Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Other Rule Changes? (Trapezoid?)


  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 StormJH1

StormJH1

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 706 posts
  • Location:Twin Cities, MN

Posted 05 June 2013 - 11:13 AM

I want to open a thread with a simple question...in almost a decade of hockey since the trapezoid rule was put into place, has anyone ever seen a trapezoid infraction actually called?  I don't watch an exceptional amount of hockey, but I can't ever remember it being called.  I remember turnovers happening b/c goalies couldn't enter the forbidden zone to play a puck, but no penalties.

 

The point of the rule, apparently, is to deter Marty Brodeur-types from playing the puck behind the net, which was "ruining" dump in hockey.  But anyone who's seen M-A Fleury play a game, or watched Jimmy against Calgary this season knows that when goalies play the puck often, bad things tend to happen!  Now they are shallowing up the nets a whopping 4" to add additional room behind the net, but I wonder if that will do more to help avoid collisions than it will to actually improve puck possession behind the net.

 

The trapezoid is more of annoyance we've grown used to than an actual "problem", but I still would do without it.  It adds subtle complexity in rules that are supposed to be very simple, and it would seem to further encourage players skating full speed after dump ins, which leads to more concussions and broken legs.

 

Agree? Disagree?



#2 Johnz96

Johnz96

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,423 posts

Posted 05 June 2013 - 11:17 AM

It was a rule made to look like they are trying to increase scoring (when in fact they actually don't want to), because of the decrease in scoring caused by the over-sized goalie equipment.



#3 evilzyme

evilzyme

    Games a gongshow.

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,095 posts
  • Location:Howell, Michigan

Posted 05 June 2013 - 11:19 AM

I've seen more than enough trapezoid calls made. You were exactly right about why it was implemented. It slowed down numerous forechecks because good puck moving goalies simply shut down the chip and chase. The trapezoid actually forces them to wait until the puck is BEHIND their net, instead of allowing them to come out and play it before hand. It certainly has done it's job, but at the same time, if you have a good puck moving goalie you would be against it. It basically is an even the playing field type of rule, but what can you do?


Pavel Datsyuk - "Pasha" - #13
"Got no fun if you got no puck"
'"I like ladies" - Towards the Lady Byng trophy
"Hannnnnnnnnnk"
"Okay $5 now"

 

I'm Don Cherry and Danny DeKeyser is my Kadri.


#4 LeftWinger

LeftWinger

    42 years in Detroit! Time to spend the rest in paradise!

  • Silver Booster
  • 8,818 posts
  • Location:HART - MI

Posted 05 June 2013 - 04:17 PM

I think the goalies are so used to the trapezoid that a rule change back to the old wouldn't make a difference...

 

I would like to see automatic icing, get rid of the over the glass penalty, bring back the two line pass.  I'd like to see a delay of game penalty for goalies who freeze the puck outside of the crease, unless they are making an immediate save.  I also think the hand pass from the faceoff circle in the defending zone is stupid too.  Of course, smaller goalie equipment.


Don't Be Jealous, But I Live Here...

www.thinkdunes.com

 

Nestrasil, yes...Cleary....No!

Dump Q and K Now!


#5 matt198913

matt198913

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,199 posts

Posted 05 June 2013 - 05:15 PM

Another rule I hate. The trapezoid took away all the work a goalie might do into handing the puck so the D man won't get killed. It was designed for more goals all its done is create more injuries.


You want to change a rule, try hybrid icing.... That's one that on paper and on screen looks great. No more guys getting their legs broken chasing down the puck!
BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

#6 Aznknight

Aznknight

    4th Line Grinder

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 200 posts

Posted 05 June 2013 - 05:17 PM

I want to see automatic icings too with the defensive goalie being positioned on the blue line but the team being able to do a line change. Imagine the chaos.

Stanley cup game 7. Chicago iced the puck. 10 secs left. Chicago 2: Detroit 1. Faceoff in their zone and Crawford is beside Dekeyser. Datsyuk wins the faceoff. Crawford runs to his net. Wings win the faceoff. Horton takes the puck and shoots it but Seabrook dives to save it. Toews runs to the referee to cry about unfair hockey while his whole team is diving around the net to try and save a goal. Bickell, who was hired by detroit in the off season, takes the puck and muscles it to the net. 11 people in the crease. Crawford still trying to get position. Finally Datsyuk handles the rebound and shelfs it. Toews cries again and wings celebrate the tying goal.

#7 FlashyG

FlashyG

    1st Line All-Star

  • HoF Booster
  • 1,159 posts
  • Location:Canada

Posted 05 June 2013 - 05:19 PM

I'd like to see an addition to the rules after an icing that prevents a team from using its time-out. It negates the point of not being able to change lines if you can just call a time-out. 

 

The idea was to speed the game up and it's actually ended up slowing it down in most cases.



#8 DeGraa55

DeGraa55

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,964 posts

Posted 05 June 2013 - 06:47 PM

I don't like the trapezoid nor the penalty for delay of game.

#9 LeftWinger

LeftWinger

    42 years in Detroit! Time to spend the rest in paradise!

  • Silver Booster
  • 8,818 posts
  • Location:HART - MI

Posted 05 June 2013 - 07:17 PM

I want to see automatic icings too with the defensive goalie being positioned on the blue line but the team being able to do a line change. Imagine the chaos.

Stanley cup game 7. Chicago iced the puck. 10 secs left. Chicago 2: Detroit 1. Faceoff in their zone and Crawford is beside Dekeyser. Datsyuk wins the faceoff. Crawford runs to his net. Wings win the faceoff. Horton takes the puck and shoots it but Seabrook dives to save it. Toews runs to the referee to cry about unfair hockey while his whole team is diving around the net to try and save a goal. Bickell, who was hired by detroit in the off season, takes the puck and muscles it to the net. 11 people in the crease. Crawford still trying to get position. Finally Datsyuk handles the rebound and shelfs it. Toews cries again and wings celebrate the tying goal.

 

:dntknw:

 

Anyone else as lost as I am?



I'd like to go back to hurry up faceoff....


Don't Be Jealous, But I Live Here...

www.thinkdunes.com

 

Nestrasil, yes...Cleary....No!

Dump Q and K Now!


#10 thegerkin

thegerkin

    Statue of Liberty!!!

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,579 posts
  • Location:Grand Rapids, MI

Posted 05 June 2013 - 09:22 PM

Lose: Trapezoid, defensive over-the-glass penalty, Instigator rule.

 

Add: Drastic non-safety size changes to goalie gear, penalize and enforce after-the-play scrums to the offending players (2:00 roughing/unsportsmanslike), more respect on the ice for the refs/linesmen (way too many being pushed and treated poorly. Possible penalty. Basically, respect the damn officials space.)



#11 TigerDan

TigerDan

    Goon

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 65 posts

Posted 05 June 2013 - 09:28 PM

Treat the over the glass play as an icing and get rid of the automatic penalty. If you ice it or shoot it out of play in your own zone, no line changes.

I have no problem with the coach using his timeout - he only gets one a game.

I would also get rid of the trapezoid - let the goalies handle the puck.  It won't stop offense.  The chip and chase methods that are detracted will be offset by 1. more goaltender puck handling errors and 2. good puck handling goaltenders creating more transition offense for their teams.

Allow coaches one or two challenges a game, but only for automatic calls (icing, offsides, too many men, high-sticking, etc.).  Referee discretion penalties (tripping, hooking, holding, slashing, interference, etc.) are not subject to challenges.  Challenges must be called during stoppages, before the puck is dropped. 

Oh, and get rid of all advertising on the ice itself - we're only a few years away from becoming Europe or the ECHL if this continues.

 

Finally and most importantly, if we're going to keep the shootouts and have 3 point games, make it International rules: 3 points for EVERY game (all games should be created equal).  Regulation win = 3 points, OT/Shootout win = 2 points, OT/Shootout loss = 1 point and Regulation loss = 0 points.  At a minimum, this will get rid of the benefit teams have found by tying regular season games. At best, it will create more 3rd period urgency in tied games - getting that 3rd point vs. guaranteeing yourself only 1 point and no more than 2 points should help.  For those that think this takes the integrety out of historical records, I argue this: it's already been lost.  The very first time 3 points were rewarded in a game shot that history all to hell.  Proof? 100 points used to be a great season, now you need almost that just to make the playoffs.


"This young man has had a very trying rookie season. What with the litigation, the notoriety, his subsequent deportation to Canada and that country's refusal to accept him? Whhelll, I guess that's more than most 21 year olds could handle."


#12 Aznknight

Aznknight

    4th Line Grinder

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 200 posts

Posted 05 June 2013 - 10:13 PM

How about 2 pucks. The insanity.

#13 Rhah

Rhah

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 503 posts
  • Location:Champaign, IL

Posted 06 June 2013 - 09:08 AM

It was a rule made to look like they are trying to increase scoring (when in fact they actually don't want to), because of the decrease in scoring caused by the over-sized goalie equipment.

 

Speaking of over-sized equipment, it really seemed crazy to me when I saw Detroit/Chicago pre-game showing Jimmy Williams and Crawford sitting in just their goalie pants but regular shirts. It literally looked like they had a barrel around them ready to go down the Niagara Falls. I think they should look at equipment size again... I can't totally remember back in a decade or so, which Philly goalie was just insanely huge in oversized pads? He literally looked like a square box sitting in the crease, he was all pads.



#14 StormJH1

StormJH1

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 706 posts
  • Location:Twin Cities, MN

Posted 06 June 2013 - 09:25 AM

Lose: Trapezoid, defensive over-the-glass penalty, Instigator rule.

 

Add: Drastic non-safety size changes to goalie gear, penalize and enforce after-the-play scrums to the offending players (2:00 roughing/unsportsmanslike), more respect on the ice for the refs/linesmen (way too many being pushed and treated poorly. Possible penalty. Basically, respect the damn officials space.)

 

You know, I was a goalie when I played (extremely non-professional) hockey, and I always loved everything about goaltending, so I've always been resistant to messing with the equipment.  I was okay with 12" to 11" pads (didn't really make an appreciable difference), and some of the things going on in the 90's (like Garth Snow's shoulder pads, or Patrick Roy's mumu-sized jersey) were getting a bit absurd. 

 

But after watching PIT/BOS go to 2OT last night, despite what was really a ton of quality chances by both teams, I am starting to get to the point where it seems like more quality hockey plays should result in goals, and that would be good for the product. 

 

The thing is, I'm not exactly sure how you do that with equipment.  Most goaltending equipment, while bulkier in appearance, really does have a functional purpose in protecting the netminder.  This was once a very dangerous job, and it was only really into the early 90's that it truly became "the safest position in hockey" because of Kevlar helmets, chest protection, etc.  Yes, there were helmets in 70's and better padding available in the 80's.  But guys like Cheveldae, Fuhr, Barasso, etc. were still playing primarily a stand-up style in the 80's and early 90's, and a lot of that was just residual from safety concerns when they were growing up.

 

As ghastly as it is to traditionalists, I'd almost rather make the nets slightly larger than shrink the equipment any more.  It's funny to me that people complain about how unfair it is to require visors of position players, yet the league can just mandate radical offseason changes to the actual tools that goaltenders use to perform their jobs (trappers, blockers, chest protector, etc.), and nobody finds that concerning.


Edited by StormJH1, 06 June 2013 - 09:28 AM.


#15 Rhah

Rhah

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 503 posts
  • Location:Champaign, IL

Posted 06 June 2013 - 09:33 AM

like Garth Snow's shoulder pads

 

Garth Snow was who I was thinking of in my previous post...

 

Thanks for reminder, and good points too, Storm.







Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users