If Alexander Radulov broke in on goal, got hooked on the way in and no penalty was called, did it really happen?

Think about that question for a moment. A linesman probably saw the infraction but couldn't call it.

This is a thought I've had in my head for some time, but after the Clowe incident last night, I feel compelled to put it down. The National Hockey League is the ONLY one of the major professional sports leagues (read: Big 4) that does not give all its playing-surface officials the power to enforce all infractions. The only one.

Currently, the referees are the only ones who can call penalties on their own merit. The linesmen can stop play for a number of situations (I'll list those shortly as they are covered in the NHL Rulebook), but cannot simply call a minor penalty during the course of play.

The Linesmen's duties are covered under Rule 32 (full list), and Rule 32.4 specifically states the circumstances in which they can stop play (as described in the NHL Official Rules):

32.4 Reporting to Referee - The Linesman shall give to the Referees his interpretation of any incident that may have taken place during the game.The Linesman may stop play and report what he witnessed to the Referees when:

(i) There are too many men on the ice (Rule 74)
(ii) Articles are thrown on the ice from the players' bench or penalty bench (Rule 75)
(ii) Match penalties (Rule 21)
(iii) Misconduct penalties (Rule 22)
(iv) Game Misconduct penalties (Rule 23)
(v) Abuse of Officials (Rule 39)
(vii) Unsportsmanlike Conduct (Rule 75)
(viii) Double-minor penalty when it is apparent that an injury has resulted from a high-stick that has gone undetected by the Referees

The Linesman must report upon completion of play, any circumstances pertaining to:

(i) Major penalties (Rule 20)
(vi) Physical Abuse of Officials (Rule 40)
(iii) When team personnel interfere with a game official (Rule 39)
(iv) When a player who has lost or broken his stick receives one illegally (Rule 10)

"Should a Linesman witness a foul (above) committed by an attacking player or goalkeeper (undetected by the Referees) prior to the attacking team scoring a goal, the Linesman shall report what he witnessed to the Referees, the goal shall be disallowed and the appropriate penalty assessed."

Nowhere in that list does it allow linesmen to call single minors (too many men notwithstanding) other than unsportsmanlike conduct, and in that case, it's usually a post-whistle infraction.

Going back to the Clowe incident, because it did not fall under the parameters of the linesmen's duties, even if they had seen it (and we're not really sure if they did), they did not have the authority to call it. That's not only bad form, it's simply bad for the game to have four on-ice officials miss something like that. Worse yet, only two of them could have called it at all.

This is where the NHL has it wrong. There have been some cases of blatently missed calls (Tim Peel...words cannot describe) and having two extra pairs of eyes will keep some of the obstruction squelched somewhat. It's creeping back into the game and threatening to push the league back into the pre-lockout days where clutching and grabbing were the norm, not the exception. The league made an effort to try and curtail it coming out of the work stoppage, but in recent years that effort has been spotty at best. Players have adjusted and they know what they can and cannot get away with.

It's time for the NHL to step up and give all its on-ice officials an orange armband. The game needs it. The league needs to take a hard look at its officiating and seriously consider making this change. I'm sure Patric Hornqvist would certainly appreciate having two extra officials who could call a post-whistle roughing penalty for all the garbage he's had to endure this year. Or maybe I'm just hallucinating at that last thought.

Either way, the game deserves the best possible officiating, and when two of your officials can't call penalties in the flow of play, it allows players to get away with too much. Improve the abilities of the on-ice officials and the game should improve along with it. It's not about increasing scoring or making the game more exciting, it's about the game's integrity.

Would the amount of penalties go up? In theory, it would. It could lead to more power plays and more scoring chances. It could also reduce the amount of stick work and obstruction that the game simply doesn't need.

Next time you see a hook or a hold that you think should be called and wasn't, remember this: Chances are somebody wearing stripes probably did see it. But if they don't have an orange armband, their arm has to stay down. And the game's officiating suffers as a result.

This is a move that needs to be made for the good of the game. And all it took was an uncalled, and uncalled for, move by Ryan Clowe for me to finally voice my opinion.

Poll

Should the NHL allow its linesmen to call all penalties?

86%

Yes

25 votes

13%

No

4 votes

29 votes | Poll has closed

Does anyone agree with the existence of these? I totally agree with conferences, it makes sense to have some division, but it seems incredibly unfair that Florida is a 3-seed (with home ice advantage) with their lackluster 92 point season, while three other 100+ teams are behind them. It's a little more even in the west- LA's the only team that sneaked into a higher spot thanks to their easier division. What do you guys think about the divisions?

I started my hockey blogging this season at The Hockey Writers -- and while I'm thankful to Dirk to now be contributing here at On the Forecheck, I owe a debt of gratitude to Preds fan Jas Faulkner and THW editor Bruce Hollingdrake for giving me a platform to write about the greatest sport on earth. I spend too much of my day job focused on politics and public policy, so it was great this year to follow my other passion.

You can check out my short THW archive here, but I wanted to revisit some preseason predictions I made in my "Top 10 Things to Look Forward to in the Nashville Predators 2011-2012 Season" post (I wound up weaving fifteen actual predictions into my list). Follow after the jump to see how I'm stacking up...

Continue reading this post »

No, I'm not getting my name put on a jersey. A while back, I wrote this post (opens in new window) about my replica Preds sweaters. Well, since my birthday is nearby, I've already established some useful birthday cash to use towards the project. I've decided to start with my 98 Preds home jersey (that's white for our newer/younger fans out there). For fun, I thought I'd make this a poll. My list is below, but feel free to add your own in the comments.

Poll

Who should be forever immortalized on my '98 Preds home sweater?

12%

Fitzgerald

3 votes

8%

Ronning

2 votes

12%

Walker

3 votes

12%

Krivokrasov

3 votes

8%

Dunham

2 votes

48%

Timonen

12 votes

25 votes | Poll has closed

Continue reading this post »

I quite frequently catch myself speaking of "we" and "us" when talking about the Preds, like I am actually out there taking faceoffs and making saves. Getting invested in a team is part of what makes being a sports fan and sporting events so much fun in the first place. But I was wondering how fellow OTFers felt about the use of first person when referring to a team you follow. Obviously, this is not a very important topic, but is my effort to burn some of my nervous energy as I eagerly await the final few games and playoffs.

Poll

Is it proper fan etiquette to use "we" and "us" to refer to a favorite team? (As in, "We really took it to the Wings last night!")

79%

Yes, that's fine.

39 votes

2%

No, it really bothers me when people do that.

1 votes

18%

I don't really care.

9 votes

49 votes | Poll has closed

Put on the front page, so we can ramp up the participation! - Dirk

Hey folks:

I've just fired up a group on ESPN.com's Playoff Hockey Challenge. The group name is "On the Forecheck" (in honor of the site we all love) and I've used my OTF username to establish my team. I'd like to suggest that everybody do the same so we all recognize each other.

You'll need an ESPN.com account to play, but it's free to sign up, so no worries there.

Group name: On the Forecheck

Password: preds

Let's get a big group for the challenge and have fun with it!

Hey guys, I am a new OnTheForecheck poster. I have been doing an internship with the Nashville Predators Radio Network this semester. Dirk suggested I start posting on here, since I have been following Ontheforecheck.com for A WHILE NOW! So, here is a question I have for tonight, as I sit here at Concourse 118 20 minutes before the game is about to to start:: The Blackhawks will again be without captain Jonathan Toews and defenseman Duncan Keith on tonight. Do you guys think the Predators can capitalize on Chicago's roster woes, with a major component of their offense and defense missing once again? Will Radulov continue his hot point streak?

As one of the Predator faithful, I ask that we pause briefly to observe the departure of Pierre Gauthier from management of the Montreal Canadiens. Yes, his tenure was brief but we are in an excellent position to appreciate all that he accomplished. In fact, tonight's game at Bridgestone Arena will provide us a perfect opportunity to do so. Let everyone lift an extra cheer or two for Andrei Kostitsyn, Sergei Kostitsyn, Hal Gill and Frankie Bouillon.

Amongst the hustle and bustle of the recent "you suck" debates, an idea for an unrelated Fan-Post was born from my innocent creation of the term "Preds-Life." For those of you who didn't see the brief conversation, I was explaining my consternation with the idea of changing the Predators post-goal celebration routine because of how solidly that routine is engrained in my life as a Predators fan. "I was just having a reflective moment on my Preds-life," I said. I came up with the term because I needed a descriptor for the connection that exists between my life and the Preds. The connection between you and your team is a concept that everyone understands, but no one has a word for. An actual language-based example of this is the Yiddish word "shlimazl" (link has NSFW language), or a constantly unlucky person - we don't have a specific English word for that, but we know what it encompasses (i.e., the past two weeks of my life (which have become comical - I'm serious): dumped, funeral, car wreck, found a tumor on my dog, illness, the part to repair my car still isn't available after two weeks, rental car problems, credit card limit problems, took the wrong bus twice yesterday, running low on money, forgot to turn in a paper, lost my house keys, aaaand HOPEFULLY. NOTHING. ELSE. You hear that, life?). I AM shlimazl. Thankfully, my Preds-Life has taught me esilience (full circle achieved: self-five!). Anyway, Cbrooksy, the author of the post to which I was originally replying, commented that the concept of one's "Preds-Life" would be a great idea for a Fan-Post. I think we all kind of know, deep down, what Preds-Life is. Like the idea of shlimazl, Preds-Life doesn't have to be spelled out to be understood. It's an integral part of who each one of us has become, and is so ensnared in who we are, that what to us is normal seems odd and foreign to outsiders. You know if you have it, and you know if you don't. We have it. We have Preds-Lives.

Also, if this picture of Smitty celebrating his OT goal against Anaheim doesn't give you goosebumps, send a shiver down your spine, get your heart-rate up, or make you feel like a 6 year old on Christmas, your Preds-Life might need CPR.

Continue reading this post »

Sorry for the cheesy title, but I love those shows and they certainly apply to the Preds next 48 hours. Those hours will include 2 games whose outcomes will go a long way toward determining our playoff seed.

Lets 1st look at the hoped for outcome. Regulation wins against the Wings and Hawks leave us in the drivers seat for the 4 seed. Sunday morning we would all wake up ahead of the Wings by 3 points. We would own the tiebreaker, but they would have 1 game in hand. Two of our last 3 would be at home.We probably had to play really well to have won both games. I would like our chances at home ice for round 1. We would be 5 points ahead of the Hawks, own the tiebreaker and each team have 3 to play. While not mathematically a fact, we would likely not have to worry about being 6th anymore and getting the Kings or Sharks ( or Yotes /Stars).

Now the dark side. We lose both in regulation and we can basically kiss 4th and home ice goodbye. The Wings would be up 3 points and have that game in hand. The Hawks would be up 1 point with each team having 3 to play. Not a disaster, but I would also assume we aren't playing as well as we need to if we lose those 2 games in regulation so thats not where we want to be heading into the playoffs.

I doubt either scenerio plays out and it will be somewhere in between. All 3 teams have alot to play for so a 2 game sweep may not be likely. 2 wins in any fashion would be great. A win and an OT/SO loss would be acceptable. Anything less is some degree of failure IMO.We can step on the Hawks throat and establish ourselves ahead of the Wings. Here's hoping, for once, we play great hockey in this type situation and send the message we are for real.