BHGinsider: Reader Questions for NHL Senior Director Damian Echevarrieta

Awhile back readers of BrooklynHockeyGuy.com were given the opportunity to send in a question to be answered by NHL Senior Director of Hockey Operations Damian Echevarrieta.  Damian recently took time out of his busy schedule to answer some of the questions that were submitted.  And believe me he did not disappoint!  Below are Damian's very detailed answers to some of your questions. Enjoy!

Nathan from Washington D.C. asks: "Why is the penalty for not having your (fight) strap attached to your pants a game misconduct?  That seems harsh."

Great question Nathan.  The “tie-down” rule exists because back in the early 90's some players, notably Rob Ray of the Buffalo Sabres, were purposely wearing their jersey and equipment in a way that made it come off easily during a fight.  This caused a problem for the league on two fronts: firstly, and most importantly, it gave these players an unfair advantage because there was nothing for their opponent to grab onto; and secondly, the undesirable result was that players were ending up half naked on the ice. 

       The current rule states that a player who engages in a fight and whose jersey is not properly tied-down, causing him to lose his jersey (completely off his torso) shall receive a game misconduct. 

       A few more quick points to take into account with this rule.  “Properly tied-down” means even if a player appears to be tied-down, he can still be assessed a game misconduct if the officials are of the opinion that the strap was not tied down properly.  The basic rule of thumb is, if the strap is ripped, the game misconduct will not apply but if the strap merely comes undone, it is usually considered to not have been “tied down properly. 

       Another thing to remember is that if the other player is deemed to have been the Instigator of the fight, the game misconduct shall not apply.  It’s a provision that keeps a player from starting a fight with an opponent in the hopes that he isn’t tied down simply to get him ejected from the game.

       When a player is given a game misconduct under this rule, it is recorded on the player’s record in the General Category of Game Misconducts.  If a player accumulates three game misconducts in the General Category, he is automatically suspended.  Other game misconducts that are in the General Category are Charging, Clipping, Elbowing, Fighting Off Playing Surface, Head-Butting, Interference, 3rd Man In, Kneeing, Obscene Language or Gestures, Persists in Continuing An Altercation, Secondary Altercation, Third Major In Same Game, and Throwing Stick Outside The Playing Surface.

Justin from Brooklyn asks: "Why is an interference penalty called when a player makes contact with a goalie who is outside of his crease?" 

Justin, a goal keeper is not “fair game” just because he is outside the goal crease.  The appropriate penalty should be assessed in every case where an attacking player makes unnecessary contact with the goalkeeper.  However, incidental contact will be permitted when the goalkeeper is in the act of playing the puck outside the goal crease provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such unnecessary contact.  When a goalkeeper has played the puck outside of his crease and is then prevented from returning to his crease area due to deliberate actions of an attacking player, such player may be penalized. 

       We have in the past, discussed the idea of making goalkeepers “fair game” when outside the crease but the fear of injury and the potential for a benching clearing brawl every time a goal keeper gets run, has always kept the idea from going any further.

We've also had a number of Ranger fans who have asked recently why goalie interference isn't a reviewable call. They are no doubt thinking of Jarko Ruutu's obvious interference on Steve Vailiquette which led to a goal during the Rangers recent loss to Ottawa. 

As for Interference on the goalkeeper being a reviewable play, the idea of refereeing from the video booth is something we want to avoid.  I am sure that most of your readers feel that there isn’t much difference between ruling on a kicked puck or a high sticked puck and ruling on Goaltender Interference, but the one thing that makes them different is that certain scenarios of goaltender interference warrants a penalty.  The General Managers and Board of Governors, who ultimately decide the rules and determine the scope of video review, have made it clear that they want to keep the game officiated by the on ice officials, who are close to the action and have a feel of the game that can never be replaced by a camera.  It is widely believed that one of the things that has made our video review policy so successful is the limited number of things that are subject to review. 

       That sort of leads me to Justin from Brooklyn’s question about monitors at ice level for the referees to view during a goal review. 

Justin from Brooklyn asks: Awhile back there was talk of putting monitors at ice level so that referee's had a chance to see the goal being reviewed.  Whatever happened to that?

The general consensus is that the ability for a referee to review on ice plays on a monitor would create a desire in our officials to referee through video.  For example, if there is a review on a potential goal and the referee notices that he missed an obvious foul leading to that potential goal, there is a natural tendency to want that goal to not count.  That reason and others, such as logistics and the complexity of the equipment we use to review goals, have led the Board of Governors to decide to leave all video review responsibilities with my department. (Hockey Operations).

Jennifer from Brooklyn asks: If a player is laying flat on the ice and he gets hit in the face with another players stick is it considered a high sticking penalty?

Many people ask this question.  This situation should not be penalized as high sticking.  The Referee may assess a slashing penalty if the offending player intended to strike his opponent.  Accidental contact, however, should not be penalized (including a normal windup or follow through).  In other words, a player doesn’t have a free whack at a guys face just because he is down on the ice.  But when he makes accidental contact, which would normally be called if the player was on his skates, there will not be a penalty on the play. 

Scott from Queens asks: Will the NHL have one minute overtime penalties next year like they're doing in the AHL?

Scott, this is a rule that I can give you lots of insight into.  Brian Burke, the new GM and President of the Toronto Maple Leafs, has been pushing for this rule change for three years now. Prior to the General Managers meetings every year, various rule changes are submitted by the GMs to be presented at the meeting.  It is our duty in Hockey Operations to give each of these rule suggestion its proper day in court, so no matter what our personal feelings may be we prepare the presentation as if it were our own suggestion.  I personally did not like the idea but Burke asked me if I would do some research on it so I did.  We crunched numbers, we looked at video and at the end of the day, it was found that in the 2006/2007 season power plays in OT were almost twice as successful as power plays in regulation time. 

       Since OT is played 4 on 4, a power play in OT is played 4 on 3 rather than 5 on 4.  It is believed that the more room you have to spread out, the better off the power play is.  Although the GMs found the statistics interesting, they did not think this was a good enough idea to try in our league.  Fast forward to the next GM meeting, Burke asks me to redo the presentation with that year’s stats.  Again, reluctantly I do as asked and we come up with the same conclusion, in the 2007/2008 season PPs in OT were again nearly twice as successful as PPs in regulation time.  This time Burke’s perseverance paid off and the GMs agreed to pursue this idea further.  That spring, I had the unenviable task of trying to sell an idea to the American League GMs that I don’t believe in.  Long story short, they agreed to test it for us this season.  I am slowly coming around to the idea.  Hey listen, when a man of Brian Burke’s stature feels this strongly about something, you have to believe that is has some merit. 

       There are some down sides to this change, it will result in more shootouts, it will skew team’s overall PP percentages and it may lead to players willing to take more penalties in OT knowing it’s only a 1:00 penalty to kill.  We plan to take a look at the stats at the conclusion of this season and talk to the AHL coaches and managers to get their feelings after using it this year and go from there.

Steve from Connecticut asks: "I know it was a long time ago, but why was Karel Rachunek's goal in Game 3 of the 2007 playoffs against Buffalo not allowed?  He didn't make a kicking motion!!!"

Ahh, Karel Rachunek’s kicked goal, this caused me quite a bit of grief at the time.  After John Dellapina printed the explanation in the NY Daily News I received a few death threats and lots of hate mail. The worst thing of all was being referred to as a nerd from Toronto.  I AM BORN AND RAISED IN BROOKLYN! 

       Back to the answer that I am sure you too won’t like.  It was ruled “No Goal” because he used his skate to propel the puck into the net.  Although a “distinct kicking” or pendulum motion is something that would negate a goal right away, it is not the only thing we look at when determining if a puck was kicked in.  Some questions that we have come up with to help determine if a puck was kicked or deflected are:

1) Did the force made by the movement of the skate propel the puck into the net or did the skate just change the direction of puck?

2) Was the puck traveling with enough force when it made contact with the skate that it did not require additional force?

3) What direction was the players skate traveling in when it made contact? Was it moving in the direction of the net?

4) In what direction was the player facing when the puck reached his skate?

       Although most people only have the rule book to refer to, it is important to remember that there is a steady flow of internal memos and rules interpretations which are constantly evolving.  Also keep in mind that we review roughly 500–600 goals a year.  We do our best to stay consistent regardless of who is playing, what the score may be, how much time is left in the game or how many calls have gone for or against a particular team. I am not saying you have to like all our decisions, but you must know that maintaining the rules and the integrity of the game is always our first priority! 

       If you want to see more about our criteria for kicked pucks, I believe you can view the Kicked Pucks Video that we have posted on NHL.com. (Video posted below. -BHG)  I hope that helps answer your question. Oh and for the record, the rest of the league accuses us of giving the Rangers all the breaks because 6 of the 9 guys that work in the war room have played for, coached or worked for the Rangers, and yet all the NY Ranger fans say we are out to get them. I guess that’s just the passion that hockey fans have for their teams!

A lot of readers have said that, besides from playing in the NHL, you have their dream job. You get to watch hockey for a living.  But there's more to it than that. What are some of the other things that your job entails?

Yes, I do have a dream job and I need to catch myself whenever I complain about work! The Hockey Operations department members are considered the “caretakers” of the game because we basically run the league from the Video Room in our Toronto office. We do everything from logging every play of every NHL game, evaluate the officials, review all goals and enforce supplemental discipline when necessary. We are also responsible for the research and presentation of proposed rule changes, track trends in the game and approve any new equipment before it can be used in NHL games. Our office also plans the agenda for the General Managers meetings, at which the ultimate direction for our game is established, and select which players are named to the All Star Game (Other than the starters which are selected by the fans). 

As for My personal responsibilities here is a quick outline:

1) Oversee daily operations of video room in Toronto office.

Scheduling, Equipment & DVDs

2) Game Logging

a) Monitor and log all NHL games, rule on reviewed goals.

b) Explanation of rules to NHL clubs, media & NHL staff.

c) Notification of potential discipline & controversial plays to NHL staff.

d) Provide video clips of on-ice situations to officiating department to aid in coaching and evaluation of officials.

3) Instigator, Aggressor and Game Misconduct List 

a) Compile and distribute nightly Instigator, Aggressor & Game Misconduct List to all clubs and referees.

b) Assessment of automatic suspensions and notification to clubs, NHLPA, PR and NHL staff.

c) Monitor games played by individual players regarding a “clean slate” in various categories such as Boarding, Stick Related, Abuse of Officials, etc.

d) Explanation of rules pertaining to Instigators, Aggressors and Game Misconducts to clubs, NHLPA, PR and NHL staff.

4) Video Goal Judge Booths

a) Oversee the repair, purchasing and inventory of all equipment pertaining to video review in all arenas.

b) Education of video goal judges in regard to procedures and rules.

c) Supervise In-Arena Technicians.

5) Supplementary Discipline

a) Assist in the decision making process of player suspensions and fines, research player history as it pertains to supplementary Discipline

b) Provide DVDs or digitized video clips to NHLPA

6) GM Meetings

Prepare DVDs for discussion, Rules Changes presentations, Assist in recording minutes of meeting & Provide off– site video for viewing games at meetings

7) Playoffs & Premier Games

Series Manager - essentially a liaison between the clubs and officials.

8) Editing of Rule Book & wording of rule changes

         We have a great staff in Hockey Ops and, because we all come from hockey backgrounds, our workplace has a team feel to it. We all have our own list of responsibilities and I would be remiss not to mention the rest my “team”.  In addition to the more famous guys, who tend to get more of the media attention because of their titles and/or playing and coaching experience at the NHL level (Colin Campbell, Mike Murphy, Jim Gregory, Kris King, Kay Whitmore and EJ McGuire) are two of the hardest working and most knowledgeable guys in the entire league: Tim Campbell and John Sedgwick.  These guys work 7 days a week in a very intense environment and deserve much more of the credit than they get.  Quite often their hard work makes the rest of the group look pretty good.  If anyone wants to know about any player in the league these guys would be able to tell you more than most pro-scouts.

Many thanks to Damian Echevarrieta for taking time to answer the reader's questions.  We hope to gather some more questions for Damian to answer later on in the season.  So if you have a question about the Rule Book, a certain play, or almost anything hockey, e-mail us at BrooklynHockeyGuy@gmail.com!