Idea time....

Why hasn't this been suggested by anyone? If both the NHL and NHLPA want to improve the game, as both parties have stated they would like to, however in different languages.

My idea is to implement technology into the game, the NHL has yet to utilize technology...

Obstructions a problem, a big problem, the refs aren't going to be able to catch all infractions so why not use cameras?

Here's my idea:

1. Hire people at head office (who already look for suspensions) to also look for obstruction calls (ie using video).

2. If a player obstructs a player, you tally it up on a chart. 10 infractions per month and the player gets a one game suspension. Then the total number of obstruction infractions that player is 'allowed' to commit the following month gets decreased by 1. So next month he is 'allowed' only 9 infractions and so on...if the player then eventually hits 0 infractions allowed per month, implement an automatic suspension (1 game...2 game...3 game...etc) without pay.

3. Each team should also designate 2 forwards and 2 defensmen (prior to the start of the season) that if obstruction occurs on them during a game, that player commiting the act gets automatically suspended for 1 game and his number of infractions for the following month drops 2 from 10 to 8.

Sounds a bit complicated, but technology use in hockey hasn't even been talked about and that in my mind holds the key to solving the obstruction problem, while making it easier on the refs.

If the NHLPA is serious about helping the league, it's the players that must ride the first bump in the road.

 

I think for them to end obstruction, they need to nip the problem in the ass starting up top. If a coach wants you to obstruct the player is going to obstruct. The coach should be getting penalized imo. Not a horrible idea, but i think it needs some work

 

I really don't think these measures are necessary and are over the top. Your 3rd point is pretty absurd. Why should a player be suspended for an obstruction penalty which is merely holding up a guy, but not be suspended for fighting or highsticking. It is saying that a penalty that slows down the game is far worse then one that potentially injures another player.

 

Basically, the OP point is that if you want to get rid of it, you need to penalize it severely.

Is a 2 minute penalty severe enough when teams kill off 85% of PP's?

 

Yes, 2 mins is plenty.

 

2 full minutes.

 

People always complain about their superstars getting no room. This'll give them that room. Drastic measures are needed, the refs can't do it all, they'll collapse again.