Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
dlbalr

Potential NHL Rule Changes

31 posts in this topic

As part of the lockout discussion we'll have on the site over the next week and a half or so, one of the areas our writers will offer their thoughts on is potential rule changes. After the last lockout, we saw a whole bunch of rule changes, some of which were good while others weren't.

I'd like to put together an Around the Boards piece on the site with your thoughts on what rule changes (new or eliminating previous changes) you'd like to see come about after the labour dispute gets settled. Plus, are there any potential changes that you think could significantly impact the Habs (for better or for worse)?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The icing rule. Once in a season, the race for the puck is exciting. Make it like the World Juniors championship and give the players a rest when the icing is obvious.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get rid of the damn trapezoid.

10 fights rule (OHL)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I 100% with icing change needed.

Might as well either eliminate the goalie crease, it is meaningless and irrelevant at present, or institute the international crease rule.

Unsportsmen-like penalty for defensive trap.

Go to 3 on 3 instead of shootout.

10 fight rule is a good one, but i would go further, be idealist and go with simple instant ejection for fighting, same as NFL/Rugby/Soccer/MLB/NBA (or most other team sports legues in world i think), i know it will likely take a fatality before this will even be considered, but its day is coming.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about shootout format? Should it be best of 3 as it is now or best of 5 as we see internationally and in the AHL?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm an old fart, and therefore I say get rid of the goddamned circus shootout and live with ties. :angry: That stupid trapezoid can go as well. Recommit to the crackdown on obstruction. And change the disciplinary structure so that head shots are disciplined regardless of 'intent.' (Incidentally, one of my fears is that an extended lockout will lead to further 'fan-pleasing' rule changes - like, say, soccer nets to maximize scoring. The lockout has proved, if there was any doubt, that there is no limit to the sheer, drooling stupidity of the National Hockey League).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm 28, dunno what kind of fart it makesme, but don't ever bring back tie games.

Worst. Outcome. In. Any. Sport.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, I know the 'tie' thing is a lost battle. But that doesn't mean I have to love the shootouts, which have nothing to do with hockey. DON's suggestion for 3-on-3 OT would certainly be better than this sideshow.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I predict they will introduce 3 on 3 hockey in the overtime. Possibly by adding 5 minutes of 3 on 3 after 5 minutes of 4 on 4.

Just like last time, the league will want to add some new and exciting aspect to bring the fans back. For the same reason we might see the introduction of some kind of coaches challenge.

I don't think this will happen, but I would like to see scrapped the rule imposing an automatic delay of game for shooting pucks over the glass.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I predict they will introduce 3 on 3 hockey in the overtime. Possibly by adding 5 minutes of 3 on 3 after 5 minutes of 4 on 4.

+1

Just like last time, the league will want to add some new and exciting aspect to bring the fans back. For the same reason we might see the introduction of some kind of coaches challenge.

+1

I don't think this will happen, but I would like to see scrapped the rule imposing an automatic delay of game for shooting pucks over the glass.

+1

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if I'd like the 3v3 hockey :/

but they should make 4v4 overtime more then 5 minutes.. its just silly short.. you can go to the bathroom and miss OT and part of the shootout as it stands now.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, I know the 'tie' thing is a lost battle. But that doesn't mean I have to love the shootouts, which have nothing to do with hockey. DON's suggestion for 3-on-3 OT would certainly be better than this sideshow.

I am with you CC, you are not alone. I don't give two sh'ts whether somebodies hockey pool works out. I play one period of overtime and if it isn't decided it ends in a tie. I would add this caveat- I really despise the notion that you can get extra points in a game for failing to get job done in regular time. We shouldn't award failure. I propose that if a game isn't decided in regular time, that there shall be only one point awarded for that game, winner take all. The original genesis of the extra time was to stop teams from playing for the tie in regular time. I think this help to solve that problem.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hockey is no longer a North American game. With no longer being a North American game, it's fine to bring in International hockey elements to the game. It's tough for some Canadians to understand that.

I too don't want a shootout to decide the Stanley Cup but I also think shortening the amount of players on the ice for an overtime is just as game modifying as a shootout. A shootout is just a game decided series of penalty shots. 4-on-4/3-on-3 overtime is modifying proper hockey format in hopes of opening up the ice.

I personally wish we just went continuous OT in every game, injury and fatigue be damned but that will fly as far as removing the shootout.

I agree with BlueKross that failure should not be rewarded. The loser point needs to be abolished and Olympic/International hockey has the best system to implement. Games are worth three points. You get zero points if you lose in regulation. If the game goes to overtime/shootout, each team gets one point for regulation and plays for the winning point, meaning an OT/SO win is only worth two points. It still gives a point to a team losing after regulation but when a regulation win means three full points, you won't see teams losing more than the eighth place team but making the playoffs. That infuriates me.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny, I went to bed last night planning to abandon this idea due to a lack of discussion but today's stuff has made me change my mind, I'll put the WWI piece together on Thursday.

Icing appears to be a point of contention, has anyone seen the hybrid icing rule they're using in the AHL? Their governors voted today to keep it in use all season.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hockey is no longer a North American game. With no longer being a North American game, it's fine to bring in International hockey elements to the game. It's tough for some Canadians to understand that.

I too don't want a shootout to decide the Stanley Cup but I also think shortening the amount of players on the ice for an overtime is just as game modifying as a shootout. A shootout is just a game decided series of penalty shots. 4-on-4/3-on-3 overtime is modifying proper hockey format in hopes of opening up the ice.

I personally wish we just went continuous OT in every game, injury and fatigue be damned but that will fly as far as removing the shootout.

I agree with BlueKross that failure should not be rewarded. The loser point needs to be abolished and Olympic/International hockey has the best system to implement. Games are worth three points. You get zero points if you lose in regulation. If the game goes to overtime/shootout, each team gets one point for regulation and plays for the winning point, meaning an OT/SO win is only worth two points. It still gives a point to a team losing after regulation but when a regulation win means three full points, you won't see teams losing more than the eighth place team but making the playoffs. That infuriates me.

I think no-touch icing is a no-brainer and would have to be welcomed by vast majority and most important change to be made?

3-2-1 point system would also create much more incentive to go more offensive to win games in regulation as well as extended games for sure.

I really am not in favour of shootout, just simply equates to field goal/free throw shooting/home run competition to decide ties, and just too gimicky for a team sport (dont agree with soccer thing neither),

But at least 3-on-3 still would allow for a bit of defense to play a part in outcome of game and likely really showcase the most skilled players and the 3-2-1 point system would discourage teams to just run out clock as they do now to get to shootout, which is a flip of coin on most nights, with goofy scoring attempts that are simply never seen in a real game scenario.

The coachs challange thing or "video ref" reviewing/overturning blatant missed calls resulting in goals/injuries/penalties might be a good thing as well.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went back to the 'original' ATB format, one we've deviated from the past few times. Instead of having the stuff on here primarily comprise the articles, I just took some of the ideas proposed on here and discussed the feasibility of each one. Happy reading! http://www.habsworld.net/article.php?id=2945

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have some right wing ideas.

Since the last lockout there's been talk of scoring dropping, and it's clear to be true if you look at hockey 15 years ago until now. I think the crease should be expanded and the goalie should only be legally allowed to touch the puck with his stick outside the crease. No more goalies coming 2 feet outside the blue paint to stop a shot, taking away the entire net. This would increase scoring, plus defense and goaltending has come a long way in 15 years.

Players should be penalized for turning their back to the play intentionally to avoid being hit OR they should modify the hitting from behind rule so it's not illegal to hit someone who can be facing the play, but chooses to not be to avoid being hit. Players need to stop abusing this rule to gain an advantage. I understand the safety issue with hitting from behind, but in the last 5 years players are not protecting themselves properly because of this rule, increasing injuries.

I would love to see a 5-man shootout system like international rules.

Coach challenges like in football would be nice to see as well or at least some form of video review when it comes to penalties. The play is dead anyway, the least the ref can do is review it to make sure it was right. Maybe between periods missed calls can be called as well.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Players should be penalized for turning their back to the play intentionally to avoid being hit OR they should modify the hitting from behind rule so it's not illegal to hit someone who can be facing the play, but chooses to not be to avoid being hit. Players need to stop abusing this rule to gain an advantage. I understand the safety issue with hitting from behind, but in the last 5 years players are not protecting themselves properly because of this rule, increasing injuries.

That's stupid.

You can only be hit from behind if you have the puck(otherwise, it's interference). If you have the puck, then you ARE facing the play.. The play is the puck. If you turn around with the puck, you are still facing the play.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's stupid.

You can only be hit from behind if you have the puck(otherwise, it's interference). If you have the puck, then you ARE facing the play.. The play is the puck. If you turn around with the puck, you are still facing the play.

Not stupid and maybe just not worded quite right is all (you know what he meant) and i am sure divers (99.9% are forwards) are for sure taking advantage and as soon as feel contact, they do a Max LaPierre, collapse into boards and fake injury (but a ref can already call diving or unsportsman like penalty anytime, just ask Max).

If 2 guys are going for a loose puck in the corner, no one has the puck and the guy coming behind can for sure still take a penalty for boarding.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't argue terms, but Don got the idea. It's not only divers, makes big players stronger on the boards. There's a big difference between trying to reach around a big player with a long reach to get to the puck and checking him into the boards. It's getting sickening in the NHL now that as soon as someone gets the puck they turn their back to the rest of the players (better?) to avoid getting hit and turning over the puck.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't argue terms, but Don got the idea. It's not only divers, makes big players stronger on the boards. There's a big difference between trying to reach around a big player with a long reach to get to the puck and checking him into the boards. It's getting sickening in the NHL now that as soon as someone gets the puck they turn their back to the rest of the players (better?) to avoid getting hit and turning over the puck.

Finally, somebody is getting it!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The turning your back situation needs to be looked at on a case by case basis by Toronto post-games and isn't something you can really give to the referees to call.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure you can. A good example is when the puck is in the corner and a player is coming around the boards towards the puck to play it, and an opposing player is also going after the puck. In the game today 8/10 times the first player to touch the puck will immediately rotate to turn his back to the oncoming player. Today's rules stats he can't be hit because he's turning. With a rule change, make it so he's legally hittable even if he turns his back. Yes it could potentially be a dangerous hit, but if the player didn't rotate and willingly put himself is a dangerous position, 95/100 times that hit wouldn't cause injury.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the biggest change I would like to see is a change to the point system, not so much the rules. 2 points for shootout, 3 for the win.

make the shootout 5 shooters instead of 3. none of this tie garbage...it's boring..and the 21st century.

i'd also like to see the kicking rule re-evaluated for goals that are waved off (if you can kick a puck in count the thing..the goalie was hopeless in his efforts).

I would like to see harsher suspensions for headshots (upwards to 20 games as well as hefty fines).

reduce the youth-age cap and eligibility rules, get the geezers out of the game and bring the speed in!

have the stanley cup winner play the KHL winner in a 7 game series (that would be so cool)

bring in two expansion teams: one back to Quebec City and add a second team to the GTA
lastly, the draft All-star draft game needs to go..bring back North America/World all star games!


outside the glass:
fair ticket prices
fair beer prices ($11.73 for a large draft is outrageous..and $4.00 bottled waters is highway robbery)

less expensive jerseys and merchandise

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0