Obscure NHL rules?

[abo9]

Long story short: I thought that there was a rule forbidding goalies to go on their knees before Patrick Roy popularized the butterfly style, but I stumbled upon an old rule that stated that goalies had to serve their own penalties.

While searching, I also learned that if a team opted for an extra attacker (by pulling the goalie) in OT, they would be awarded a regulation loss in the scenario that the opposing team scored an empty netter.

What are some other obscure NHL rules that most people are not aware of?

Click to read more...

 

[JT Kreider]

That Scott Stevens was somehow awarded to the Devils from the Blues as compensation for Brendan Shanahan

 

[Hockey Outsider]

That rule existed during the NHL's inaugural season (1917-18). Goalies were assessed a minor penalty for making a save while not standing upright. Benedict routinely went down to his knees to make saves, and he was nicknamed "Praying Benny". He'd pretend to slip in order to avoid being assessed a penalty. The rule was changed either during or right after that season (it's unclear when).

As I mentioned recently in another thread, Benedict is probably one of the three most historically influential goalies in NHL history (the other two are Jacques Plante and Patrick Roy).

 

[Brodeur]

One that I like to point out to friends when we attend games is that an offensive zone draw can be moved to the neutral zone if the attacking defensemen were to join a post-whistle scrum. To a non-hockey fan, it can be a strange visual to see a scrum happen around the net and then the two attacking D are just hanging out by the blue line instead of joining in. I want to say at some point, I overheard a fan who was unaware of the rule assume that the defensemen were simply too scared to get in a fight.

Rule 76.2, paragraph 11
Following a stoppage of play, should one or both defensemen who are the point players or any player coming from the bench of the attacking team, enter into the attacking zone beyond the outer edge of the end zone face-off circle during an altercation, gathering or “scrum,” the ensuing face-off shall take place in the neutral zone near the blue line of the defending team. This rule also applies when an icing, an intentional off-side, or a high-sticking the puck violation (by the team of greater numerical strength of its opponent) has occurred, and the ensuing face-off is to be in the offending team’s defending zone. Should any of the non-offending players enter into the attacking zone beyond the outer edge of the end zone face-off circle during an altercation, gathering or “scrum,” the ensuing face-off shall take place in the neutral zone near the blue line of the defending team

 

[JMCx4]

That Scott Stevens was somehow awarded to the Devils from the Blues as compensation for Brendan Shanahan

That wasn't a rule, that was a ruling. And a punishment.

 

[CaptBrannigan]

I always thought hand passes being legal in the defensive zone was interesting. It’s more accurate to say that they’re not illegal. The point of the rule isn’t to allow hand passes, it’s to disallow pressured teams from getting a cheap whistle by committing a hand pass.

 

[abo9]

That rule existed during the NHL's inaugural season (1917-18). Goalies were assessed a minor penalty for making a save while not standing upright. Benedict routinely went down to his knees to make saves, and he was nicknamed "Praying Benny". He'd pretend to slip in order to avoid being assessed a penalty. The rule was changed either during or right after that season (it's unclear when).

As I mentioned recently in another thread, Benedict is probably one of the three most historically influential goalies in NHL history (the other two are Jacques Plante and Patrick Roy).

For some odd reason I thought it was a rule that was abolished in the 70's or something, so I was really surprised to learn it was abolished way earlier, and that goalies refrained from going down mostly for safery reasons! (and that goalies who's go down were labelled as "floppers", how have times changed!)

One that I like to point out to friends when we attend games is that an offensive zone draw can be moved to the neutral zone if the attacking defensemen were to join a post-whistle scrum. To a non-hockey fan, it can be a strange visual to see a scrum happen around the net and then the two attacking D are just hanging out by the blue line instead of joining in. I want to say at some point, I overheard a fan who was unaware of the rule assume that the defensemen were simply too scared to get in a fight.

I was actually unaware of that one too! I would hope that NHL coaches know about it, but I wonder if there were instances were this scenario happened and they did not invoke it

 

[JT Kreider]

The earliest version of the penalty shot wasnt what is today with picking up the puck at center ice and skating in. They had to shoot the puck from like 30 feet from the goalie and were allowed like 5 feets worth of momentum. And the full 2 minute of a penalty was served no matter how many goals were scored.

 

[Jannik Hansen]

One that I like to point out to friends when we attend games is that an offensive zone draw can be moved to the neutral zone if the attacking defensemen were to join a post-whistle scrum. To a non-hockey fan, it can be a strange visual to see a scrum happen around the net and then the two attacking D are just hanging out by the blue line instead of joining in. I want to say at some point, I overheard a fan who was unaware of the rule assume that the defensemen were simply too scared to get in a fight.

That must be where that famous GIF of Campbell hugging the other D came from.

 

[Golden_Jet]

That rule existed during the NHL's inaugural season (1917-18). Goalies were assessed a minor penalty for making a save while not standing upright. Benedict routinely went down to his knees to make saves, and he was nicknamed "Praying Benny". He'd pretend to slip in order to avoid being assessed a penalty. The rule was changed either during or right after that season (it's unclear when).

As I mentioned recently in another thread, Benedict is probably one of the three most historically influential goalies in NHL history (the other two are Jacques Plante and Patrick Roy).

Tony Esposito always went down

 

[Golden_Jet]

In the early years, there was no forward pass.

 

[abo9]

In the early years, there was no forward pass.

What do you mean? Like, you could not pass in front of you ever?

That would be crazy, and so different than today's hockey!

 

[Brodeur]

That Scott Stevens was somehow awarded to the Devils from the Blues as compensation for Brendan Shanahan

With things being slow, that was something that I went back to do some reading on since it happened before my time as a fan. It was fascinating to learn how the CBA rules were different before 1995 (and some of the info on Wikipedia is incorrect):

- I had assumed Shanahan was a Group II RFA since that's what he would have been post-1995. Instead there was a designation called Group I free agents. The peculiar thing was that it was for players who were under 24 and had less than 5 years pro experience. The really interesting caveat was that the original team did not have the right to match. Learning that answered my question why the Devils didn't retain Shanahan.

- Unlike Group II free agents (like Stevens when he signed with St. Louis from Washington), there was no predetermined scale of draft pick compensation like we're accustomed to seeing. Instead there was a process called equalization where the two teams had a short window (three business days?) to agree to a trade.

- If the two teams could not agree to a deal, then an independent arbitrator would be brought in and both teams would present their offer/request. The arbitrator would then side with one of the two teams.

- Shanahan was the first "big" Group I free agent to go through this process. Up to that point, teams were a little worried about potentially leaving their fate in the hands of an arbitrator.

- St. Louis offered Rod Brind'Amour, Curtis Joseph, and a couple draft picks while New Jersey requested Stevens. The two sides couldn't agree, so it went before an arbitrator. Recently on Cam Janssen's podcast, Lou Lamoriello mentioned that as part of the process the Devils were allowed access to all the physicals of the Blues players. CuJo had ended the previous season on IR and was still recuperating, so Lou framed the argument that St. Louis was trying to dump an injured player. The arbitrator eventually ruled in favor of the Devils. From what I read, many other GMs were shocked and the ruling was a wet blanket on the Group I market through 1995 since teams didn't want to risk losing an established All-Star for a potential one.

----------------

Other Group I free agents:

- Right after the Stevens ruling, Devils forward Troy Crowder signed with Detroit. Crowder surprised many by holding his own against Bob Probert who was considered the top enforcer in the league. New Jersey swung for the fences again and requested Probert as compensation whereas Detroit offered Dave Barr and Randy McKay. The same arbitrator ruled in favor of Detroit. Crowder would have a back injury which would limit his time in Detroit while McKay won a pair of Cups in New Jersey.

- The Rangers acquired Adam Graves via Group I free agency.

- St. Louis dipped their toes back in Group I free agency by signing Petr Nedved from Vancouver. This one was different than the other since it happened as the season was in progress. St. Louis offered Craig Janney and a 2nd round pick. Vancouver requested Brendan Shanahan. So for at least one game, the Blues had an awkward situation where Janney and Shanahan were playing knowing that one of them was on the cusp of being moved.

The arbitrator ruled for St. Louis but Janney refused to report to Vancouver. With the playoffs looming, Vancouver perhaps didn't have the time to wait out Janney like New Jersey had done when Scott Stevens initially refused to go to the Devils. So instead Vancouver technically traded Janney back to St. Louis for Jeff Brown, Bret Hedican, and Nathan Lafayette.

 

[Golden_Jet]

What do you mean? Like, you could not pass in front of you ever?

That would be crazy, and so different than today's hockey!

Oops, it was only in the offensive zone , no forward pass
Was changed in 1929/30 season

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

I wonder if there were instances were this scenario happened and they did not invoke it

They do not have to invoke it. It's the refs' job...

 

[abo9]

They do not have to invoke it. It's the refs' job...

Fair point, I guess since I didn't know about this rule I would expect the situation to be pretty rare (probably since players know) and therefore I'd think that ref's would not really implement it everytime. It's their job, but if it happens once every ten years, they might not remember it on the fly

 

[Puckclektr]

You can score a goal without the puck going in the net.

 

[LeafsNation75]

Do they still have that rule where you can get a 2:00 penalty if your visor is not on properly? On opening night of the 2017-18 season Leo Komarov was given a penalty because of that.

 

[abo9]

You can score a goal without the puck going in the net.

Are you referring to the rule when a player throws his stick while there's a breakaway on an empty net? / I think there's also a rule for that if a goalie voluntarily dislodges the net on a breakaway

Do they still have that rule where you can get a 2:00 penalty if your visor is not on properly? On opening night of the 2017-18 season Leo Komarov was given a penalty because of that.

You'd think teams and equipment managers would not risk those penalties lol. I think in terms of equipment penalties one of those is to have your shirt properly attached or something? I've heard of the "Ovy tinted visor" rule but never of that one! Good one! Leafs fans must have been pissed lol (any fans would have been pissed really)

 

[JT Kreider]

Are you referring to the rule when a player throws his stick while there's a breakaway on an empty net? / I think there's also a rule for that if a goalie voluntarily dislodges the net on a breakaway

Or any penalty impeding a breakaway on an empty net that would be a penalty shot is an automatic goal

 

[abo9]

Or any penalty impeding a breakaway on an empty net that would be a penalty shot is an automatic goal

Gotcha. I was aware of that "throw the stick" one because as a kid, I figured "why not throw my stick" to potentially avoid a goal, but yeah I'll have to look to the other infractions!

I mean, some obscure rules are there exactly because some people thought of ways of circumventing some of the obvious rules!

 

[Golden_Jet]

Do they still have that rule where you can get a 2:00 penalty if your visor is not on properly? On opening night of the 2017-18 season Leo Komarov was given a penalty because of that.

I remember that, to be fair I guess, he wore it above his eyes, he might of got one in pre-season, or he was warned.

I wonder if that was the same year, you couldn't tuck in your jersey, so as to cover, either the RBK or CCM logo.

 

[LeafsNation75]

I remember that, to be fair I guess, he wore it above his eyes, he might of got one in pre-season, or he was warned.

I wonder if that was the same year, you couldn't tuck in your jersey, so as to cover, either the RBK or CCM logo.

One of the refs in that game was Tim Peel who called Komarov for the penalty and he seems to be the most hated ref on here.

 

[danpantz]

I remember that, to be fair I guess, he wore it above his eyes, he might of got one in pre-season, or he was warned.

I wonder if that was the same year, you couldn't tuck in your jersey, so as to cover, either the RBK or CCM logo.

I believe he got warned during warm-ups. Looking at the visor the thing looks like it was sticking straight out. They probably told him to lower it during warm-ups and he didn't.

 

[canadianmagpie]

Roger Neilson was awesome at finding loopholes in rules that the NHL quickly reacted to.