Rule Changes

[CHFAN222]

Re: Rule Changes

I just have a feeling that these rules will lead to less upsets. Let's face it when you play a more talented team you are going to commit more penalties. These new rules make penalty killing a lot harder. Is there any way some of the conferences say Hockey East just say to their refs f this allow icing shorthanded.

 

[Federal League]

Re: Rule Changes

With a minor penalty, if a goal is scored, the penalty is over. The infraction has occurred, and a goal was scored. Therefore, the punishment should be over. It doesn't make sense to doubly punish a team that gets scored on after a delayed penalty.

Plus, even though you're technically still playing 6-on-6 during the delay (counting goalies), it really is a man advantage once the goalie's pulled. Which is why I said it's like getting a double minor if you score during the delay. If the rule was something like you still get a power play if you score before pulling your goalie, I'd be for it. Or if the rule was you're not allowed to pull your goalie during a delayed penalty, I'd be for it. What I'm not for is pulling the goalie, getting a 6-on-5 set up, scoring and then still getting a power play.

5. Why don't you like it? Doesn't make sense to keep playing the same side.

I just personally don't like having the long change during a 5-minute sudden death period. I do like switching sides in the postseason when it's 20-minute continuous OT, however. I'm really not that passionate about this issue, though. If they change it, I'm not gonna get all up in arms.

 

[aparch]

Re: Rule Changes

Also, icing will be called even when a team is shorthanded, a rule change that has been used in USA Hockey Development Camps.

I HATE this. The CCHA experimented with it five years ago during exhibition play.

• Goaltenders will change ends between the third period and overtime.

For regular season 5 minute OT's?

• The obtainable pass rule was removed.

• Teams will get a power play even if they score during a delayed penalty.

This one is quite random.

In all, these changes are a much bigger embarrassment than the CCHA testing the shootout.

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Rule Changes

In all, these changes are a much bigger embarrassment than the CCHA testing the shootout.

Uh... yyyyyeah... I'm going to have to go ahead and, uh... disagree with you there.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_m-JOczlPvzs/RoLDvEFZqVI/AAAAAAAAAKo/rY2LJoivvis/s320/Lumbergh.bmp

Okay, except for the icing thing. That's about the most ridiculous rule suggestion I've ever seen in my life.

 

[beaverhockeyfan]

Re: Rule Changes

That icing rule is the stupidest thing ever. Better idea if they want to go this route. When a penalty is called, instead of getting a powerplay, you get a goal.

Teams on the powerplay that ice the puck should be given a 2 minute minor for failing (Tech would be screwed).

Agree, it is a stupid rule proposal. You are on the power play, you have an extra guy on the ice. You loose possession, skate back to the other end and start over.

Let's call it Double Jeopardy. After all, you are penalizing and already penalized team for getting the puck.

 

[GoBucky36]

Re: Rule Changes

IMO, if the player taking the hit lowers his head right before the contact, it should not be called contact to the head.
I do like the icing being called even when the offending team is short-handed though. IMO, its going to make the game more exciting because the short-handed team wont be able to always throw the puck to the opposite end of the rink to kill time. Not to mention its going to put an added premium on discipline because the odds of scoring on a power play will be higher.

 

[Pirateasaurus]

Re: Rule Changes

The icing on PK is quite astounding. You have to wonder if anybody who voted for this has ever actually played hockey. What is this trying to establish? All it will achieve is a regression in flow as players will still ice the puck because they will be tired. I wouldn't be surprised to see powerplays with up to 10 whistles. I think this one will be changed after this next season, especially since fatigue leads to an increased likelihood of injury. This will be killer for teams with the long change too because then they probably can't even chip it out of the zone and hope to change.

The contact to the head thing feels ominous to me. While the CFB rule in a sense is a good idea, i saw numerous very soft, unnecessary ejections last year. I feel that the addition of this will only make it worse. Also, the last thing anybody wants are more judgment calls for the refs.

The game seems to be getting softer year after year. You have to wonder what things will be like in 10-15 years.

 

[Carmine Scarpaglia]

Re: Rule Changes

The icing on PK is quite astounding. You have to wonder if anybody who voted for this has ever actually played hockey. What is this trying to establish? All it will achieve is a regression in flow as players will still ice the puck because they will be tired. I wouldn't be surprised to see powerplays with up to 10 whistles.

Definitely worth noting that it will be very common to see guys get stuck out there for the full two minutes if they do manage to kill it. And that takes a long long time to sit on the bench to recover for another shift. So if you have good players on the PK forget about seeing them for several minutes. Likely you'll see star players taken off the PK to keep them from getting absolutely dead tired. Which is just god****ed stupid.

I think this one will be changed after this next season

There aren't final yet. They need to be approved. I imagine this one will get shot down quickly if the committee has any brains.

I just personally don't like having the long change during a 5-minute sudden death period.

Exactly.

 

[burgie12]

Re: Rule Changes

I think this one will be changed after this next season...

The rulebook only goes up for changes every other year.

There aren't final yet. They need to be approved. I imagine this one will get shot down quickly if the committee has any brains.

The 12-person panel / committee does not have a single person on it with any connection to hockey. My guess is that it this last part is little more than a rubber stamp-type process, unless you think someone from the Conference Carolinas or Nebraska Wesleyan University cares about icing during a penalty kill.

 

[Twitch Boy]

Re: Rule Changes

Contact to the head now a 5 and game? JFC, there's usually at least 3 elbowing contact to the heads a game.

Keep the power play after scoring on a delayed penalty? No. Just no.

AND ICING CALLED ON THE PENALTY KILL?!

I'm hearing the PK ditty on constant loop in my head.

 

[HockeyMan2000]

Re: Rule Changes

The icing change is so idiotic it defies description. It's as if people that don't even like the sport are out there making changes to it. Simply baffling.

 

[Alton]

Re: Rule Changes

The 12-person panel / committee does not have a single person on it with any connection to hockey. My guess is that it this last part is little more than a rubber stamp-type process, unless you think someone from the Conference Carolinas or Nebraska Wesleyan University cares about icing during a penalty kill.

The "Playing Rules Oversight Panel" (PROP) is only able to veto rule changes for one of 3 reasons: Student-athlete safety, significant financial impact, and a negative impact on the integrity or image of the game. You are correct when you state that it is almost always a rubber-stamp process. Most overrides from the PROP have to do with rule changes that require an expenditure of money by the schools, such as a change in the 3-point line in basketball.

I think we can consider these rule changes official, at least for the next 2 years.

 

[candycanes99]

Re: Rule Changes

I just personally don't like having the long change during a 5-minute sudden death period. I do like switching sides in the postseason when it's 20-minute continuous OT, however. I'm really not that passionate about this issue, though. If they change it, I'm not gonna get all up in arms.

True, I'd change it only for the continuous OT games. The 5-minute OT always feels like an extension of the 3rd anyway, no need to switch it up then.

 

[M-HockeyNet]

Re: Rule Changes

The "Playing Rules Oversight Panel" (PROP) is only able to veto rule changes for one of 3 reasons: Student-athlete safety, significant financial impact, and a negative impact on the integrity or image of the game. You are correct when you state that it is almost always a rubber-stamp process. Most overrides from the PROP have to do with rule changes that require an expenditure of money by the schools, such as a change in the 3-point line in basketball.

I think we can consider these rule changes official, at least for the next 2 years.

Here's a link to the NCAA PROP members list. Find their e-mail addresses on each institutions website and wager an e-mail campaign to deny the rule changes. Maybe with enough fan outcry they will realize they should veto under reason #3. Or give them reason #4... the changes are stupid

 

[Twitch Boy]

Re: Rule Changes

Here's a link to the NCAA PROP members list. Find their e-mail addresses on each institutions website and wager an e-mail campaign to deny the rule changes. Maybe with enough fan outcry they will realize they should veto under reason #3. Or give them reason #4... the changes are stupid

I almost want the rules to pass solely for the hilarity that would ensue next season.

40% power plays...teams with sub 60% PKs...10-9 games with 60 combined PIMs...

 

[Patman]

Re: Rule Changes

I hope you're right, but I've got to believe that the referees are going to be instructed to call the CTH. That's going to make a real mess out of the first month of games or so. I remember seeing the same thing when they first emphasized the CFB penalties a few years ago. I saw a ton of majors at first, and then it did start to settle down.

I agree that CTH penalties are going way over-board... there's a long way between what can happen and what that sociopath Cooke did to Savard.

 

[Carmine Scarpaglia]

Re: Rule Changes

The "Playing Rules Oversight Panel" (PROP) is only able to veto rule changes for one of 3 reasons: Student-athlete safety, significant financial impact, and a negative impact on the integrity or image of the game. You are correct when you state that it is almost always a rubber-stamp process. Most overrides from the PROP have to do with rule changes that require an expenditure of money by the schools, such as a change in the 3-point line in basketball.

I think we can consider these rule changes official, at least for the next 2 years.

Jesus H Christ. This is worse than I thought. The people responsible for this should die of gonorrhea.

 

[Happy]

Re: Rule Changes

I almost want the rules to pass solely for the hilarity that would ensue next season.

40% power plays...teams with sub 60% PKs...10-9 games with 60 combined PIMs...

This is great, this means a team that is nothing but a bunch of thugs on ice will lose. We might even see more skill on the ice. UND is going to have to change it's recruiting.

 

[M-HockeyNet]

Re: Rule Changes

I almost want the rules to pass solely for the hilarity that would ensue next season.

40% power plays...teams with sub 60% PKs...10-9 games with 60 combined PIMs...

...four players getting booted every game for contact to the head and 52 icings by the shorthanded team trying to kill off those major penalties.

 

[Runninwiththedogs]

Re: Rule Changes

Hello everyone! These rules are terrible! But we don't need to wonder why they are so stupid. We have incompetent boob John Hill on the Ice Hockey Rules Committee!

Here is what I envision occurring: a 5 minute PK without a chance to change personnel because tUMD keeps icing the puck... the 5 minute PK coming, of course, from a slight jostle to the shoulder of a St. Cloud player, who then drops like a stone and holds his head like he's been beaten with a bat, and Campion of course calls it a CTH.