost to the Boston Bruins 2-1 in game seven. There were just three penalties, 1 for Boston, 2 for Toronto. The same year, the Dallas Stars beat the Vegas Golden Knights 2-1, and each team had just one penalty. The Edmonton Oilers beat the Vancouver Canucks 3-2, and there were 5 penalties, 3 for Edmonton, 2 for Vancouver. Lastly, the Panthers won the Cup over the Oilers, with three penalties, 1 for the Panthers and 2 for Edmonton.
This past year had the most penalty-filled game 7 of this group, with Dallas having 3 penalties and Colorado having 4. The Jets beat the Blues in a thriller, having taken just one penalty, while the St. Louis Blues took two penalties. And lastly, the Leafs lost to the Panthers, with just one penalty against the Leafs.
So, according to this, each and every team that played in those game 7s basically played equally clean, which on its face is a little odd. I mean, if it happened a couple of times, sure, but each and every time? And you are trying to tell me the big, bad Florida Panthers are as clean as the allergic to physical contact Toronto Maple Leafs?
Referees swallow their whistles because they want the teams to determine the outcome of the game, not their officiating. However, by not calling everything evenly, they are determining the outcome of the game, but just trying not to be directly involved.
I think there is something that could help with this problem, and it is relatively easy to implement, with a few guidelines.
Accountability
Fans understand that NHL officiating will never be perfect. Either there will be calls that will be wrong or missed, or the game will slow to a crawl so that video can be closely viewed to ensure that no infractions, much like the early days of the coaching challenge.
The thing is, referees are just faceless, striped figures on the ice, most of whom many fans will never know the names of, unless you are Tim Peel (for the wrong reason) or Wes McCauley (for the right reasons).
And referees shouldn't necessarily be stars, but it's a lot easier to hate a nebulous figure like the "referee" rather than a real person. Which is why, if the referees are given interviews after the game, this could be a big benefit.
Interviews are a great way to learn about the individuals behind the stripes. Obviously, there would have to be some ground rules in place, otherwise, it would devolve into asking simple questions about every possible play. "Why didn't you call this little hook a penalty?"
But, for major calls, it would give the referees a chance to explain their point of view and why certain things happened. As it stands, there is absolutely no explanation for any questionable calls. There are many calls that Canadiens and hockey fans in general don't understand in the Edmonton-Montreal game. Imagine being able to explain why things went down the way they did.
And yes, this will inevitably going to lead to the answer "We were wrong," or "We missed that call." Which I can kind of understand why the league would not want to admit. Every single sports league likes to pretend that its officiating is perfect. And it never is, and that is okay.
Most people accept apologies, we like to see the best in people, and if a ref admits to missing a call, or explains why they thought a certain play was a penalty. Just any sort of explanation would go a long way to helping people understand and sympathize with the referees and the league.
Or even a simple explanation in the form of a tweet or video that explains why something was or was not called. Because a lot of these issues are simply due to confusion. Things happen on the ice, and most fans have no explanation of why it happened the way it did.
I mean, how often have we talked about goalie interference? It's an absolute crap shoot whether a call will be goalie interference or not, and we hardly know the criteria. And the way that coach's challenges go, it seems like teams don't understand either.
And this will be tough on the league. The truth is, the league is not perfect. Sometimes, calls are wrong, or the rules aren't held to the same standard. But if feet aren't held to the fire, there's never going to be any change.
If the league has to explain calls, it will make them tighten up the rules. Because right now, there's no incentive to fix anything. Calls are missed or questionable, people will complain for a minute or two, and then the league will just move on. Having to explain questionable calls will force the league to take a look at the issues and actually do something about it, not just sweep it under the rug.
There is a natural inclination from the league to pretend to be perfect and protect referees from the abuse of fans, which I'm sure they feel anyway. But right now, there's no accountability, and with no accountability, there will be no change, and the league won't be able to fix this problem.
If anything, it should force the league to clear up the rules, which is nothing but a good thing.