MillerTime 86
So Long Tyler SeQuin
Last night when Seidenberg interfered with Crombreen and Crombreen took a dive, it got me thinking about the state of embellishments in the NHL, how they are penalized, and whether the league is acting seriously enough to deter players from flopping and rid these ridiculous antics from the game.
On the play I had in mind, Seids definitely interfered with Crombreen, but the dive ultimately went uncalled resulting in only an interference penalty to Seidenberg and a Lightning power play. Clearly an oversight on the referee's parts there, but it got me thinking about embellishments on a larger scale.
People have varying theories on how embellishments should be handled ... Some want just the embellishment called, negating the penalty that led to the embellishment. But to drop one penalty in favor of another isn't a good idea, IMO, because two wrongs don't make a right.
Some want both penalties called, which then cancel each other out. Not a very strong deterrent to prevent diving since the worst that will happen is being caught and getting a matching 2 minute minor which results in a 4-on-4 situation.
Sometimes (but rarely called this way) there is embellishment without any other penalty, in which case the embellishment itself leads to a powerplay for the other team.
To truly rid this from the game, the embellishment needs to carry a higher weight with the consequence being a power play for the other team regardless of any minor penalty which may have led to the embellishment. It's how to do this, without negating the other infraction (if applicable), where the NHL seems to be stuck in the mud on this issue right now.
My suggestion is to make embellishments an automatic double-minor. That way, if there is another minor penalty like last night when Seidenberg interfered with Crombreen, the embellishment (if called correctly) still would have led to a 2-minute power play for Boston. And in the rare event that it's called on it's own, it stings that much more for the diver's team being down for 4 minutes instead of 2. It needs to carry a higher punishment than it does now to truly be addressed. Only then, when the entire team is put at a disadvantage because of it, will players think twice about flopping IMO.
A dive should carry more weight as it's not only an infraction, but also works to mock the officials and taint the image of the entire league
Curious to hear others' takes on this, but an embellishment-free NHL would certainly make the game better and preserve it's integrity. This isn't soccer. Yet.
On the play I had in mind, Seids definitely interfered with Crombreen, but the dive ultimately went uncalled resulting in only an interference penalty to Seidenberg and a Lightning power play. Clearly an oversight on the referee's parts there, but it got me thinking about embellishments on a larger scale.
People have varying theories on how embellishments should be handled ... Some want just the embellishment called, negating the penalty that led to the embellishment. But to drop one penalty in favor of another isn't a good idea, IMO, because two wrongs don't make a right.
Some want both penalties called, which then cancel each other out. Not a very strong deterrent to prevent diving since the worst that will happen is being caught and getting a matching 2 minute minor which results in a 4-on-4 situation.
Sometimes (but rarely called this way) there is embellishment without any other penalty, in which case the embellishment itself leads to a powerplay for the other team.
To truly rid this from the game, the embellishment needs to carry a higher weight with the consequence being a power play for the other team regardless of any minor penalty which may have led to the embellishment. It's how to do this, without negating the other infraction (if applicable), where the NHL seems to be stuck in the mud on this issue right now.
My suggestion is to make embellishments an automatic double-minor. That way, if there is another minor penalty like last night when Seidenberg interfered with Crombreen, the embellishment (if called correctly) still would have led to a 2-minute power play for Boston. And in the rare event that it's called on it's own, it stings that much more for the diver's team being down for 4 minutes instead of 2. It needs to carry a higher punishment than it does now to truly be addressed. Only then, when the entire team is put at a disadvantage because of it, will players think twice about flopping IMO.
A dive should carry more weight as it's not only an infraction, but also works to mock the officials and taint the image of the entire league
Curious to hear others' takes on this, but an embellishment-free NHL would certainly make the game better and preserve it's integrity. This isn't soccer. Yet.
