NHL tweaks some rules

[HockeyCrazy3033 168]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=211407&hubname=nhl

Thought this was interesting.

I'm not sure I am getting the one about the penalty shot? Can someone explain it better?

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=211407&hubname=nhl

Thought this was interesting.

I'm not sure I am getting the one about the penalty shot? Can someone explain it better?

My understanding of it is now you could get awarded a penalty shot if you're taken down past your own blueline, but before center ice. Previously (which I never knew) you had to be past the center ice redline headed towards the opposing goalie.

It seems like sort of a moot point with how rarely they call penalty shots, no matter how in the clear a player was. I still don't see a ref being inclined to call a penalty shot on someone who's taken down by their own blueline.

[LeftWinger 4,959]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=211407&hubname=nhl

Thought this was interesting.

I'm not sure I am getting the one about the penalty shot? Can someone explain it better?

...used to be that a penalty show was awarded if you had a breakaway from the red/blue line in, now if you have a breakaway from your blue line and get tripped or whatnot even before you cross the red line or the opposing blue line, you SHOULD be awarded a penalty shot. We'll see how long that lasts...

[HockeyCrazy3033 168]

My understanding of it is now you could get awarded a penalty shot if you're taken down past your own blueline, but before center ice. Previously (which I never knew) you had to be past the center ice redline headed towards the opposing goalie.

It seems like sort of a moot point with how rarely they call penalty shots, no matter how in the clear a player was. I still don't see a ref being inclined to call a penalty shot on someone who's taken down by their own blueline.

Ahh that makes much more sense now.

Thanks, Harold.

[LeftWinger 4,959]

My understanding of it is now you could get awarded a penalty shot if you're taken down past your own blueline, but before center ice. Previously (which I never knew) you had to be past the center ice redline headed towards the opposing goalie.

It seems like sort of a moot point with how rarely they call penalty shots, no matter how in the clear a player was. I still don't see a ref being inclined to call a penalty shot on someone who's taken down by their own blueline.

...oh, they'll call it through December, but com Feb, Mar and Apr (playoffs) they'll find a way to NOT call it at all, excpet in a game 5 when the series is on the line! LOL!

[DyingAlive 27]

I really don't see this being a factor at all. I mean, how often does someone get a clear break away before they have crossed the red line?

[#19=Legend 29]

I really don't see this being a factor at all. I mean, how often does someone get a clear break away before they have crossed the red line?

Yea, Thats the same thing that i was thinking.

[Kp-Wings 3]

I really don't see this being a factor at all. I mean, how often does someone get a clear break away before they have crossed the red line?

When the opposing team has Hal Gill and Jamie Rivers on the ice at the same time.

[Jwo 7]

I liked the old way better for the Pen shot.

[ProfessorLidstrom5 0]

I really don't see this being a factor at all. I mean, how often does someone get a clear break away before they have crossed the red line?

I agree. However, I do recall a couple of times last season when a player had a breakaway out of their own blueline from a pass from their teammate while on a penalty kill. Other than that I can't think of any.

[Guest Crymson]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=211407&hubname=nhl

Thought this was interesting.

I'm not sure I am getting the one about the penalty shot? Can someone explain it better?

Way to make things "easier" for the casual viewer by constantly changing the rules.

[Flip-check 6]

Way to make things "easier" for the casual viewer by constantly changing the rules.

It isn't much of a change though, anyway.

Like harold said, it's a pretty moot point. I never see breakaways before the center line either.

[toby91_ca 620]

Way to make things "easier" for the casual viewer by constantly changing the rules.

Do you honestly think a casual viewer will even notice this rule change? I would be willing to bet that even most super-fans wouldn't really notice, or didn't even know what the original rule was (i.e. had to be past centre).

Edited June 21, 2007 by toby91_ca

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

Do you honestly think a casual viewer will even notice this rule change? I would be willing to bet that even most super-fans wouldn't really notice, or didn't even know what the original rule was (i.e. had to be past centre).

Agreed. I didn't even know the center ice rule existed.

It'll be a big change for all those times a guy is on a clean breakaway by his own blueline AND gets hauled down from behind.

So maybe it'll happen once this season. Maybe.

[Dixie Wingslover 0]

Penatly shot change.... not much impact... one way or the other really..... will still be a rare situation......But this.....

The interference rule was altered so referees can at their discretion assess a major penalty and a game misconduct when an injury results from an act of interference. Previously, only a minor penalty could be assessed for interference.

This is a whole different can of worms.... " at their discretion" ? What is going to be determined an "injury" ? A stretcher off the ice? Guys gotta go to the locker room? Pretty vague..... I see alot of controversy from this one. Blood or no blood on a high stick is pretty cut and dried. This one could not be so clear.

[eva unit zero 271]

This is a whole different can of worms.... " at their discretion" ? What is going to be determined an "injury" ? A stretcher off the ice? Guys gotta go to the locker room? Pretty vague..... I see alot of controversy from this one. Blood or no blood on a high stick is pretty cut and dried. This one could not be so clear.

Probably when the referee has to stop play due to a player being down injured.

[wingsfan979802 0]

I really don't see this being a factor at all. I mean, how often does someone get a clear break away before they have crossed the red line?

2:42 of this video.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

2:42 of this video.

That's about as quick as it can happen, and even then by the time he had control of the puck he was at center ice.

The only other situation where I could see it happening is if a guy blocks a shot from a defenseman at the point, the puck rebounds out of the zone and he takes off on what would be a clean breakaway but the D-man pulls him down as he skates past.

A pretty rare case, and I still think the refs would probably wouldn't call the penalty shot.

[scsgoal31 0]

Penatly shot change.... not much impact... one way or the other really..... will still be a rare situation......But this.....

This is a whole different can of worms.... " at their discretion" ? What is going to be determined an "injury" ? A stretcher off the ice? Guys gotta go to the locker room? Pretty vague..... I see alot of controversy from this one. Blood or no blood on a high stick is pretty cut and dried. This one could not be so clear.

Every personal penalty in the NHL rule book has an optional Major Penalty for injury causing penalties. Interference was the only penalty that didn't have the option. Now it's the same across the board.

[vangvace 12]

This is a whole different can of worms.... " at their discretion" ? What is going to be determined an "injury" ? A stretcher off the ice? Guys gotta go to the locker room? Pretty vague..... I see alot of controversy from this one. Blood or no blood on a high stick is pretty cut and dried. This one could not be so clear.

There are a few "at their discretion"s in the rulebook though. Meh, at least Chicago said to dump the instigator. One of the minor leagues is dumping it this season and increasing the diving penalties.

1. rule 25 - penalty shots can now be given from an infraction occurring anywhere in the neutral zone, whereas before the infraction must have occurred in the attacking zone.

-- result: more dives in the neutral zone.

2. rule 56 - referees can now give majors and game misconducts for interference penalties if an injury occurs.

-- result: more dives and players faking injuries; also, more game misconducts and suspensions.

3. rule 24 - the term "gross misconduct" was removed from the rule book. players now get game misconducts which count toward fines and suspensions.

-- result: more game misconducts and suspensions.

4. rule 76 - all face offs must occur at a face off dot; no longer at open ice after a stoppage.

-- result: more face offs near the net; another pathetic scam to increase goal scoring.

Edited June 21, 2007 by vangvace

[betterREDthandead 58]

1. rule 25 - penalty shots can now be given from an infraction occurring anywhere in the neutral zone, whereas before the infraction must have occurred in the attacking zone.

-- result: more dives in the neutral zone.

No, it won't. How often do you see a player dive to get a penalty shot? Breakaways are rare - guys who have one, their eyes light up and they have a one-track mind: GOAL. Not "hey, there's a guy behind me and he's kind of trying to poke at the puck, lemme just go down and try and draw a penalty shot and forget about the breakaway." Penalty shots are worse than breakaways anyway. The goalie doesn't have to worry about the rebound.

2. rule 56 - referees can now give majors and game misconducts for interference penalties if an injury occurs.

-- result: more dives and players faking injuries; also, more game misconducts and suspensions.

Again, no. How stupid-obvious would it be if a guy jaked it after a crummy little interference penalty? How many interference penalties are chintzy as hell anyway where there isn't the slightest possibility of getting hurt? And how often do you see guys get hooked, cross-checked, obstructed, or otherwise draw a penalty and play hurt to get the other guy a major? It NEVER happens.

3. rule 24 - the term "gross misconduct" was removed from the rule book. players now get game misconducts which count toward fines and suspensions.

-- result: more game misconducts and suspensions.

4. rule 76 - all face offs must occur at a face off dot; no longer at open ice after a stoppage.

-- result: more face offs near the net; another pathetic scam to increase goal scoring.

Blah blah blah. There's dots on the ice in places other than by the goalies. I don't see anything at all wrong with any of these rule changes, other than the penalty shot one which probably will have zero impact on the game at all and was a waste of the committee's time.

EDIT: "blah blah blah" came off like it was directed at the poster. It's my commentary on the rules changes. Big fat deal, is my overall take on these. They may as well have said "screw the rules meeting this year" and gone fishing.

[Production Line 1]

tweaking is right...