• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
wingsfan4795

Delay of game penalty

Rate this topic

32 posts in this topic

Either the current or ice it is fine with me.

9 times out of 10 you can pretty much safely conclude that in a pinch nobody purposefully wants to put it in a crowd, but this is something where there can be absolutely no grey area for a discussion - even if it is all but obvious that the player didn't mean to do so.

It's either a penalty all the time or treat it like icing all the time. I understand if people think a penalty for it is too strict, but either method works for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't Eddie O disagree with Pierre when he suggested that the refs make judgment call? Oh, that's right, because it has been called on the Wings like 3 times vs the Hawks this year (one PP goal after such a penalty allowing them to take us to OT). I am sure the first time it gets called on the Hawks his opinion will mirror Pierre's.

Or maybe it was Emrick, shrug :)

It was Eddie. He also said that the refs shouldn't have another judgement call about whether it was intentional or not. I hate to agree with Eddie, but I feel the same way.

I taped the game so I will find an exact quote when I watch it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The officials have to judge in a split second if the puck was deflected or not. It's still a jugdement call. I don't know why this should be the only black and white call when really, no other penalty is. I've seen players taken down on a clear breakaway with no penatly shot. A defenseman diving for the puck and getting it, but a penalty is still called for tripping. It's endless.

I agree with whoever compared it to icing, a puck played with a high stick, a hand pass or offsides. The whistle is blown, and a faceoff occurs deep in the zone or whatever, but it isn't a 2 minute penalty. The same should apply for a puck over the glass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The officials have to judge in a split second if the puck was deflected or not. It's still a jugdement call. I don't know why this should be the only black and white call when really, no other penalty is. I've seen players taken down on a clear breakaway with no penatly shot. A defenseman diving for the puck and getting it, but a penalty is still called for tripping. It's endless.

I agree with whoever compared it to icing, a puck played with a high stick, a hand pass or offsides. The whistle is blown, and a faceoff occurs deep in the zone or whatever, but it isn't a 2 minute penalty. The same should apply for a puck over the glass.

Players defending their zone will intentionally chip the puck over the glass when they are gassed and/or outmatched by their opponent. That's the purpose of the penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was Eddie. He also said that the refs shouldn't have another judgement call about whether it was intentional or not. I hate to agree with Eddie, but I feel the same way.

I taped the game so I will find an exact quote when I watch it.

I do agree about making them have to assume what a player was thinking (same as with some of these body checks with intent to injure)... I couldn't remember if Pierre brought up how it was just icing in AHL and it should be that in NHL too. But if they won't bring that rule up then lesser of two evils of always having it be a PP is let refs choose PP or icing... but refs need clearcut rules, because they apparently suck at most other judgement calls, so I think it should just be auto icing.

Although, I just thought of something while typing this, On the PK, would it be too easy to flip over boards and get the icing you want when sometimes you can't get a true icing? Would you suspend the icing rule for PK?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The team that is shorthanded is allowed to ice the puck.

Players defending their zone will intentionally chip the puck over the glass when they are gassed and/or outmatched by their opponent. That's the purpose of the penalty.

Isn't that why players ice the puck too? Is that a two minute delay of game penalty? No. I would think if a player had full control of the puck and it was on his stick, why would he put it over the glass and not ice it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I was just thinking on the PK, it would seem a little cheap to just glass it because to ice it you still sometimes have to wing it past some defenders at the blue line. If its just skied over the glass, the defenders get no chance to try to keep it in not to mention you can just glass it over any part of the ice you want, back, sides, 3/4's, etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0