Most penalties should be 1 minute minors

LakeLivin

Armchair Quarterback
Mar 11, 2016
4,642
13,328
North Carolina
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.

Agreed. And add embellishment to the one minute list as well. That way the refs would be more likely to actually call it.
 

Guffman

Registered User
Apr 7, 2016
6,357
8,533
I think penalties should be 0 minutes. Let the players do whatever the F they want. Just slash and hack away. Sucker punch opponents. No repercussions for fighting.

Hell, I’d watch this mayhem! How about you guys?
 

Asinine

yer opinion is wrong
Feb 28, 2013
1,912
3,680
Takes teams upwards of a minute to even get their pp setup a lot of the time.
 

Dr Jan Itor

Registered User
Dec 10, 2009
44,922
19,779
MinneSNOWta
Puck over glass should just be 1 minute.

Drawing blood for a high stick should just be an extra 1 minute (3 total).

Just those two probably.
 

gamer1035

Registered User
Feb 14, 2012
4,191
878
Add 1 minute penalties, but in exchange, make icing apply even when short handed
 

TheOtherOne

Registered User
Jan 2, 2010
8,265
5,257
I'm totally onboard with getting rid of the special icing rule while we're at it.

Every game, we see 1 hook called for every 3 that are ignored. 1 slash called for 3 ignored. Etc.

To put it in the simplest terms: Imagine 1 minute penalties and refs calling exactly twice as many. Power play time is exactly the same. Power play goals are the same. But the benefit is consistency. Refs don't have to let some calls go for the sake of "game management". They can just call them whenever they see them.

I think at first you'd see 3 or 4 penalties called for every 1 that was called under the old rules. But that would mean players would get a much clearer idea of exactly what is illegal, and adjust accordingly. So it would drop, and you would get more 5v5 time, but also less clutch and grab and trying to get away with whatever you can, because it would get called every time. I think this would make for more entertaining hockey overall.

Also, sorry for the 20% typo, I wrote it too fast for my own good.
 

McShogun99

Registered User
Aug 30, 2009
17,786
13,176
Edmonton
How about instead of a penalty the penalized team has one player without a stick trying to stop a 2 on 1. If the team doesn’t score then the penalized team get awarded with a short handed goal.

I also have other ideas that are just as good as a 1 minute penalty.
 

Ragamuffin Gunner

Lost in the Flood
Aug 15, 2008
34,551
6,734
Boston
I'd rather they make some penalties 2min full time. There are penalties that don't deserve a major but are worse than other minors. Puck over glass and illegal check to the head ae both 2min and releasable fi there si a goal. IMO if you hit a guy in the head, the other team can score as much as they want in those 2 mins.
 

Fig

Absolute Horse Shirt
Dec 15, 2014
12,955
8,449
How about instead of a penalty the penalized team has one player without a stick trying to stop a 2 on 1. If the team doesn’t score then the penalized team get awarded with a short handed goal.

I also have other ideas that are just as good as a 1 minute penalty.

They should all play with goalie sticks instead. :sarcasm:
 

PROGFAN66

Registered User
Feb 10, 2019
423
215
I really hope the NHL would to the following.

  • The two minute power should be served out as full.
  • The power play face off going into the next period should be in the offensive zone
  • Eliminate the clear rule for the penalty team and if they do it should be a penalty maybe that should be a one minute extra.
  • Honestly any plays dealing with cross checks to the back should be an automatic penalty.
  • The powers to be need to tell the refs to clean up the game during the playoffs.
 

summer tooth

Registered User
Aug 10, 2020
2,094
1,333
2 minutes is 3.3% of the game or 10% of a period. I like the 2 minutes but I'd rather see fewer penalties called for things like tapping a guy's hand with your stick blade as a slash and also accidental trips where your stick got caught underneath. too many people are diving off of trips, and also letting their stick fall out to get a slash call, etc.
 

Drake1588

UNATCO
Sponsor
Jul 2, 2002
30,083
2,431
Northern Virginia
Here's the thing: You propose two major changes, the first focused on shortening the length of time a team is shorthanded during a minor, and the second designed to encourage officials to call infractions more often.

History teaches us time and again that the officials start out calling everything after a crackdown campaign starts and then they slowly revert to letting it slide. Why? Are they simply dicks? Incompetent? Bias?!?! Is it Bettman? No, of course not to all of the above. The owners decide how the game is called and the owners might periodically grumble about calls, but they always pull back whenever there is a tightening of the way the officials call the game. The officials, the league office, and the commissioner are all ultimately just implementing the wishes of their boss(es), which are the NHL ownership cadres. Owners don't like it when the game is brought to a crawl by penalties.

So you have one change that will slowly fade away, while the other is a fixed, measurable, and comparatively immutable change. As the officials stop calling as many penalties, it's not like you will see the length of time that teams are on the PK decline in a graduated manner to match it. Any quick change again to two minutes would be an admission they screwed up, so it would be years before they could save face and go back to two minutes for a minor.

So you'll have fewer and fewer minors called, but they'll all still only be for one minute apiece. The result is that you'll get fewer goals. Some may be fine with that, but the league generally wants to encourage scoring.
 

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
84,977
137,335
Bojangles Parking Lot
I think it’s worth experimenting with this in the minors, to see how it impacts play.

Officials feeling pressure to overlook penalties is a huge problem and has been for a very long time. It’s a major reason that we got the Dead Puck Era and annual playoff scandals. At this point the issue has become public-facing with the Tim Peel incident. Something has to be done about it, and “get better refs” is not a valid solution.

There are legit questions about whether a short PP would actually increase scoring, but IMO there is compelling evidence that it would at least shift momentum and help open up the general pace of play.

More importantly, we don’t necessarily need certain PPs (less-serious holds, minor obstruction, DOG, etc) to lead directly to goals. We just need players to be disincentivized from those actions, and refs need to be empowered to hold the line against them. If this change would help that happen, I’m for at least experimenting with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheOtherOne

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
84,977
137,335
Bojangles Parking Lot
So you have one change that will slowly fade away, while the other is a fixed, measurable, and comparatively immutable change. As the officials stop calling as many penalties, it's not like you will see the length of time that teams are on the PK decline in a graduated manner to match it. Any quick change again to two minutes would be an admission they screwed up, so it would be years before they could save face and go back to two minutes for a minor.

So you'll have fewer and fewer minors called, but they'll all still only be for one minute apiece. The result is that you'll get fewer goals. Some may be fine with that, but the league generally wants to encourage scoring.

I think the argument here is something like this:

Currently the average NHL game includes something in the order of 3 power plays for 5 minutes of PP time per team. We can generalize by saying that means 3 minor penalties, one of which is cut short by the other team taking a penalty.

Now I’m going to totally make up some numbers here, but — let’s say this change is designed to create a 50% increase in the number of penalties called. Of the new total, let’s say 60% of the penalties being called are of the “not serious” variety which are now 1-minute minors. That would mean something like 5 penalties for 7 minutes of PP time on average. Bear in mind we are talking about an average over a large sample, so this number would start out higher before settling into the 5PP/7min norm.

Based on these averages, what we’d be seeing on a practical level would be the equivalent of one more PP per game for each team. That’s not a radical departure from the current norm… it would result in roughly one extra goal per 2 games played (or one per team every 4 games). That’s enough to move the needle on GAA and total scoring, but not by much.

The more important thing is that according to these assumed numbers, we’d be seeing something like 3 penalties per team for small hooks, holds, etc in addition to more serious fouls like high sticking. That rise in enforcement against the minor stuff (what we currently view as ticky-tack calls) would drive a general shift to a more fluid standard of play. It’s not the PP scoring that sells this idea — it’s the fact that players could count on going to the box for that little crosscheck or hook that officials are currently hesitant to call.

The permanent impacts of that kind of shift can be profound. Power plays are way down from 2006, because officials no longer hold as strict of a line against obstruction fouls as they did back then. But the general pace of play has remained much faster since the obstruction crackdown, because it led to a fundamental shift in how rosters were built. Even in the worst morass of a no-whistles playoff gladiator brawl, we never see anything approaching Dead Puck hockey. That traces back to a relatively brief period where the officials felt empowered to alter the course of a game based on a relatively trivial offense — that empowerment and resultant shift in strategic dynamics is what this change would be designed to not only induce temporarily, but institutionalize permanently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheOtherOne

DJJones

Registered User
Nov 18, 2014
10,205
3,513
Calgary
This would slow the game down so much. I'd prefer to take something from Lacrosse. Minor infractions are just a change in possession. Maybe the refs could blow a whistle and the team pretty much has to act like they are offside.
 

MartyOwns

thank you shero
Apr 1, 2007
24,126
17,822
how about the team that takes the penalty can choose to either kill a 5 on 4 for 3 minutes or a 5 on 3 for 1 minute. and one of the penalty killers wears a monkey mask. and if the monkey man scores a shorthanded goal, the goalie that gets scored on has to eat 5 hot dogs in 2 minutes or be sent to 'tickle town', which is where 14 midgets tickle the goalie in between the benches until the goalie can escape.
 

Rorschach

Who the f*** is Trevor Moore?
Oct 9, 2006
11,239
1,815
Los Angeles
It would work if we could get double the referees per game. If there are 1 minute penalties, then that means refs would have more discretion to call more penalties. You'll need more eyes to spot the ones that are less egregious in my opinion.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->