Why is a delayed penalty called off when a team scores even if they haven't pulled the goalie to put on an extra attacker?

[Stringer Bell]

I have never understood this. The team/player who commits the offence receives no punishment, even though the goal had nothing to do with the penalty being called.

Am I completely out to lunch and missing something here?

Click to read more...

 

[Divine]

It's still an advantage even if the goalie isn't pulled.

You can make riskier plays knowing the second the other team gets possession, the play is blown dead.

The alternative would be to blow the play dead as soon as the penalty occurs to guarantee the powerplay.

 

[Pukboy5kroner]

I have never understood this. The team/player who commits the offence receives no punishment, even though the goal had nothing to do with the penalty being called.

Am I completely out to lunch and missing something here?

If the other team touches the puck it's called dead, if a goal is scored, we move on. It's not a court of law.

 

[JPeeper]

Yes Stringer, you're out to lunch.

 

[Jacob]

I think if you score on the delayed call the penalty should still be served.

 

[DopeyFish]

I think if you score on the delayed call the penalty should still be served.

yup

and icings should still happen during PKs

 

[Oddbob]

Because they scored. It is like when a PP goal gets scored, the player comes out of the box. The goal scored is the punishment.

 

[Coffey]

yup

and icings should still happen during PKs

And a goal shouldn’t end a PP.

 

[ACLEVERNAME]

Because there's an obvious shift in momentum from 'equal play' to advantage for the team carrying sole possession.

Also, give me one example of a goal being scored on a delayed call without the goalie gunning it for the bench.

 

[CanadienShark]

It's basically free reign to play keep away until you score and the moment the other team touches, the play is blown dead. That's an advantage.

 

[ItWasJustified]

I think if you score on the delayed call the penalty should still be served.

yup

and icings should still happen during PKs

And a goal shouldn’t end a PP.

Good luck getting the NHLPA to accept that a lot of their members would face an increased risk of injury from blocking more shots and exhaustion.

 

[JAK]

I would be in favour of lowering it to a one minute PP if a goal is scored on the delayed penalty.

 

[Doctor Coffin]

Good luck getting the NHLPA to accept that a lot of their members would face an increased risk of injury from blocking more shots and exhaustion.

Right. About as much chance of those happening as having goalies serve their own penalties.

 

[Tralfamadore]

yup

and icings should still happen during PKs

The team on the PK would still just ice the puck though to slowly chip time off the clock and the 2 minutes would just be filled with whistles.

 

[Jacob]

The team on the PK would still just ice the puck though to slowly chip time off the clock and the 2 minutes would just be filled with whistles.

Overall there are too many icings. 1/3rd are just passes that hit a bad spot on the ice or are just out of reach. I’d call icings more in line with the original intention of the rule.

I think if you called icings on the PKing team you’d just see more soft dumps or guys skating it out as a unit, which would necessitate a more skilled PKing unit. I think it would lead to more short handed chances and more PP goals, and not that many more whistles.

 

[Perfect_Drug]

These are mostly rules adopted by the PWHL.


Scoring a goal doesn't negate a PP or end the PP.

It's a really interesting wrinkle to generate offense.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

Agreeing with all of the people saying that even if the goal is scored with the goalie pulled you should still get the PP.

 

[Tralfamadore]

Overall there are too many icings. 1/3rd are just passes that hit a bad spot on the ice or are just out of reach. I’d call icings more in line with the original intention of the rule.

I think if you called icings on the PKing team you’d just see more soft dumps or guys skating it out as a unit, which would necessitate a more skilled PKing unit. I think it would lead to more short handed chances and more PP goals, and not that many more whistles.

Why would teams risk properly trying to break out the puck down a man though? They would definitely just continuously ice the puck and powerplays would be horrible to watch.

Overall I agree with your first point.

 

[tarheelhockey]

The purpose of the penalty is to restore the aggrieved team’s scoring opportunity. That’s the whole purpose of the delayed penalty, to allow them to follow through and not give the offending team the benefit of shutting down the scoring chance entirely.

If they immediately score a goal, there’s nothing to restore.

 

[Channelcat]

Actually a valid question

 

[Ezekial]

The purpose of the penalty is to restore the aggrieved team’s scoring opportunity. That’s the whole purpose of the delayed penalty, to allow them to follow through and not give the offending team the benefit of shutting down the scoring chance entirely.

If they immediately score a goal, there’s nothing to restore.

This is the perfect explanation.

 

[The Gr8 Dane]

I really don't see the problem with how it is now , that one icing on the PK proposition is ridiculous

 

[Tralfamadore]

The purpose of the penalty is to restore the aggrieved team’s scoring opportunity. That’s the whole purpose of the delayed penalty, to allow them to follow through and not give the offending team the benefit of shutting down the scoring chance entirely.

If they immediately score a goal, there’s nothing to restore.

But plenty of penaltys are called with no scoring chance being present.

 

[tarheelhockey]

But plenty of penaltys are called with no scoring chance being present.

No rule is going to fit every situation, but that is the underlying principle in the system. Theoretically they could be justified in blowing the whistle immediately when there’s no offensive opportunity, but the rules aren’t that nuanced.

 

[BLNY]

and icings should still happen during PKs

Off topic, but I wouldn't mind icing going away if your opponent pulls their goalie. They're getting a man advantage out of it.