FLYLine27*
BUCH
A lashing in the locker room after the game...that's' the only way to solve late game penalties.
Greatest game on earth yet some want to continue to bastardize it with gimmicky rules......
You're right, let's go back to the good old days and remove the forward pass.
Sure if the other team is an idiot that accepts the penalty.
There will be some sort of payback for Emelin next game.
The problem is that does nothing to help the team that was negatively affected by the penalty, and gives an advantage to an opposing team.
Let's just say an Eastern Conference team is on a West Coast trip and is playing the Kings one day and then the Ducks the next day. They take an egregious penalty against the Kings at the end of OT so that it goes to shootout. If you're then going to penalize the Eastern Conference team for the next game, you're then giving a power play to the Ducks to make up for a penalty against the Kings. In reality, you're handicapping the Kings by allowing the EC team to get away with the penalty in the previous game and then giving a rival, the Ducks, an advantage in their following game.
I have this thought every single one goal game I watch at the end.
If a team has a penalty called on them with less that 2 minutes remaining, then the game doesn't stop until they kill that penalty.
It is a very logical solution. Right now, you see teams breaking the rules because they know there isn't a large consequence for stopping a good scoring chance in the last 30-60 seconds of a game. They're odds of winning are better if they take a penalty, get a line change, get some rest, and get their 50/50 chance at regaining puck possession off the face off. If breaking the rules of a game give a benefit in any situation, then the rules are flawed, IMO.
At least it isn't like the end of basketball games though, where every losing team ever has a clearly better chance at a comeback through fouling their butts off. It ruins so many basketball games.
You still have to deal with the We-don't-want-to-affect-the-outcome-of-the-game mentality that some referees have. I think the standard to get something called would end up being unreasonably high. It's still better than nothing, though..
lol.......... thanks for proving my point. This may be in the top 10 of all-time worst replies in terms of the context of what is being talked about.
LOL
How did I prove your point? You made a post about not bastardizing the game with rule changes and at the time, that was a major rule change and the game wouldn't be the way it is today without it. Should we bring back the two line pass? Is that recent enough for you? Rule changes are part of sports, every sport in fact. Evolve or die.
This is laughable.
If you think fundamental rule changes like the forward pass and two line passes in any shape, way or form are like carrying a penalty that occurred in a game against Team A on a Monday night in Columbus over to the next game a team plays against Team B on a Thursday night in Vancouver
OR
extending the length of a game to accommodate never ending penalties so the entire 2 minute time frame NEEDS to be completed (and a game conceivably NEVER ending) then you'll have to argue with someone else cuz to me they are so completely different I consider it a waste of time to even think about them or draw a comparison.
Good luck.....
btw - I've got zero problem with rule changes that make sense or are smart to do......
But a PP goal would lead to a whistle and end the game if time had already expired, right? I think teams' conversion rates suggest that games, on average, would be extended less than, say, a 20 minute OT period. But even in the most extreme circumstances where "endless penalties" somehow don't yield 5-on-3 goals for upwards of 20 minutes, that would probably still be some good/exciting hockey to watch at least, and if the defending team extends their chances that long, well all the power to them for using their strengths and gamesmanship to keep giving themselves a chance. Maybe score would have to be factored in to whether it they resort to it, I dunno. Just brainstorming.
I think the solution is simple.
If a team takes a penalty with less than 2 mins left in the game. The full penalty must be served.
If that mean extending the game a minute and a half or so, so be it. However, a team can choose to decline a PP if they are up to avoid having teams that are down trying to extend the game.
Also, any double minors or non fighting 5 min majors with less than 2 mins left would automatically result in a penalty shot from any player the coach chooses.
Anything is possible. I suggest that the NHL would literally laugh the suggestion of continuing games past regulation time just cuz someone got a penalty right out of the boardroom.
There are so many potential issues it is mind boggling.
Here's just another one. What's the point of extending a game just cuz someone got a penalty with one minute left if the score is 6 -1?
Nothing wrong with brainstorming but let's face facts, this suggestion is so absurd it doesn't really merit much more discussion.
Then you get the posters saying the penalty should carry over to the next game?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!??!?!!? It's inane.
For everyone who thinks extending the game or granting automatic penalty shots is a good idea, I can't wait for your favorite team to shoot the puck out of play from their defensive zone or have a face-off violation that allows the other team to tie or take the lead.
Regarding the whole "brawl" scenario in terms of penalties at the end of game, keep in mind the following:
1. Given the direction the league/hockey is going, there are basically no more brawls
2. If a brawl does happen, more than likely it will be in a lopsided game. Why do we want to extend a lopsided game?
3. Carrying over penalties to the following game against a completely different team makes no sense. The team that drew those penalties gets nothing out of this, and some random team who happens to be next on the schedule does.
And if another penalty occurs before that penalty expires then that full penalty must be served too....
The game might literally NEVER end.
I already mentioned that the score might have to be factored in. Maybe just in 1 goal/tied games penalties have to be served in full in the last 2 minutes. Don't have to do the same with 5 minute calls for the most part, because I believe most have built-in mechanisms for leading to supplementary discipline if egregious in some way. But we're not actually writing the rules, just imagining different ones.
Carrying over to the next game, against an unrelated opponent, is ridiculous, I agree.