There might be more difficult jobs in pro sports than being a hockey referee, but the list of those surely can't be very long.
Of course, there are challenges to officiating any sport, whether it's maintaining a consistent strike zone in baseball or figuring out precisely what constitutes a legal catch in football, but refereeing a hockey seems to have a few more than most.
There are, for example, only two refs on the ice during an NHL game, compared to the seven officials who work those in the NFL. That's not many eyes to keep track of all that's taking place on a playing surface that's 200 feet long and 85 feet wide.
And that's not even considering that, of the 10 skaters on the ice at any given moment during a typical game, probably a half-dozen are looking to get away with some violation of the rules, whether that means covertly tugging on the back of an opponent's sweater in an attempt to slow him or trying to necessitate some unscheduled dental work with a subtle butt-end to the mouth.
One thing hockey referees have in common with their colleagues in other sports is that the highest praise they can get is to get through a game unnoticed -- or, after the game, unmentioned -- but that doesn't happen all that often, especially at this time of year.
Sometimes, the issue is that the refs simply don't notice an infraction that is apparent to many, if not most, of the other people in the building; other times, the refs and players and/or coaches from one of the teams simply have conflicting opinions about something they all witnessed.
And when the incident in question is a violent one that results only in a minor penalty, regardless of whether supplemental discipline figures to be imposed by the league a day or so later, the referee(s) involved instantly becomes a lightning rod.
And not for lavish praise.
YOUR TURN: How do you assess the quality of officiating in the NHL and, if you believe significant improvement is necessary, what would you do to make that happen?
