2018 Canada's Olympic Women's Hockey Team

[shelfit]

What went on long enough -- passing the puck? Just because a pass isn't toward the goal, it can still be part of a strategy to score. I've seen teams on the PK passing the puck around with no attempt to score for a long time, and I don't think anyone in the building thought it was cause for a delay of game penalty.

Exactly. This isn't basketball. There's no shot-clock or back-court rule in hockey.

 

[Puckdrop14]

I was ecstatic to see Nurse snipe one on Rooney. Turnbull played quite well I thought. Any thoughts on the goaltending? Obviously I am a HUGE ARD fan, but I don't know why you would change goalies at this point after last night for the semi's/final.

ARD played a decent game however her rebound control was non existent. She would have been smoked against a team like the US however you never know what the staff is thinking when they decide who is playing an important game.

 

[joecct]

Exactly. This isn't basketball. There's no shot-clock or back-court rule in hockey.

But you have to advance the puck. You can't constantly pass it up the ice and then pass it back to your goalie.

I think after a warning by the ref, there's an end zone faceoff. Do it again, and it's a minor.

 

[ironic_chef]

Re: 2018 Canada's Olympic Women's Hockey Team

But you have to advance the puck. You can't constantly pass it up the ice and then pass it back to your goalie.

I think after a warning by the ref, there's an end zone faceoff. Do it again, and it's a minor.

Absolutely not. This is not a rule.

 

[Blackbeard]

Re: 2018 Canada's Olympic Women's Hockey Team

What went on long enough -- passing the puck? Just because a pass isn't toward the goal, it can still be part of a strategy to score. I've seen teams on the PK passing the puck around with no attempt to score for a long time, and I don't think anyone in the building thought it was cause for a delay of game penalty.

Yes, cycling the puck in the neutral zone or high in their end...if that went on long enough. Of course it can be a strategy to score and apparently is. Teams on the PK would be attempting to kill the clock which is a strategy as well but the team on the PP would be foolish to squander their temporary advantage by not pressing the issue, so, one would think that such passing to kill the clock would be relatively short lived, as it usually is.

Imagine this, what would have happened the other night if Finland would have stopped skating (notwithstanding that that might be a bad "strategy" and might be one thing the US would be looking for in order to pounce) but stayed in their end watching the US put on a cycling show in the neutral zone. Without seeing what they were looking for how long would the US continue the cycling?...2 minutes?, 3 minutes?, 5 minutes?, 7 minutes?, until the buzzer went to end the period? At what point, if there is a point and that is the essence of my question, does the ref think that he/she needs to get the game moving along and dispense with the passing clinic? Does the crowd have to start booing and throwing cold dogs and warm beer on the ice? If this went on indefinitely would the ref feel compelled to act? Would the ref even have the discretionary power/authority to act?

Again, these are questions...I don't know the answers if in fact there even are answers that can be gleaned from the rule book.

The standing around in your own end watching the passing clinic might even be an effective counter strategy.

 

[shelfit]

But you have to advance the puck. You can't constantly pass it up the ice and then pass it back to your goalie.

I think after a warning by the ref, there's an end zone faceoff. Do it again, and it's a minor.

LMAO, this is absolutely hilarious! While you are supposed to try to keep the puck moving if possible (which is why the refs keep barking at you to "move it, move it" when you're in a battle along the boards, for example), there is no rule about having to "advance the puck." You actually can pass or skate it up, then back, or sideways, or wherever you want for as long as you want as long as you don't go offside, etc. Like I said, there's no shot-clock or back-court rule in hockey. Too funny! You made my night!

 

[Eeyore]

Re: 2018 Canada's Olympic Women's Hockey Team

Again, these are questions...I don't know the answers if in fact there even are answers that can be gleaned from the rule book.

If you can't cite something from the rulebook, it's a complete fantasy that something might be called.

 

[joecct]

Absolutely not. This is not a rule.

There was a Rule (is a rule?) that did not permit you to carry the puck behind your net when breaking out.

 

[shelfit]

There was a Rule (is a rule?) that did not permit you to carry the puck behind your net when breaking out.

Ok, I get it now. You're just messing with us all, pretending to be a complete dumba** to see how we bite. Well done.

 

[Blackbeard]

Re: 2018 Canada's Olympic Women's Hockey Team

If you can't cite something from the rulebook, it's a complete fantasy that something might be called.

In initially asking if it might be called I was asking if anyone here knew the rule book well enough to enlighten those of us who didn't.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

But you have to advance the puck. You can't constantly pass it up the ice and then pass it back to your goalie.

I think after a warning by the ref, there's an end zone faceoff. Do it again, and it's a minor.

Where the h*ll in the rulebook is this?!

One more time. This is not basketball. And it’s also not soccer.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2018 Canada's Olympic Women's Hockey Team

I'll interrupt this p***ing match with something actually interesting and relevant to the discussion:

https://youtu.be/lWGbZPx_HPY

 

[Sean Pickett]

Re: 2018 Canada's Olympic Women's Hockey Team

Yeah, I was just asking the question. I have no idea whether it could be called that way if it went on long enough. It had crossed my mind so I just tossed it out there for opinions or to see if anyone else actually knew whether or not it could be called that way.

Exactly. This isn't basketball. There's no shot-clock or back-court rule in hockey.

But you have to advance the puck. You can't constantly pass it up the ice and then pass it back to your goalie.

I think after a warning by the ref, there's an end zone faceoff. Do it again, and it's a minor.

Absolutely not. This is not a rule.

If you can't cite something from the rulebook, it's a complete fantasy that something might be called.

There was a Rule (is a rule?) that did not permit you to carry the puck behind your net when breaking out.

Ok, I get it now. You're just messing with us all, pretending to be a complete dumba** to see how we bite. Well done.

In initially asking if it might be called I was asking if anyone here knew the rule book well enough to enlighten those of us who didn't.

Where the h*ll in the rulebook is this?!

One more time. This is not basketball. And it’s also not soccer.

I find it amazing that no one can be bothered look this up in the rules books: it's not like they're not available on the Internet. That said, joecct is correct in regards to NCAA Ice Hockey rules:

Rule 76
76.2 Advancing Puck - Except to carry the puck behind its goal once, a team in possession of the puck in its own defending zone must advance the puck toward the opposing goal, unless it is prevented from so doing by players of the opposing team.
PENALTY—For initial violation, play shall be stopped and a faceoff conducted at either end-zone faceoff spot adjacent to the goal of the team causing the stoppage, and the referee shall warn the captain of the offending team of the reason for the faceoff. For a second violation by any player of the same team in the same period, a minor shall be assessed to the offending player.

I have never seen a warning for it, let alone a penalty, but it is the rules book and has been for decades. However, I did not find the same rule in the IIHF Rules Book.

Sean

 

[shelfit]

I find it amazing that no one can be bothered look this up in the rules books: it's not like they're not available on the Internet. That said, joecct is correct in regards to NCAA Ice Hockey rules:

Rule 76
76.2 Advancing Puck - Except to carry the puck behind its goal once, a team in possession of the puck in its own defending zone must advance the puck toward the opposing goal, unless it is prevented from so doing by players of the opposing team.
PENALTY—For initial violation, play shall be stopped and a faceoff conducted at either end-zone faceoff spot adjacent to the goal of the team causing the stoppage, and the referee shall warn the captain of the offending team of the reason for the faceoff. For a second violation by any player of the same team in the same period, a minor shall be assessed to the offending player.

I have never seen a warning for it, let alone a penalty, but it is the rules book and has been for decades. However, I did not find the same rule in the IIHF Rules Book.

Sean

We were all waiting for you to look it up, except this isn't NCAA hockey, but thanks anyway.

 

[shelfit]

I'll interrupt this p***ing match with something actually interesting and relevant to the discussion:

https://youtu.be/lWGbZPx_HPY

The passive neutral zone trap (1-3-1) in this example is a joke and should be banned.

If there is ever going to be a rule where the offensive team must "advance the puck" then there will need to be a matching rule where at least one player on the defensive team must forecheck the puck. That would be a way of putting in a system of checks and balances for this type of situation.

 

[Eeyore]

Re: 2018 Canada's Olympic Women's Hockey Team

The other problem is that ". . . advance the puck toward the opposing goal . . ." is an amazingly broad concept. Unless you literally just stand there, as the Philadelphia player does in that video, you will at various times be advancing the puck towards the opposing goal.

". . . prevented from so doing by players of the opposing team," is also really broad. You aren't required to skate the puck into the teeth of the other team's defense. A team regrouping with the puck is trying to produce and find holes in the other team's coverage. That other team is preventing them from advancing on terms that they find favorable. So, they'll keep moving the puck around until they find an opening.

The reason you've never seen this called is because you've never seen anyone commit it.

 

[ne7minder]

Re: 2018 Canada's Olympic Women's Hockey Team

I find it amazing that no one can be bothered look this up in the rules books: it's not like they're not available on the Internet. e must advance the puck toward the opposing goal, unless it is prevented from so doing by players of the opposing team.

Just spitballin' here, could it be that nobody cared enough?

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: 2018 Canada's Olympic Women's Hockey Team

I find it amazing that no one can be bothered look this up in the rules books: it's not like they're not available on the Internet. That said, joecct is correct in regards to NCAA Ice Hockey rules:

Rule 76
76.2 Advancing Puck - Except to carry the puck behind its goal once, a team in possession of the puck in its own defending zone must advance the puck toward the opposing goal, unless it is prevented from so doing by players of the opposing team.
PENALTY—For initial violation, play shall be stopped and a faceoff conducted at either end-zone faceoff spot adjacent to the goal of the team causing the stoppage, and the referee shall warn the captain of the offending team of the reason for the faceoff. For a second violation by any player of the same team in the same period, a minor shall be assessed to the offending player.

I have never seen a warning for it, let alone a penalty, but it is the rules book and has been for decades. However, I did not find the same rule in the IIHF Rules Book.

Sean

I knew Sean would set us straight. But I'm more amazed by how many posts you quoted.

However, it does not appear to be an IIHF rule. So, though fascinating to learn it is a rule in some form of hockey (though impossible to call other than the going behind their own net more than once), we don't have to worry about it in the Olympics.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: 2018 Canada's Olympic Women's Hockey Team

Just spitballin' here, could it be that nobody cared enough?

We cared. We were just too darn lazy...

 

[Lindsay]

We cared. We were just too darn lazy...

Yep.