cusimano_brothers 1,655 Report post Posted October 2, 2011 It needs to be changed; the League says it's big on making the game safer and this is as good a place as any to do it. Reminds me of the second "elimination" scene from They Shoot Horses, Don't They?. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GMRwings1983 8,794 Report post Posted October 2, 2011 That's actually a great point. I think the only pro leagues that don't use no-touch icing are the AHL and NHL. ECHL uses no-touch icing. Junior hockey and college hockey both have no touch icing. International leagues use no touch icing. I'm in favor of no touch icing. You get the one or two instances a game where a player beats it out, but the majority of the time there aren't even heated races for the puck. If you want to shorten the length of a game, then go the no touch icing rule, it'll shave a few minutes off the game. How will it shorten the game, though? No-touch icing means more whistles, hence more stoppages in play. Whenever a guy beats the icing, that keeps the clock rolling. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
P. Marlowe 748 Report post Posted October 2, 2011 How will it shorten the game, though? No-touch icing means more whistles, hence more stoppages in play. Whenever a guy beats the icing, that keeps the clock rolling. Nonsense, poopypants. Whistle comes faster, no need to wait for defenseman to skate over and touch the puck. Forwards beat the icing maybe once a game so it doesn't really bring more whistles. 1 Konnan511 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Konnan511 1,736 Report post Posted October 2, 2011 How will it shorten the game, though? No-touch icing means more whistles, hence more stoppages in play. Whenever a guy beats the icing, that keeps the clock rolling. That happens once, maybe twice a game. Now players wouldn't have to skate all the way to touch up the puck. It shaves off a few seconds each time which adds up to a minute or two per game on that side alone. Then account for players already heading to the face-off dot and the refs getting to position quicker. It'd shed probably ten minutes off the length of the game by these estimates i just made up to support my theory. Nonsense, poopypants. Whistle comes faster, no need to wait for defenseman to skate over and touch the puck. Forwards beat the icing maybe once a game so it doesn't really bring more whistles. What he said. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GMRwings1983 8,794 Report post Posted October 2, 2011 Nonsense, poopypants. Whistle comes faster, no need to wait for defenseman to skate over and touch the puck. Forwards beat the icing maybe once a game so it doesn't really bring more whistles. Ah, I see. But hockey games aren't that long compared to other sports. Is it really a problem? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
P. Marlowe 748 Report post Posted October 2, 2011 Ah, I see. But hockey games aren't that long compared to other sports. Is it really a problem? To me the few seconds that are saved is a nonfactor. Well, there's more time to score goals. :/ Just mentioned it cause it's quite usual to have the misconception that no touch icing breaks the flow of the game. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eva unit zero 271 Report post Posted October 2, 2011 Nonsense, poopypants. Whistle comes faster, no need to wait for defenseman to skate over and touch the puck. Forwards beat the icing maybe once a game so it doesn't really bring more whistles. To me the few seconds that are saved is a nonfactor. Well, there's more time to score goals. :/ Just mentioned it cause it's quite usual to have the misconception that no touch icing breaks the flow of the game. No-touch does result in more whistles. The player chasing the puck may not get to the puck more than once or maybe twice a game. But with no-touch icing, it leads to a lot of situations where the goalie is forced to play a puck he otherwise wouldn't play. So the number of stoppages would be increased. A situation that is fairly common with regard to this is a player coming out of the penalty box in the second period. The shorthanded team is hemmed in, and gains possession as the player gets out. Defenseman sends a long pass that misses and goes all the way to the end boards. The player who just got on the ice has a clear advantage at getting the puck, and with touch icing he'll either get the puck or force the goalie to leave the net and play it; meaning the other team has to come back and defend it - one player shifting the game from one end to the other. If the team that is now attacking either gets the puck or forechecks well, they will have the puck and be set up in the offensive zone only a few seconds after killing a penalty. With no-touch icing, that play is basically dead as soon as the pass misses; just waiting for it to make it all the way and not go to the net. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
P. Marlowe 748 Report post Posted October 2, 2011 No-touch does result in more whistles. The player chasing the puck may not get to the puck more than once or maybe twice a game. But with no-touch icing, it leads to a lot of situations where the goalie is forced to play a puck he otherwise wouldn't play. So the number of stoppages would be increased. A situation that is fairly common with regard to this is a player coming out of the penalty box in the second period. The shorthanded team is hemmed in, and gains possession as the player gets out. Defenseman sends a long pass that misses and goes all the way to the end boards. The player who just got on the ice has a clear advantage at getting the puck, and with touch icing he'll either get the puck or force the goalie to leave the net and play it; meaning the other team has to come back and defend it - one player shifting the game from one end to the other. If the team that is now attacking either gets the puck or forechecks well, they will have the puck and be set up in the offensive zone only a few seconds after killing a penalty. With no-touch icing, that play is basically dead as soon as the pass misses; just waiting for it to make it all the way and not go to the net. Alright. Could you break this down in numbers to prove me that this happens more than 1-2 times a game at best? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Konnan511 1,736 Report post Posted October 3, 2011 Alright. Could you break this down in numbers to prove me that this happens more than 1-2 times a game at best? The one good thing about Eva, is that he will provide numbers to prove his point. Although he'll incorporate Hudler in there somewhere. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eva unit zero 271 Report post Posted October 3, 2011 Alright. Could you break this down in numbers to prove me that this happens more than 1-2 times a game at best? 0 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 377 610 987 1597 1 GMRwings1983 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RedBengals 27 Report post Posted October 3, 2011 No Touch is widely enough incorporated that there must be somehing about it people like. It's safer, that should be enough for the NHL to adopt it. I wouldn't be surprised to see it within the next five years. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Konnan511 1,736 Report post Posted October 3, 2011 0 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 377 610 987 1597 I knew you'd throw Hudler in there somewhere. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
P. Marlowe 748 Report post Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) 0 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 377 610 987 1597 Thank you. Now I understand everything, not only about ice hockey, but about life as well. Edited October 3, 2011 by P. Marlowe 1 Aussie_Wing reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Doc Holliday 1,888 Report post Posted October 3, 2011 In Div III College they have a hybrid icing rule, where if the player can negate the icing they wave it off. They could incorporate that to keep players from getting drilled chasing for it but allow players to beat the icing call. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Majsheppard 203 Report post Posted October 3, 2011 I don't like no-touch. This opinion was formed before we had Helm. I would be really mad if a star was hurt on my team... Therefore I will not complain much if they put it in... I still would rather not have it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
P. Marlowe 748 Report post Posted October 3, 2011 In Div III College they have a hybrid icing rule, where if the player can negate the icing they wave it off. They could incorporate that to keep players from getting drilled chasing for it but allow players to beat the icing call. I've been wondering about the hybrid icing... Doesn't it allow just the kind of icings which have the risk the lead to injuries? The ones in which there's a chase and a good chance for the forward to get the puck. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Doc Holliday 1,888 Report post Posted October 3, 2011 I've been wondering about the hybrid icing... Doesn't it allow just the kind of icings which have the risk the lead to injuries? The ones in which there's a chase and a good chance for the forward to get the puck. From my experience it has only been waived when the offensive player has a sizeable lead. Ties go to the defending skater. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
P. Marlowe 748 Report post Posted October 3, 2011 From my experience it has only been waived when the offensive player has a sizeable lead. Ties go to the defending skater. That makes sense. Thanks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Crymson Report post Posted October 3, 2011 I frankly don't know why it wasn't instituted years ago. I've seen it in the Olympics, and it was great. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
