Should play continue when the puck goes in the netting?

[Xamar*]

I would like to know some of your thoughts on this. It maybe harder to notice on TV because the pucks disappears off the screen but I've noticed that when I go to a game when the puck goes into the netting, it never really stays up in the air for longer than a couple of seconds which gives the players enough time to adjust to the falling puck. It just doesn't seem like a worthwhile stoppage to me. It may even improve the speed of the games and cut back on whistles if it wasn't a stoppage. What do you guys think?

Click to read more...

 

[izzy]

Absolutely not.

 

[IdealisticSniper]

No. The nets are there as a safety provision, not an extension of the glass and playing surface.

 

[Jisatsu]

They already allow the play to continue when the puck goes into the netting. Ask Detroit.

 

[CanadiensforLife]

Nope. The netting is just there as a protection for the fans. It should not be used as an extension of the glass.

 

[Xamar*]

Is it a safety risk for fans if play continues after the puck hits the netting? I get why the netting is there but since it is there and it still is protecting fans, why not keep the game going ?

 

[IdealisticSniper]

Is it a safety risk for fans if play continues after the puck hits the netting? I get why the netting is there but since it is there and it still is protecting fans, why not keep the game going ?

Because it's not part of the game it's part of the arena.

 

[ATBLeafsTyler]

Is it a safety risk for fans if play continues after the puck hits the netting? I get why the netting is there but since it is there and it still is protecting fans, why not keep the game going ?

Because it's not a part of hockey. This will never even be debated.

 

[DearDiary]

Gives forecheckers too much time to recover the puck. Instead of dumping it in, just arc it at the net.

 

[starling]

They already allow the play to continue when the puck goes into the netting. Ask Detroit.

Buffalo scored a goal like that two days ago too.

 

[Shakey Rustie]

They already allow the play to continue when the puck goes into the netting. Ask Detroit.

To be fair, the puck has to be 50 feet in the air while hitting the netting for it to be considered still in play.

 

[Claypool]

No. The nets are there as a safety provision, not an extension of the glass and playing surface.

You can argue that the glass is also a safety provision.

I think that pucks off the net will remain in play sometime in the future. Not for a few more seasons, though.

 

[Leafidelity]

Definitely not.

 

[Jray42]

Absolutely positively not.

 

[Machinehead]

If you allow play to continue, teams will start deliberately banning pucks off the netting.

 

[Claypool]

If you allow play to continue, teams will start deliberately banning pucks off the netting.

Just like they do with the glass?

 

[tom_servo]

Gives forecheckers too much time to recover the puck. Instead of dumping it in, just arc it at the net.

I agree. This seems an obvious problem.

 

[Quarter]

You can argue that the glass is also a safety provision.

I think that pucks off the net will remain in play sometime in the future. Not for a few more seasons, though.

No kidding, you can. What else was the league supposed to do, leave the fans open to getting pelted by flying rubber by not putting up glass (or specifically fencing in the earlier days)?

An earlier poster said it best: the netting is part of the arena, not part of the playing surface

 

[TheStranger]

Just have them play in a plexiglass bubble and get it over with. No more fan injuries, no pucks over the glass slowing it down. Good to go.

 

[Nynja*]

Just have them play in a plexiglass bubble and get it over with. No more fan injuries, no pucks over the glass slowing it down. Good to go.

 

[jacks*]

I would like to know some of your thoughts on this. It maybe harder to notice on TV because the pucks disappears off the screen but I've noticed that when I go to a game when the puck goes into the netting, it never really stays up in the air for longer than a couple of seconds which gives the players enough time to adjust to the falling puck. It just doesn't seem like a worthwhile stoppage to me. It may even improve the speed of the games and cut back on whistles if it wasn't a stoppage. What do you guys think?

Heck why not keep it going when it goes over the glass as long as a fan throws it back on the ice.

 

[jnk96]

Nope. The netting is just there as a protection for the fans. It should not be used as an extension of the glass.

What is the glass for then?

Still, I do not think the game should continue even though I hate the amount of stoppages you get in a hockey game. Even more so in the NHL with their five billion commercial breaks.

 

[Roland of Gilead]

Just like they do with the glass?

Totally different thing. The glass is a part of the rink, netting isnt. And it would be very idiotic to let players shoot 5-10 meters high shots to nettings, the game would change totally

 

[Quarter]

What is the glass for then?

To stop the puck from going out of play? What else?

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Really? NO