Most penalties should be 1 minute minors

[TheOtherOne]

I know you're all going to hate this because of tradition and all. But thought I'd throw it out there anyway.

I would suggest making most common penalties be 1 minute minors instead of 2 minutes.

That's the critical part of my suggestion. You could also add some minor details, like the ref can use discretion to make it 2 minutes if it looked intentional, or egregious, but not quite bad enough for a major. Or you could make certain penalties 2 minutes by default if they are more dangerous or more important. But these details are less important.

Background: Roughly speaking, 5 penalties = 1 goal. There are about 4 penalties (8 minutes) per team per game. So about a quarter of every game is played 5v4. A single minor penalty takes 20% of a period.

I think there always seems to be a conversation going around about reffing inconsistency. You often see a guy hacking away at an opponent and then on the next shift the opposing team gets penalized for the same thing. I think that happens because those plays happen constantly. And I think they happen constantly because the refs let them go. It's a vicious cycle.

I think a good way to break this cycle is to allow refs to make MORE calls without having to worry about drastically affecting the game. In a tight 1-goal game, a ref sees interference, it's technically against the rules but not super egregious, he can just call it. Instead of 20% chance at a goal it's more like 10%. Instead of 2 minutes it only kills 1 minute. You can penalize every borderline play without having to worry about 1 single blown call drastically affecting the outcome.

Really the best way to think about it is averaging things out. It makes a single call less important, which allows a ref to make more calls overall, which gives players a clearer view of what is legal and not. Makes everything more black and white.

Anyone on board?

Click to read more...

 

[Roboturner913]

I don't hate it.

 

[Kane One]

I’d want to see the data on how long it takes into a PP to score.

My guess would be more goals are scored after the first minute of the PP, therefore this would be making PPs useless and teams taking more penalties.

 

[Maelmoor]

Something "minor" such as an interference or hooking, can prevent the opponent from scoring. If the penalty just means a minute of pp, it would most certainly encourage more destructive behaviour, is that really what we want?

 

[BlueOil]

this makes penalties less costly and increases the refs discretionary scope, it's gonna be a no from me dawg

more calls and less box time for the infractions means the refs are even more involved in the game than before and fans are going to disagree with the calls even more

i suppose if you're trying to amplify the problem to build a critical mass to make the nhl deal with it, this would be one way, but why would they institute it?

 

[HugeInTheShire]

Not a fan of a 1 minute penalty at all, all the team has to do is clear the zone twice and it'd be basically over. If you go 1 minute but don't allow icing the puck, that'd generate more goals.

Personally I've always liked the idea of any goal erasing a PP, AKA a short handed goal negates the other teams PP

 

[viceroy]

Okie dokie. But remove the no icing called during PK then. Also make it a full minute despite a goal.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

The objective of penalties is a deterrent to prevent a team from breaking the rules. Making the punishment less severe just encourages teams to push the boundaries.

If the "objective" of this is so refs will simply call more penalties, then the issue is with the referees and not the current powerplay system. Fix the brutal officiating instead of fixing something that isn't broken.

 

[iamjs]

The concept of the penalty is basically lost if you do a 60 second penalty. Two clears and you're basically even. Back to back minors would be no different than your standard penalty now. If anything, I think it would cause games to become dirtier because of the lack of respect to the now-lesser penalty. You want to know how to lessen the percentage of time played on 5v4 (or less)? Have some discipline and stop taking stupid penalties.

You're also giving the beneficiary of the power play about 45 seconds to score once you consider the time to set up in the zone. How is that fair who might be down a player?

I think a good way to break this cycle is to allow refs to make MORE calls

or they can just make more calls based on what they see and not because the penalty is now "only one minute."

There are things in the game that may need changed. The length of the penalty is not one of them. In fact, I say go back to the mid 50s and let the player sit in the box until the penalty expires.

 

[iamjs]

Okie dokie. But remove the no icing called during PK then. Also make it a full minute despite a goal.

So you want the guilty team to be permitted to ice? You sure?

 

[Pierre Dagenais]

You want the refs to make more calls? Have you given any thought to what the impact would be on the flow of the game?

 

[JustaFinnishGuy]

Something "minor" such as an interference or hooking, can prevent the opponent from scoring. If the penalty just means a minute of pp, it would most certainly encourage more destructive behaviour, is that really what we want?

The game already supports and downright encourages breaking the rules in the playoffs and sometimes in the regular season. It's asinine that the refs say it's "letting the boys play" when literally that's not what's happening when a dude is on a breakaway and he gets taken down like he's in WWE only to result in the defensive team getting all the momentum going the other way.

There are too many penalties missed, I f***ing want penalties to be called, end of.
This change wouldn't move that needle, and sorry for ranting kind of beside the point, but the NHL is not a league that is strictly called, it's the total opposite.
I want the refs to operate on less power, and them to be forced to call a penalty as they see it, never giving the benefit of the doubt. Who cares if the same team has had 3 penalties in a row if a Raffi Torres- type comes to headhunt out of nowhere?

Overall I'd give this proposal a pass, it won't get applied and it wouldn't really fix anything, while possibly creating more problems on officiating.

 

[Cup or Bust]

The alternative is to just simply call the rules the way they are defined in the rule book regardless of what the game situation is whether it is a regular season or playoff game and force the players to change their behavior which is what happened after the 04-05 missed season and they decided to stop the clutching and grabbing, hooking and holding. If the argument is that it is not possible and there will still be too many penalties that means there is something wrong with the rules if it is not possible to follow the rules and still have a good game of hockey.

 

[viceroy]

So you want the guilty team to be permitted to ice? You sure?

No. I may have been unclear but I was trying to explain that at present, the "guilty" team, i.e. the team on the PK is allowed to ice the puck with no icing call. I'm saying if you're going to shorten their penalty to just 1 minute then call icing on them. Clear?

 

[hoglund]

I know you're all going to hate this because of tradition and all. But thought I'd throw it out there anyway.

I would suggest making most common penalties be 1 minute minors instead of 2 minutes.

That's the critical part of my suggestion. You could also add some minor details, like the ref can use discretion to make it 2 minutes if it looked intentional, or egregious, but not quite bad enough for a major. Or you could make certain penalties 2 minutes by default if they are more dangerous or more important. But these details are less important.

Background: Roughly speaking, 5 penalties = 1 goal. There are about 4 penalties (8 minutes) per team per game. So about a quarter of every game is played 5v4. A single minor penalty takes 20% of a period.

I think there always seems to be a conversation going around about reffing inconsistency. You often see a guy hacking away at an opponent and then on the next shift the opposing team gets penalized for the same thing. I think that happens because those plays happen constantly. And I think they happen constantly because the refs let them go. It's a vicious cycle.

I think a good way to break this cycle is to allow refs to make MORE calls without having to worry about drastically affecting the game. In a tight 1-goal game, a ref sees interference, it's technically against the rules but not super egregious, he can just call it. Instead of 20% chance at a goal it's more like 10%. Instead of 2 minutes it only kills 1 minute. You can penalize every borderline play without having to worry about 1 single blown call drastically affecting the outcome.

Really the best way to think about it is averaging things out. It makes a single call less important, which allows a ref to make more calls overall, which gives players a clearer view of what is legal and not. Makes everything more black and white.

Anyone on board?

No. I may have been unclear but I was trying to explain that at present, the "guilty" team, i.e. the team on the PK is allowed to ice the puck with no icing call. I'm saying if you're going to shorten their penalty to just 1 minute then call icing on them. Clear?

It takes most teams the better of a minute to just set up than score, which makes penalties useless and probably lead to more unnecessary violence in the game.

 

[OppositeLocK]

I just want more fair and accurate reffing.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

I know you're all going to hate this because of tradition and all. But thought I'd throw it out there anyway.

I would suggest making most common penalties be 1 minute minors instead of 2 minutes.

That's the critical part of my suggestion. You could also add some minor details, like the ref can use discretion to make it 2 minutes if it looked intentional, or egregious, but not quite bad enough for a major. Or you could make certain penalties 2 minutes by default if they are more dangerous or more important. But these details are less important.

Background: Roughly speaking, 5 penalties = 1 goal. There are about 4 penalties (8 minutes) per team per game. So about a quarter of every game is played 5v4. A single minor penalty takes 20% of a period.

I think there always seems to be a conversation going around about reffing inconsistency. You often see a guy hacking away at an opponent and then on the next shift the opposing team gets penalized for the same thing. I think that happens because those plays happen constantly. And I think they happen constantly because the refs let them go. It's a vicious cycle.

I think a good way to break this cycle is to allow refs to make MORE calls without having to worry about drastically affecting the game. In a tight 1-goal game, a ref sees interference, it's technically against the rules but not super egregious, he can just call it. Instead of 20% chance at a goal it's more like 10%. Instead of 2 minutes it only kills 1 minute. You can penalize every borderline play without having to worry about 1 single blown call drastically affecting the outcome.

Really the best way to think about it is averaging things out. It makes a single call less important, which allows a ref to make more calls overall, which gives players a clearer view of what is legal and not. Makes everything more black and white.

Anyone on board?

As a fellow Wings fan, I'm guessing this is to save us the embarrassment of having to watch the Wings on the PP for a full 2 minutes?

 

[jetsforever]

No need to change it IMO

 

[Soundgarden]

This just makes being a fan of a team with a brutal PP even worse.

Lose face-off, fail to get into the zone, eventually get set up, pass the puck 3-25 times, and by the time you shoot the puck once the guy has been back for thirty seconds. Bleh.

 

[66871]

No but one minute for puck over the glass or too many men on the ice would be an improvement. There no need to penalize either of these at two minutes.

 

[viceroy]

It takes most teams the better of a minute to just set up than score, which makes penalties useless and probably lead to more unnecessary violence in the game.

Could be. Don't really care either way, I'm happy with 2 minutes.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

A single minor penalty takes 20% of a period.

I'm not the smartest guy, but how does a two-minute penalty take 20% of a twenty-minute period?

 

[Zach716]

Powerplay = goals = entertainment = more fans = $$$

 

[bellringer77]

Don’t like it. I bet it would largely decrease scoring for two main reasons.

1.) Less PP time (obviously)
2.) Major increase in trips,hooking,interference,which just puts more pressure on the refs to make more correct calls.

you could say well their would be more power plays. Yeah but then we are just spinning in circles and breaking the flow of the game

 

[tenken00]

I once considered the idea of making penalties like spot fouls in soccer/football. You get a penalty, they get to put the puck exactly where you did it and the opposing team can shoot it from there or pass it to a teammate near by.