George McPhee Off To Boca Raton For NHL GM Meetings

The GMs will meet in Boca Raton next week and video review - both for goaltender interference and offside - is on the agenda. Agenda matters don't often get immediate traction but there seems to be an appetite for a fast-track solution to these ongoing issues.
Video review in the NHL is flawed - just about everyone in or around the league will agree. It needs to be fixed and preferably in short order. When no one is happy - not the GMs or the referees and certainly not the players and coaches - action is a must.
The most oft heard complaint about review centers around a lack of consistency from one play to the next. Players and coaches can be heard, after games featuring a video review with a result they don't like, grumbling about not knowing what the rule is and how it is applied.
RELATED: Golden Knights growing the game in Las Vegas
Fair enough. They're living and dying by these decisions which affect the outcome of games.

Toronto Maple Leafs coach Mike Babcock recently had this to say about goaltender interference review.
"No one knows what's going on. We better get it solved. Just saying: 'OK, we're going to leave it the way it is' … No chance, get it fixed," said Babcock. "Let's get it fixed before the playoffs, so we all know the rules."
RELATED: Hyka, Lagace assigned to Chicago Wolves
There have been 142 goals reviewed based on goaltender interference in the NHL this season. Ninety-six of those scoring plays have been upheld while 46 on ice rulings have been overturned - 40 of these plays have been ruled no goal situations.
Whether the GMs can find consensus is one question. How change can be implemented in a timely fashion is another.
Most often, change isn't as easy as waving a wand and saying, for instance, "all review decisions will be made in Toronto by hockey operations personnel in the Situation Room, effective immediately."
If the GMs come up with a proposed alteration to video review and it's considered a procedural change and not a rule change - it can be bumped up to the board of governors for rapid approval. If it's a rule change - it must go to the competition committee which is made up of governors, GMs and NHLPA representatives - things get thornier and take more time.

Review for offside and goaltender interference were put in to place because the GMs wanted to eliminate goals which came on plays with clear and obvious rules infractions. There have been unintended consequences as a result of video review. Goals have come off the board for offside calls when a player has lifted a skate off the ice by the measure of less than an inch.
Goals have stayed on the board when interference seems clear while others have come off when seemingly very little contact was present.
Lots of the focus has been on where the decisions based on review are made and there's some logic to this as consistency is the object.
Put the decisions in the hands of the Situation Room in Toronto. Add an NHL referee to the room so the officials remain involved. The standard will become more consistent than having different referee crews scattered around the NHL responsible for these matters.

The offside rule needs to be tweaked. The inside edge of the blue line should be the plane and if it's crossed in any fashion prior to the puck the play should be ruled offside. No straddling the line. If a skate breaks the plane before the puck - the play is offside.
Goaltender interference needs to be more clearly defined and should include a checklist of items which result in an infraction.
Borrow a page from international hockey and disallow any standing in the crease by an opposition player. Skating through the crease is still allowed but standing in it results in a whistle.
There's lots to chew on here and expecting the GMs to come up with solutions in two days of meetings is a tall order. We're nearing the end of an 82-game regular season and the stakes are getting higher. The GM meetings are the last opportunity for a fix this season and failure to act could result in added grief.
One thing, however, is clear. It's time for a review