New Rule being discussed

[alienanxiety 23]

I am confused by this. Does it mean that only the attacking defensmen can not advance into the zone past the new line? if so wouldn't that leave them standing out there alone, while their forwards are being covered 5 on 3???

And if it means that neither team's defensemen can advance into either zone past that line, doesn't that stop the defensemen from defending the goalie???

[uk_redwing 495]

This rule is so retarded the BOG must be at the end of teathers to bring this up.

Oh, and that looks NOTHING like a football (not soccer damnit!) pitch. Grrrrr...

Shrink the goalie pads, get rid of the instigator rule, fire bettman and we're all set for a sweet hockey league

[toby91_ca 620]

For instance the old garden was something like 100' by 60' can't remember the exact measurements.

Are you insane? Do you know how small that would actually be?

Current rink sizes are 200' by 85' I believe. Assuming you are talking about Boston Garden, since it was usually considered to be one of the smaller rinks, it's actual measurements were 191' by 83'.;

[shannyfan1414 0]

Whoes job is it to come up with stupid crap like this?

Why not just do the easy fix and shrink the goalie gear. They shouldn't F with the tradition of the game.

[stevkrause 1,247]

this is the most ridiculous thing I have EVER heard... if they want to seriously put the last nail in the coffin of the game - This will do it.

Edited December 19, 2007 by stevkrause

[Opie 308]

Are you insane? Do you know how small that would actually be?

Current rink sizes are 200' by 85' I believe. Assuming you are talking about Boston Garden, since it was usually considered to be one of the smaller rinks, it's actual measurements were 191' by 83'.;

Like I said in my post, I didn't know the measurements, the point to my post was not the actual dimensions it was the theory that a smaller rink as opposed to a largerr rink would help scoring.

Edit: was a little cranky when I wrote the first reply!

Edited December 19, 2007 by Opie

[eva unit zero 271]

Judging by the intent of the rule (to prevent collapsing defenses) it seems logical that perhaps the line is meant only for the defending wingers, and not the attacking defensemen? This would prevent teams from collapsing all five skaters to the slot, and would open the game up because while the attacking team could create a mismatch down low, it woul also potentially be giving up an odd-man situation. Which leads to more scoring.

[WingsZR2 1]

As long as Ozzie is in net scoring isn't going to increase . Quit trying to add new s*** to FU the flow of the game like this. Instead fix what is broken, poor marketing and inflating goalie gear.

[Hank 0]

Like I said in my post, I didn't know the measurements, the point to my post was not the actual dimensions it was the theory that a smaller rink as opposed to a largerr rink would help scoring.

But seeing as people on this board do not have the ability to make an inference or decipher the main idea of a sentence or paragraph, I should have spelled it out with colored blocks for them.

To back you up Opie, Denis Savard has suggested the same thing. I believe the Gardens, Chicago Stadium and Buffalo's rinks were around 180x70.

Savard feels that with a smaller rink it won't be as easy to collapse because everyone will be in the same.

Who knows if this would be the case. But making the ice bigger would have an adverse effect as it would mean traps and zone defenses would be even easier to implement.

Judging by the intent of the rule (to prevent collapsing defenses) it seems logical that perhaps the line is meant only for the defending wingers, and not the attacking defensemen? This would prevent teams from collapsing all five skaters to the slot, and would open the game up because while the attacking team could create a mismatch down low, it woul also potentially be giving up an odd-man situation. Which leads to more scoring.

Yeah, I'm not sure if they meant both the dmen and wingers couldn't enter the zone. I'm not even sure the BOG got into the exact rule of it.

But if they prevented the wingers from entering it would be a risk-reward play to have your dmen jump in the play. Sure, they could add to the offense but that would leave a man wide open for a breakaway.

[PenaltyShot 96 521]

So the dmen would only be able to access 2/3 of the ice? Any limitations on player movements is stupid. I don't think the offense would improve if the dmen couldn't jump into a rush or move forward to prevent an offensive turnover.

Edited December 19, 2007 by PenaltyShot 96

[Hank 0]

So the dmen would only be able to access 2/3 of the ice? Any limitations on player movements is stupid. I don't think the offense would improve if the dmen couldn't jump into a rush or move forward to prevent an offensive turnover.

That sounds like it would be the case. Either that or wingers (or two forwards) would only have access to 2/3 of the ice.

Some coaches will love the strategy that would evolve from this. They'd have swing plays where a winger would go in the 'extra zone' and a dman would slip below the new line. Maybe that would create confusion or whatever.

There's some interesting intangibles that would accompany this rule but I still hate it. Hockey has always been touted as a 'team sport' but now you're essentially taking 40% of your players out of the equation in certain situations.

Just shrink the freakin' goalies already! You could smuggle immigrants in some of the trappers out there!

[Legionnaire11 0]

with today's technology, how can we not create some kind of goalie pads that are smaller and still offer as much if not more protection that what they currently wear?

change up the materials and put some real limitations on them. Like, make the leg pads no wider than 8 inches, and no thicker than 3 inches. limit the catching glove so that when it's full open, the basket part of it measures no more than 10" across. I don't know what a good limit on the upper body pads would be.

as long as the material offers enough protection, there's no reason not to reduce the sizes.

[Hank 0]

with today's technology, how can we not create some kind of goalie pads that are smaller and still offer as much if not more protection that what they currently wear?

change up the materials and put some real limitations on them. Like, make the leg pads no wider than 8 inches, and no thicker than 3 inches. limit the catching glove so that when it's full open, the basket part of it measures no more than 10" across. I don't know what a good limit on the upper body pads would be.

as long as the material offers enough protection, there's no reason not to reduce the sizes.

It can be done. Goalies know it, the PA knows it and manufacturers certainly know it. It's up to the PA to allow it to happen.

[Yzerfan1999 81]

I am usually pretty open to change, but this...this is just dumb.

[Wings_Dynasty 267]

What's to stop Chris Chelios from becoming a forward when the Wings make a change on the rush. Lebda goes off, Lids and Raffy on and Cheli rushing with the puck, then he becomes a winger and is allowed over the line.

[Chelios57 31]

Change this:

back to this:

We can fit 100,000 songs into an iPod, but goalies equipment has to be light and huge to protect!! Friggen dumbasses.

[LIDDYGIBBY5 1]

Some of the best posts I have seen and I agree. Don't mess with the game. I don't mind a low scoring game at all; it just means there was some wicked fine defence and great goaltending. Who can argue with that??

I can't argue with wicked fine defense, but I can argue with nuetral zone trap. There is nothing more boring than watching two teams who trap. I love watching hockey, but that garbage makes me want to :puke:

[Lidstromrules16 7]

make hockey more like lacrosse......exactly

[Hank 0]

I can't argue with wicked fine defense, but I can argue with nuetral zone trap. There is nothing more boring than watching two teams who trap. I love watching hockey, but that garbage makes me want to :puke:

Me too. It's why I hate watching teams like the Wild or Canucks who sit back and wait.

[Mudvayneowns91 0]

Yeah, whoever thinks the trap is good for hockey should be slapped.

[irishtemper14+25 11]

OH my.....that would look ri-goddamn-diculous if they did that, just shrink the goalies gear if you want more scoring

[Turkey 0]

My first instinct is to say this is an atrociously bad idea. I agree with shrinking goalie gear as the first order of business. It perhaps can't happen all at once but why not treat it like fuel efficiency standards and say something like "all goalie gear is to be shrunk by x% by 2010."

[LIDDYGIBBY5 1]

Me too. It's why I hate watching teams like the Wild or Canucks who sit back and wait.

How do you feel about an illegal defense penalty like they had in the NBA if the played a zone? Is it possible to force teams to not trap?

[lets go pavel 2]

actually, as ridiculous as that idea seems, it is far superior to the other plan that was discussed:

now if we can just replace the ice with a nice flannel ...

[vangvace 12]

So we have jersey's that make players 8% faster.

Skates in the works to make them quicker on the start and use 15% less enegy.

So are the new lines supposed to increase whistles by 10% by my interpretation?

What's next? Get rid of the ice and turn it into handball?