Raising the Height of the Glass

[Belzebob]

i find that when I raise the height of the glass I can barely taste the rum...….so......

no

 

[Drake1588]

I think the OP's argument is clear enough. He or she would like to see the height of the glass raised to decrease incidents of puck over the glass. Raising the height of the glass would make it easier for a defender to laze the puck off the glass and out of the zone.

I suppose the question that I have in response is simply this: Why would we want to make it easier for defenders to clear the zone? Why would we want to incentivize more low-pressure zone clearances? The league is interested in maintaining or raising the level of offense, not introducing new changes to reduce scoring. This would be calculated to reduce the effectiveness of dump and chase, high-intensity, forechecking hockey.

I am not a fan of the idea. Under the threat of a penalty, defenders today need to calculate in a split second whether or not to attempt to clear the puck off the glass, while under pressure. I like this effect.

 

[Machinehead]

Conversely...

All in favour say "Aye!"

Me avoiding adult responsibilities.

 

[Treb]

Is the netting any better?

Reflections off the glass makes some spot blind to the action for some seats, so making it higher just make those blind spot bigger for the audience.

 

[easton117]

Delay of game penalties happen now only once every 4 or 5 games, and even you said it's not "exactly a pressing issue."

So why not just leave it at that...

Clearly you miss a lot of Bruins games.

It’s not an if but a when with that group

 

[Kamiccolo]

This has been on my mind for some time now. Can somebody give me reasons as to why raising the height of the glass is never discussed? When I think about it, there seem to be a few benefits: it cuts down on whistles, it makes delay of game penalties less prevalent, and it can also block more pucks from potentially hitting fans who aren't paying attention.

Is there a safety concern that I'm missing? To me, this seems like a change that can yield some positive outcomes, even if it isn't exactly a pressing issue.

Nikita Zatsev likes this post.

 

[tony d]

When it comes to safety I always hope for better measures to keep things safe for the fans at the game.

 

[Trinstin]

Doesn't it cost money? There. Reason why it won't happen.

 

[razor8]

When it comes to safety I always hope for better measures to keep things safe for the fans at the game.

Then they should build a dome around the ice.

 

[frisco]

I'd like to see higher glass at the ends of each rink. Too many stoppages for pucks into the netting especially on deflected shots. Also, maybe an incline (leans toward ice surface at say a 45 degree angle) on the top three feet or so pucks don't run up the glass and hit netting but instead deflect back into play. Yeah, it is bit of a bubble hockey thing but again, less stoppages and more action down low.

Or maybe live off the netting except for direct shots from outside the zone.

My Best-Carey

 

[one2gamble]

Changing the glass gets harder/longer the taller it is

 

[Huck Cheever]

Just make it a dome over the playing area like those old arcade hockey games, puck is always in play.

 

[MikeyMike01]

Wasn't there a young kid dying from a deflected shot in Columbus?! For safety reasons a net make sense.

They died from mismanaged treatment after the fact.

The netting was an overreaction.