• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
drumnj

Rule Changes in the AHL (what the NHL has considered)

Rate this topic

76 posts in this topic

Yesterday the American Hockey League annoced a few new rule changes. I know the overtime and fighting (Yzerman suggested it last year) ones have been considered by the NHL as well. This may be a test run in the AHL and could be something we'll see in the NHL for the future.

Rule 85 (“Overtime”)

  • During the regular season, the sudden-death overtime period will be seven minutes (7:00) in length, preceded by a “dry scrape” of the entire ice surface.
  • Teams will change ends at the start of overtime.
  • Full playing strength will be 4-on-4 until the first whistle following three minutes of play (4:00 remaining), at which time full strength will be reduced to 3-on-3 for the duration of the overtime period.
  • If the game is still tied following overtime, a winner will be determined by a three-player shootout.

Rule 20.4 (“Major Penalties”)

  • An automatic game misconduct will be applied to any player who has been assessed two major penalties for fighting or three major penalties for any infraction in the same game.

Rule 9.6 (“Helmets”)

  • A player on the ice whose helmet comes off during play will be assessed a minor penalty unless he immediately (a) exits the playing surface or (b) puts the helmet back on with the chin strap properly fastened.

http://theahl.com/ahl-board-approves-rules-changes-p192792

Edited by drumnj
haroldsnepsts likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the helmet one is dumb. If you're in your own end on a pk defending and someone checks you, knocks the helmet off, somehow you deserve a penalty because you don't want to leave your team even more shorthanded to go put the helmet back on or go back to the bench?

wings87, thegerkin, number9 and 6 others like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the helmet one is dumb. If you're in your own end on a pk defending and someone checks you, knocks the helmet off, somehow you deserve a penalty because you don't want to leave your team even more shorthanded to go put the helmet back on or go back to the bench?

I hope they allow discretion for the officials in these kind of situations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope they allow discretion for the officials in these kind of situations.

If it was a rule in the nhl the refs would be given no discretion. The fact that you have to securely do the chin strap back up when you put the helmet back on is the worst part, this rule could seriously handicap a team at the wrong time

BadgerBob likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was a rule in the nhl the refs would be given no discretion. The fact that you have to securely do the chin strap back up when you put the helmet back on is the worst part, this rule could seriously handicap a team at the wrong time

Which is why it's better that it's in the AHL before it would come to the NHL. Let them work out the bugs so the NHL officials can f*** it up in new and interesting ways.

Hockeymom1960 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every single proposal is idiotic.

Weeding fighting out of the game has been going on slowly now. Gimmmicky overtimes are absurd. 3 on 3 is not a situation you see in normal play. It's not much different than deciding a game by shootout. Just another gimmick to avoid a tie.

Hockeymom1960 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For OT, I like the dry scrape idea and changing ends so teams have the long change.

I'm not crazy about the shifting to 3 on 3 during a 7 minute OT, but I'd still take it over a shootout. It's at least worth seeing how is plays out in the AHL.

The helmet rule and major penalty rule are pretty bad though.

I'd be interested in them trying to really crack down on the hit from behind rule in the AHL. Don't create a new rule, just enforce the existing one. If they actually don't allow players to hit a guy in the numbers, it seems like it would protect defenseman and help with puck movement in the defensive zone.

Right now in the AHL and NHL the rule seems to be enforced as "you can hit a guy from behind into the boards, as long as it's not too bad or he doesn't end up getting hurt" which is a terrible standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're going to have the game of hockey ruined in 5 to 10 years. The OT rule is interesting, but if the other 2 make it into the NHL.... yikes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still in the "play hockey until the game ends" boat and I'd really like to see the NHL get away from 3 point games. Either that our make all games worth 3 points. First rule does nothing for that and it's still gimmicky so I don't like it.

I also think fighting has a place but there shouldn't be a need to fight in a game twice, this coming from someone who has played competitively for 20 years. So I like that rule. Keeps people honest but still playing hockey.

I see the purpose of the third rule but I still don't like it. If someone wants to risk a head injury by playing that's their choice. There are better ways to protect players from injury than penalizing them for giving their all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're going to have the game of hockey ruined in 5 to 10 years. The OT rule is interesting, but if the other 2 make it into the NHL.... yikes.

With the litigious society we live in coupled with the NFL lawsuit and the BS ones fringe ex-players are tossing at the NHL, the league has to be seen taking steps to cut down on head injuries. Discouraging fighting and making sure people have helmets on are steps towards that. If you want to blame someone, blame the lawyers and over-reacting hockey moms who go berserk over every bump and bruise.

The league won't be going away from the current standings point system anytime soon, but I'd rather see it be a win or nothing than the extra point for OT. Failing that, 3 for a regulation win, 2 for OT win, 1 for OT loss, nothing for regulation loss. The current format keeps teams bunched up more though, meaning it looks more exciting.

Edited by DickieDunn
Nightfall likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate the current OT rules and I hate the proposed changes, just too convoluted. What would happen if it's still tied after 3-3? Both teams play table hockey to declare the winner?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate the current OT rules and I hate the proposed changes, just too convoluted. What would happen if it's still tied after 3-3? Both teams play table hockey to declare the winner?

Rock paper scissors. Best 2 of 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of a SH the win should be decided by each teams enforcer brawling it out until a decision is made.

Nvm, I don't wanna see my precious Dano get hurt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of a SH the win should be decided by each teams enforcer brawling it out until a decision is made.

Nvm, I don't wanna see my precious Dano get hurt.

Our enforcer is our power play... No wait...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re "Rule 85":

1) Why "seven minutes"?

2) Regular season games have already been dragged out as far as they can. You want excitement? Ditch the "dog-and-pony show" know as the shootout and start with five-on-five in the overtime. After each minute, one player per team is taken off, so that if the overtime goes the full five minutes, you're left with two goalies and two skaters in the final minute. No winner? No problem; bring back the single point for that archaic thing know as the "tie game".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re "Rule 85":

1) Why "seven minutes"?

2) Regular season games have already been dragged out as far as they can. You want excitement? Ditch the "dog-and-pony show" know as the shootout and start with five-on-five in the overtime. After each minute, one player per team is taken off, so that if the overtime goes the full five minutes, you're left with two goalies and two skaters in the final minute. No winner? No problem; bring back the single point for that archaic thing know as the "tie game".

Your version sounds just as bad, maybe worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every single one of those is idiotic and unnecessary.

I can definitely see myself not bothering with hockey anymore within the next 5-10 years.

I think the 7 minute OT idea is a little goofy, but definitely worth experimenting with if it cuts down on the number of shootouts.

Though I'd rather they just do 7 minutes of 4 on 4 OT while keeping the ice scrape and long change.

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