Bring Back Foot in Crease Rule?

[Sojourn]

Why is it stupid? Everyone complains about the lack of consistency the NHL displays. With such a black and white rule and video reviews then most calls would be undisputable.

It wasn't a good rule.

The fact that it would make some goaltender interference reviews less controversial doesn't make it a good rule. You would legitimately see goals called back because a player has a toe in the paint, and it wouldn't matter even a little bit if he impacted the goaltender's ability to make the save at all. Take everything people hate about reviewing an off-side play, and magnify it.

I want goaltenders to be safe in the crease. I'm someone who feels they need to be able to do their job to the best of their ability and protecting them is important because they are vulnerable. All that padding is meant to stop pucks. It isn't designed to help when they get run over. That being said, there is no reason to call back a goal just because a player's skate slid through the blue paint at an inopportune time, and it will happen.

 

[Goalie guy]

No

 

[Toonces]

I'm not sure the NHL wants to go back to the circus that was the 1999 Stanley Cup playoffs. Most people only seem to remember the Hull goal, and for good reason, but those entire playoffs were a parade of review after review and it was embarrassing.

 

[Oddbob]

A thread like this should be banned! Ugly Ugly Idea!

 

[ThreeLeftSkates]

Let’s also bring back the tie and the two line pass while we’re at it.

Regular or bow type?

 

[blood gin]

Can you imagine all the goals that would be waived off for a toe in the crease? Like before. I mean we used to have games where as many as three goals were waived off. Good solid no interference goals...just because of a toe in the crease. Moronic

 

[Kreegz2]

I'm not sure the NHL wants to go back to the circus that was the 1999 Stanley Cup playoffs. Most people only seem to remember the Hull goal, and for good reason, but those entire playoffs were a parade of review after review and it was embarrassing.

I believe in '98 the Bruins had a game 6 series clinching goal by PJ Axelsson disallowed to the rule, despite him being several feet away from the goalie at the time of the infraction. They ended up losing the series. It was just a terrible rule and should never, ever be considered for reinstatement.

 

[Brunomics]

If you didn't live it then you don't know how awful a rule it is.

 

[ijuka]

Can you imagine all the goals that would be waived off for a toe in the crease? Like before. I mean we used to have games where as many as three goals were waived off. Good solid no interference goals...just because of a toe in the crease. Moronic

Yes, I agree. But the thing there is, there's nothing to determine or evaluate. It's a black/white decision, a brainless one where no subjectivity comes into play. That's important for making fair, consistent decisions. We all would prefer to have better rules, but we have to understand the refs can't handle the responsibility and as such, rules like these where there's no room for speculation are the way to go.

 

[blood gin]

Yes, I agree. But the thing there is, there's nothing to determine or evaluate. It's a black/white decision, a brainless one where no subjectivity comes into play. That's important for making fair, consistent decisions. We all would prefer to have better rules, but we have to understand the refs can't handle the responsibility and as such, rules like these where there's no room for speculation are the way to go.

I understand what you're saying, but I think the current system is far more preferable to one where players are gun shy about going near a crease. it brings down scoring and the quality of hockey in general

There is no issue right now with goalies getting run

 

[tarheelhockey]

I'm too young to remember the rule being in place,

Count yourself lucky for that. Imagine if EVERY SINGLE playoff goal was followed by the announcer saying "looks like he may have been just a bit offside on that one, we'll need to take a look". I mean EVERY SINGLE goal. Overtime game 7, you're not even sure if you want to celebrate because they're showing a ref skating over to the penalty box. That's the level of hell that we went through with the crease rule.

As a general principle, hockey never has (and never will) work particularly well with black-and-white rules or video replay. Even seemingly simple rules like high sticking will go haywire when a guy lifts the opponent's stick into his own face, and black-and-white calls like the trapezoid and delay of game become disproportionate as soon as they result in goals against. Adding video review to those calls results in something like the current offside-review travesty, where irrelevant details determine game outcomes.

The game is chaotic by nature and as much as people complain about the refs, it's largely because everything is over-replayed on TV/jumbotrons and online. Things that were once viewed as incidental contact are now blown up into "WAS THAT A SLEWFOOT?????" levels of baseless outrage. When it's all viewed in real time with no replay (think about attending a game in an arena without a replay board), 90% of this stuff is really not that controversial and people get over it in a hurry as the game continues. It's the attempt to double-down and triple-down on video replay as a "solution" that gets this game in so much trouble, as was the case with the crease rule. Apparently the hockey world still hasn't learned the lesson after 20 years.

 

[McRpro]

Toe in the crease rule????

Boo this man!!!

 

[BigKing]

Burn this thread with fire

 

[KinCornKarn]

Yes. I liked the glow puck and the robots too.

 

[NextYear67]

Lol great idea. Not

 

[VainGretzky]

Op should get a infraction for just suggesting this

 

[triggrman]

Is this really a thread?

 

[isles55]

Yes. Because McGinn's goal shouldn't count for some reason.

 

[Jetsfan79]

I agree with Ray Ferraro - just adopt the international rule. Blow the play dead if theres a crease violation. At the very least they should test it in the AHL.

 

[Machinehead]

Foot in the crease is a bad rule.

I'm in favor of a rule similar to the six-yard box in soccer, where any contact with the goalie inside the crease is the offensive player's responsibility.

But just standing the the crease not touching the goalie? No.

 

[Chuck Downie]

Ask Brett Hull

 

[Whalers Fan]

No.

No.

No, god no, no. NO.

My thoughts exactly. That rule needed to die, and should never spoken of again.

 

[HandshakeLineRespect]

Jesus some on the current threads are absurd right now.

 

[ShelbyZ]

Only if Gary Thorne and Bill Clement are calling the games.

 

[Tom Polakis]

Having endured a lot of games in person in that 1999 season, all I remember about it was endless delays in nearly every game for "the goal is under review." Whether it decided games (or even Cups) wasn't as annoying as sucking the life out of games for periods lasting much longer than TV timeouts do.