Rule Change Ideas

[EdJovanovski]

- Once the puck passes center allow players to go offside
- Use floating blueline, so once players enter zone the blueline is pushed back to center
- Allow kick in goals
- Make icing a delay of game penalty, and don’t allow icing while shorthanded (no penalty, but faceoff in their end)
- Powerplays don’t end once a goal is scored

 

[Howboutthempanthers]

Return the rule of no two line pass.

 

[El Diego]

lol I admitted that StoneHands guy showed some good evidence on the rules, and the actual wording. He has still failed to recognize my point.

I showed some examples of people going offside trying to stay in the white, but apparently they’re just lifting their feet for some reason.

Telling me “lol obviously the players know the rules” is naive. If the players knew they were allowed to have their foot on the blue paint, they wouldn’t be stretching out to stay onside like some of the plays I showed.

That’s my opinion.

I am really struggling as to how to explain this more clearly to you. The only thing I can say is next game you watch, specifically look at them crossing the line. You keep peddling this idea that players try to stay in the white specifically, which is not true. You evidence is like three clips that are actually explained away. I am guessing you are committed to this now and don't want to admit you were incorrect. No one is going to be upset if you admit you were wrong. In fact, it is more embarrassing to continue to defend your point when it has been thoroughly debunked.

 

[RalphyDanger]

I am really struggling as to how to explain this more clearly to you. The only thing I can say is next game you watch, specifically look at them crossing the line. You keep peddling this idea that players try to stay in the white specifically, which is not true. You evidence is like three clips that are actually explained away. I am guessing you are committed to this now and don't want to admit you were incorrect. No one is going to be upset if you admit you were wrong. In fact, it is more embarrassing to continue to defend your point when it has been thoroughly debunked.

Again here is the video from NHL. Go to 50 seconds in. If their intention is to have the players be able to touch the blue still, they need to make it more obvious.

No need to keep quoting me and telling me I’m embarrassing myself.

 

[berlin]

Get rid of the offsides replay.

 

[Invictus12]

The play would be blown down as soon as the puck left the defensive zone so if the puck was shot the length of the ice onto the open net by the team getting the penalty it wouldn't count since the whistle has gone as soon as it crossed their blueline.

Accidentally shooting the length of the ice into your own net would need to be addressed though.

Well, what if a player takes it out of the offensive zone himself on a pending PP? Does that gets whistled down. I pretty intrigued by this...

 

[LakeLivin]

My wishes, including some that run very counter to tradition.

• Put icing back in on the PK. The idea of a penalty is to . . well . . penalize a team. But we also in a sense reward them during that time by eliminating icing? Ruh?

• Add 1 min penalties for "lesser" infractions like clearing the puck over the glass and embellishment. The fact that you get penalized the same amount of time for embellishment as for a play that could seriously injure an opponent (like boarding) makes no sense to me. Heck, then the refs might even start to call obvious embellishment again.

• Initiating contact with an opponent after the whistle is an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty, period. I can't think of any other sport where you're allowed to do so without penalty, and for good reason imo (think Domi - Ekblad).

• In game League video review on dangerous hits once there is a stop in play, with penalties and ejection (if appropriate) even if the refs didn't catch it during play. Just like they do in NCAA basketball or the NBA. Those are serious enough to merit another look, especially when compared to the moronic offsides challenge. The League needs to start taking player safety more seriously, and this would be a good start.

• 3-2-1 points system.

• I don't know enough about the reduction in size of goalies pads to weigh in on the injury vs. increased scoring debate, but I am comfortable in reducing the size of the gloves they use. Those things are still like baskets, lol.

• No offsides except: 1) a pass from a team's defensive zone into their offensive zone. 2) still need to tag up when the defensive team clears the puck. (and then eliminate the offsides challenge). I know, I know, but think of how much this would open up the game!

 

[Last Gleaming]

Pretty happy with the state of the game. A minor one: a short-handed goal ends a minor penalty early, just like a power-play goal. Could make PK units more adventurous.

 

[Anglesmith]

I think one thing that would be a small change that would make the game a bit less silly would be to remove the automatic extra minor for breaking skin on a high stick. The extra minor doesn't correlate to harder/more severe infractions, nor does it correlate with greater impact on the opposition team. There isn't really any good reason for it.

 

[hangman005]

Pretty happy with the state of the game. A minor one: a short-handed goal ends a minor penalty early, just like a power-play goal. Could make PK units more adventurous.

Not sure how well received it would be, but the idea intrigues me, wouldn’t mind a minor league trying it just to see what dynamic it would have.

 

[MNNumbers]

3-2-1-0 Points system, although I'm not really hung up about it.
I like making embellishment/diving 1:00 penalties. Also, they need to be called correctly. Diving: Acting when there is no penalty. Embellishment: Overacting to draw a call even if there was a penalty.
Also, puck over glass should be a 1:00 penalty.
What actually is the rule on the trapezoid, anyway?
Offside has been well covered. If anything, the idea of (one defender behind the player negates the offside) is intriguing to me, although it would be very difficult to officiate.
No contact after the whistle sounds good, but it would lead to potential farces of face-offs. If you pull something I don't like, and I can't pop you one after the whistle, then I have to wait until the next puck drop, and I let you have it immediately then. I'm not sure I like that, either.

 

[mouser]

I would be fully happy with changing the offside rule to only require a player has a skate on or behind the blue line, whether the skate is on the ice or not.

Not because I think the rule as it stands is wrong. But simply because i think it would make the offside calls much easier for the refs and linesmen to evaluate in game at full speed without the added factor of judging whether a player’s trailing skate was on the ice or not.

 

[Butch 19]

Get rid of the damn trapezoids.

Though now that they're using it for advertising space I suppose that will never happen.

?? what? There are no ads in the trapezoids - the ads are in the corners of the non-trapezoid areas.

And the trapezoids work well. They do what they're supposed to do: limit the goalies legal playing range, which increases possible offensive chances

 

[LakeLivin]

3-2-1-0 Points system, although I'm not really hung up about it.
I like making embellishment/diving 1:00 penalties. Also, they need to be called correctly. Diving: Acting when there is no penalty. Embellishment: Overacting to draw a call even if there was a penalty.
Also, puck over glass should be a 1:00 penalty.
What actually is the rule on the trapezoid, anyway?
Offside has been well covered. If anything, the idea of (one defender behind the player negates the offside) is intriguing to me, although it would be very difficult to officiate.
No contact after the whistle sounds good, but it would lead to potential farces of face-offs. If you pull something I don't like, and I can't pop you one after the whistle, then I have to wait until the next puck drop, and I let you have it immediately then. I'm not sure I like that, either.

I want to reduce that, too. If you initiate something outside of play immediately after the puck drop, that's an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty as well in my book. If you need to police something yourself, you need to do it in the flow of play. Any intentional potentially dangerous action by the opposition gets taken care of by the in game review I'd add, so there's no longer a need to police that by the teams themselves. And this would greatly reduce retaliation against clean hits that result in an injury, something else that makes no sense to me. Not to mention "staged" fights, which are also stupid in my book.

All of this only works if the league takes effective responsibility for actively policing dirty hits or dangerous actions during the game, and the only way I can see that happening is by adding in game video review for those types of plays.

 

[MNNumbers]

I want to reduce that, too. If you initiate something outside of play immediately after the puck drop, that's an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty as well in my book. If you need to police something yourself, you need to do it in the flow of play. Any intentional potentially dangerous action by the opposition gets taken care of by the in game review I'd add, so there's no longer a need to police that by the teams themselves. And this would greatly reduce retaliation against clean hits that result in an injury, something else that makes no sense to me. Not to mention "staged" fights, which are also stupid in my book.

All of this only works if the league takes effective responsibility for actively policing dirty hits or dangerous actions during the game, and the only way I can see that happening is by adding in game video review for those types of plays.

I would agree that if the league wants the focus to be on the game of hockey, then it would immediately institute in-game reviews from Toronto on all hits. If the league finds something amiss - illegal hit or something that was missed by the referee, then the league office communicates directly to the referee and the matter is taken care of in the next stoppage like this:
NHL: Please look at your iPad, and the following play starting at 11:22 of the period.
Ref: Ok.
NHL: Do you see this hit that Coyle laid McDavid? the puck is nowhere near either of them, and Coyle gets McDavid with an elbow to the head.
Ref: Yep. I see it.
NHL: It's 5 min major for elbowing, and a misconduct.
Ref: OK.
Or.....
NHL: Please check your tablet and look at the angle we are sending you for 10:17.
Ref: OK
NHL: This penalty was awarded 2 min for boarding. However, it's not really that clean. Elbow up, head targeted. This is a misconduct.
Ref: OK.

If this kind of thing happened (and there is technology to do so), then the need for players to police their own game would disappear.

HOWEVER:
I believe that Toronto has actually put itself into a bind, because there is a certain amount of money produced by this league which depends on hard hits. If the hitting were eliminated by this procedure, I think that Toronto fears some of the money disappearing as well. So, this won't happen.

But it should.

 

[LakeLivin]

I would agree that if the league wants the focus to be on the game of hockey, then it would immediately institute in-game reviews from Toronto on all hits. If the league finds something amiss - illegal hit or something that was missed by the referee, then the league office communicates directly to the referee and the matter is taken care of in the next stoppage like this:
NHL: Please look at your iPad, and the following play starting at 11:22 of the period.
Ref: Ok.
NHL: Do you see this hit that Coyle laid McDavid? the puck is nowhere near either of them, and Coyle gets McDavid with an elbow to the head.
Ref: Yep. I see it.
NHL: It's 5 min major for elbowing, and a misconduct.
Ref: OK.
Or.....
NHL: Please check your tablet and look at the angle we are sending you for 10:17.
Ref: OK
NHL: This penalty was awarded 2 min for boarding. However, it's not really that clean. Elbow up, head targeted. This is a misconduct.
Ref: OK.

If this kind of thing happened (and there is technology to do so), then the need for players to police their own game would disappear.

HOWEVER:
I believe that Toronto has actually put itself into a bind, because there is a certain amount of money produced by this league which depends on hard hits. If the hitting were eliminated by this procedure, I think that Toronto fears some of the money disappearing as well. So, this won't happen.

But it should.

We're mostly in agreement. I'd just clarify the language about "in-game reviews from Toronto on all hits" to ensure that no one thinks they're stopping or slowing down the game to look at every hit. The questionable ones stand out, and if players knew they'd get caught and punished even if they slipped them by the refs in real time, they'd happen even less often. On your money/physicality point, I guess it comes down to how well the league could differentiate between clean hard hits and dirty hits. I'd like to think it's something they have the ability to do without eliminating hitting from the sport.

 

[member 151739]

Make it illegal for goalies to play the puck behind the net. Instead of a trapezoid where it is legal, it should just be a red line behind the net.

This prevents a dump-in from being disrupted, and it will protect the more aggressive goalies, eliminating the chance of a player hitting a goalie in that situation.

 

[MNNumbers]

We're mostly in agreement. I'd just clarify the language about "in-game reviews from Toronto on all hits" to ensure that no one thinks they're stopping or slowing down the game to look at every hit. The questionable ones stand out, and if players knew they'd get caught and punished even if they slipped them by the refs in real time, they'd happen even less often. On your money/physicality point, I guess it comes down to how well the league could differentiate between clean hard hits and dirty hits. I'd like to think it's something they have the ability to do without eliminating hitting from the sport.

To clarify my point....
I'm talking about Toronto watching replays WHILE ACTION CONTINUES IN ST. PAUL. If they see something that was illegal, they relay to St Paul, and the referee takes action DURING THE NEXT STOPPAGE.
Thus, there is no slow down.

And, as you say, nobody gets away with anything.

However, I would be quite sure that many many fans like the idea of their guy absolutely crushing some dude on the other team, especially if "he gets away with it." I simply think that self-policing by players is so ingrained in No American hockey culture that it can't be eliminated without losing too many fans.

As an example...Except US/Canada, US/Russia, or Canada/Russia...can you see US fans paying for a whole season of Olympic style games? I can't.

Although, again, I think this is what SHOULD happen.

 

[LakeLivin]

To clarify my point....
I'm talking about Toronto watching replays WHILE ACTION CONTINUES IN ST. PAUL. If they see something that was illegal, they relay to St Paul, and the referee takes action DURING THE NEXT STOPPAGE.
Thus, there is no slow down.

And, as you say, nobody gets away with anything.

However, I would be quite sure that many many fans like the idea of their guy absolutely crushing some dude on the other team, especially if "he gets away with it." I simply think that self-policing by players is so ingrained in No American hockey culture that it can't be eliminated without losing too many fans.

As an example...Except US/Canada, US/Russia, or Canada/Russia...can you see US fans paying for a whole season of Olympic style games? I can't.

Although, again, I think this is what SHOULD happen.

Yeah, we're in agreement on how it would/should work. Where we differ slightly is in that I think it could be implemented without actually losing fans. Sure, there'd be a lot of griping at first when the policy was announced, but I don't see the on ice product actually changing much during live play except that there'd be less dirty hits (i.e., I don't it turning the game into international hockey). If true, the question then becomes how many fans would actually abandon the game due to the elimination of skirmishes while the play was stopped? I'm sure there'd be some (maybe a lot) who would bitch about it, but not sure how many would actually boycott the product because of it.

Hey, I've got a tongue in cheek solution that would substitute for the lost aggression and maybe even boost interest: each team gets a 24th roster spot that doesn't play but represents the team in a 5 minute MMA style battle during each intermission.

 

[SwaggySpungo]

Id like to see the goal line pushed back to 10’ again, with the blue lines both being pushed in 1’ each to open up a little extra space in the neutral zone.

 

[13 others]

Don't allow icing by the PK team. Would force them to carry it out of the zone and create more scoring on the PP.

If a team is on the PP at the start of a period, the opening faceoff is in the attack zone not at centre ice. As it is now, the PP team is penalized by the fact the period ends and they have to face off at centre.

Also, a penalty with less than 2 minutes in regulation or OT could result in an optional penalty shot/PP. It's no big deal to take a penalty with <30 seconds left. That would change.

 

[thewall]

-Angled posts so when the puck its the post it goes in the net. This would increase scoring. Sounds weird coming out of my mouth because i am a goalie.

-Remove the trapozoid.

- 2 min pp no matter if you score or not. The only concern is refs would probably put their whistles away even more.

 

[albator71]

1. a player has to spent the entire 2 minutes in the penalty box

2. if a team scores a goal on a delay penalty, they should still have a powerplay why cancel the penalty.

3. get rid of the stupid trapezoid, let the goaltenders play the puck.

4. lets have the 3-2-1-0 point system.

 

[PK Cronin]

Ya. StoneHands posted some stuff earlier that made me think I could be wrong about how the rules are interpreted. I still think they need to fix offsides.

You could be wrong?!

Again here is the video from NHL. Go to 50 seconds in. If their intention is to have the players be able to touch the blue still, they need to make it more obvious.

No need to keep quoting me and telling me I’m embarrassing myself.

You don't need to go 50 seconds in.

"Offsides is when an attacking player crosses the blue line before the puck does."

Crosses means that the attacking player has already passed the blue line. It doesn't say crossing, which would indicate that the blue line itself would be offsides.

If the "leading edge" is what the puck needs to pass in order to establish offsides, why do you think it's different for a player?

Nowhere in the video do they discuss needing to keep your skate in the white part of the neutral zone. They say the skate needs to be kept down on the ice, which is true. You only need to be in the neutral zone when that happens though, and the neutral zone includes the blue line as established by the "leading edge" the referee was referring to and the fact that a player must cross the blue line. You can't have crossed the blue line completely if you're on the blue line.

That Florida Panthers example is so terrible and I'm not sure how you're suggesting that player had possession. He doesn't even know where the puck is when he crosses the line. You continually post about the best players in the world questioning how they would make such a simple mistake. I don't know, why do football players go offsides? They're the best players in the world. They're trying to get an edge or just make a mistake. It happens. Do you understand how fast these players are moving?

Nobody other than you seems to be struggling with interpreting the rule.

 

[1865]

Not sure if it’s been mentioned yet, but a few ideas:

1) Remove coincidental penalties. More 4 on 4 and 3 on 3.
2) Leaving your feet to block a shot is a penalty.
3) Offside is a vertical line. No need to keep your skate on the ice.
4) No defensive zone hand passes.
5) Coaches challenge applies to anything but it’s a penalty if superfluous. No penalty if it is deemed worthy of a review. You don’t lose a timeout.