Not allowed to ice puck...

[Z Winged Dangler 2,082]

I turned my tv on to NHL on the fly last night, and I believe it was during the Colorado/Vancouver game, where an announcer asked why players on the PK are allowed to ice the puck. If the penalty killers had to get the puck out of the zone on the penalty kill instead of icing the puck over and over, there would be more offensive chances on the power play. As the announcer said, you get a penalty, you're penalized...

Heard it and thought it might be an interesting concept.

[Guest mindfly]

So you want a powerplay to be an automatic goal more or less because that's what it would be like

[Hockeytown Red Wings 245]

The problem as I see it is that players will continue to ice the puck anyway. You could be adding up to 10 extra stoppages to the game.

[dat's sick 1,002]

So you want a powerplay to be an automatic goal more or less because that's what it would be like

Agreed. The PP would be waaaay overpowered. They've already made the zones bigger, and they're calling every little thing to ensure there are lots of PP opportunites during the games.

The PKers being allowed to ice the puck also adds an interesting dynamic at the end of games if a team goes on the PP and pulls their goalie to try and get a goal.

[Z Winged Dangler 2,082]

good points from you guys, just found it to be an interesting topic for discussion. i don't necessarily think they should do it, but on the topic of changing the size of zones....the NHL ice size should narrow the difference of the size from theirs and international size. take the two rink sizes and split the difference giving the skilled players more room to get around all the lugnut defensemen in the NHL. that would probably be a better idea than not being able to ice it on the PK, but it would be fun to atleast watch it in the AHL for a year.

come on guys, i'm from Winnipeg...all i have is the Moose. i need some excitement!

[betterREDthandead 58]

The problem as I see it is that players will continue to ice the puck anyway. You could be adding up to 10 extra stoppages to the game.

Bingo. Given the choice between allowing a quality chance at the net and causing a faceoff in the zone, they'll take the faceoff every time. Being allowed to ice the puck during a PK balances out the equation a bit....it's already about a one-in-five chance you'll be scored on anyway.

the NHL ice size should narrow the difference of the size from theirs and international size.

Least likely thing to ever happen. The owners aren't going to spend money in the short-term doing something that will cost them even more money in the long-term.

[Guest CaliWingsNut]

This negates the no line change rule.

If a team can dump the puck they can get a line change, while currently if they ice it, they have to stay on for the faceoff. So while allowing a few more shots, it would likely be against fresher legs.

[egroen 384]

Scotty Bowman has long been an advocate of this ("Why should a penalized team be given an advantage?") -- but then he is usually coaching the teams that draw the penalties.

[Guest Shoreline]

Things are fine the way they are. Don't fix something that isn't broken.

[titanium2 867]

The problem as I see it is that players will continue to ice the puck anyway. You could be adding up to 10 extra stoppages to the game.

This is pretty much what I would do. It would really kill the flow of the power play.

[b.shanafan14 733]

It would be next to automatic PP goal for most teams in the league. Not only would the teams ice the puck over and over, but unless someone on the PK manages to take the puck and hold onto it in the attacking zone for long enough, a PK unit would never be able to change, it would be a solid 2 minute PK for 4 skaters or a goal, icing the puck would never grant relief.

It is definitely an interesting concept if we are in the mode of constantly trying to find ways to increase goals, but no thanks. The NHL refs are inconsistent and responsible for deciding enough games with poor calls, doing this would basically be like awarding a penalty shot every hook, except most teams would rather face a penalty shot than 2 minutes without personnel change against NHL caliber PP.

[arnoldbuck 0]

I'm not positive on this. But a loooong time ago, wasn't that rule instituted because the ye old Habs PP scored too many goals on the man advantage. I mean waaay back. Just I story I thought I remember hearing somewhere.

[cusimano_brothers 1,655]

From "National Hockey League Official Guide & Record Book 2010":

Major Rule Changes

1956-57

Players serving a minor penalty allowed to return to ice when a goal is scored by opposing team.

Before that, a player serving a minor penalty sat for the entire penalty; the rule was changed because of the unfair advantage Montreal had.

But, here is a question I thought of on the weekend:

A team is trailing and pulls their goalie for a sixth skater. They then accidently ice the puck, forcing them to keep the same skaters on the ice for the following face-off. Why are they allowed to put their goalie back in?

Edited March 10, 2010 by cusimano_brothers

[egroen 384]

From "National Hockey League Official Guide & Record Book 2010":

Before that, a player serving a minor penalty sat for the entire penalty; the rule was changed because of the unfair advantage Montreal had.

But, here is a question I thought of on the weekend:

A team is trailing and pulls their goalie for a sixth skater. They then accidently ice the puck, forcing them to keep the same skaters on the ice for the following face-off. Why are they allowed to put their goalie back in?

Yeah, the Habs with Harvey on the ice cleaned up on power plays and forced that change to come about.

The Oilers in the 80s did the same with simultaneous minors (4 on 4 hockey) that they changed that to an offsetting penalty.

[Donaldjr2448 43]

From "National Hockey League Official Guide & Record Book 2010":

Before that, a player serving a minor penalty sat for the entire penalty; the rule was changed because of the unfair advantage Montreal had.

But, here is a question I thought of on the weekend:

A team is trailing and pulls their goalie for a sixth skater. They then accidently ice the puck, forcing them to keep the same skaters on the ice for the following face-off. Why are they allowed to put their goalie back in?

Great Question!! I think the league should look into what is considered not to be icing and when icing is waived off. Because there are many times I feel the goaltender can play the puck and doesn't because of the icing. I think if the Goalie does not have to leave his crease and can play the puck in his crease, that it should negate the icing call, just like a defensemen slowing up to let the puck get by them for icing!!

[Konnan511 1,736]

I'm all for it. It seems some people think that the puck wouldn't be allowed to exit the offensive zone. You can dump the puck w/o icing, I see it done at least once or twice a game at least.

[Marty Barry 230]

Stupid is as stupid does.

[toby91_ca 620]

From "National Hockey League Official Guide & Record Book 2010":

Before that, a player serving a minor penalty sat for the entire penalty; the rule was changed because of the unfair advantage Montreal had.

But, here is a question I thought of on the weekend:

A team is trailing and pulls their goalie for a sixth skater. They then accidently ice the puck, forcing them to keep the same skaters on the ice for the following face-off. Why are they allowed to put their goalie back in?

I suppose it's allowed because the situation is different. But are you suggesting they don't allow it and if so, why? To create offense? It the other team is able to just shoot it in an empty net, that's not very exciting.

[cusimano_brothers 1,655]

I suppose it's allowed because the situation is different.

I checked and it's covered by "81.4, Line Change on Icing" of the Official NHL Rules as being an exception.

[zettie85 106]

Playing 5-4 is being penalized. I don't see how allowing icing would hurt anyone but the fans in how boring PP's would get. That would definitely turn in to a strategy. See how many whistles on each PK you can get. That still all depends on how good you are at face-offs too I guess.

[wmubronco420 25]

I like the idea the player not being able to come out of the box after a goal. But the PK team not being able to ice it is just overkill IMO.