more ghey NHL rules

[The Czech Republic 0]

Yeah whatever, there's a(n) OAO NHL thread, but I'm not going to follow a trend started by Johnson of putting ALL league news in one thread.

 

The latest news from the NHL is that in continuation with their "it's not a new season if we don't change a perfectly good rule" program, next season, goaltenders may not be allowed to leave the crease.

 

Ridiculous.

 

There's some rationale behind this, but it's not any good rationale. I fear for the NHL.

[razazteca 0]

So goalies cannot not fight each other now?

[jimmy no nose 0]

The reasoning is that these days goalies wear a ridiculous amound of padding and can just go out and drill whoever they want with no fear of consequences. Even if a guy is to go nail the goalie he's got about 6 inches of padding in each direction. I think it'd be better to just limit the amount of padding the goalie wears because that also opens up more room for scoring. Goalies controlling the puck is boring any way.

[Vern Gagne 0]

Making the goalies padding smaller is also one of the changes the NHL is thinking of making.

[the.weej 0]

You probably should've quoted a source on this. It's not restricting goalies from leaving the crease, but rather...

 

Canadian Press

 

2/10/2004

 

HENDERSON, Nev. (CP) - In what could turn out to be an historic day in NHL history, the league's 30 general managers agreed to several rule changes Tuesday that may drastically change the way the game is played.

 

``A couple of these differences will make a major difference to the way the game is played,'' New York Islanders GM Mike Milbury said as the day-long meeting ended.

 

Among the changes the GMs will recommend:

 

- Goalies can no longer handle the puck behind the back-end red line (behind the net);

 

- The width of goalie pads will be reduced to 10 inches from the current limit of 12 inches;

 

- The nets will brought back to 10 feet from the back boards from the current 13 feet;

 

- The tag-up offsides will be brought back;

 

- AHL will try out three points being awarded for a victory in regulation time with NHL possibly going to that format in 2005-06 if it works well in the minors; that would also include two points for an overtime win, it may also include two points for a penalty shootout win.

 

``Yes, it is quite a bit,'' said Carolina Hurricanes GM Jim Rutherford.

 

The GMs' suggestions this week will be further re-examined this summer by a blue-ribbon panel of hockey experts including coaches, players, media and some GMs.

 

Then the end package must be approved by the league's owners at a Board of Governors' meeting in late summer.

 

Legendary coach Scotty Bowman took part in the decision-making Tuesday.

 

``They're asking me as a coach what I would do in certain situations and since I'm not active anymore I can give an unbiased opinion on that,'' Bowman said.

 

This article is from tsn.ca. Sorry I couldn't find an exact link. I'm honestly surprised this hasn't been brought up sooner, since it's fairly big nerws.

 

Anyway, the logic behind making the goalies unable to handle the puck behind the net is not because can go out and "drill whoever they want without fear of consequences," but because puckhandling goalies play an enormous, enormous role in the NZT. Without the goalies to assist in clearing a dumped-in puck from centre ice, it will bog down the speed of the trap immensely and give the opposing team a better chance to regain the puck in the offensive zone. Removing the goalies from the equasion is one of the only ways to conteract the trap, and much more sensible than just dropping the red line. That's said, I hope they go with the idea of penalizing the goalie if he does touch the puck, instead of something like blowing down the play, because that would just slow the game down further. I also forsee defenceman injuries going up over this.

 

As far as the other proposed changes go, I like them, witht the noteable exception of the shoot out. Deciding a game based solely on the skill of a single player is stupid, especially in a team game. If anything will hurt the sanctity of the NHL, shoot out's would.

[Red Baron 0]

I like that there is only 10 feet behind the net

 

and I like that goalie pads are 10 inches

[The Czech Republic 0]

I don't favor the three points for a win. Or the overtime loss, period. I'd rather that overtime is expanded to 10 or 15 minutes, with the OTL point eliminated altogether. I think we should cut down on the number of ties.

 

However, I'd prefer a tie over a shootout. I used to think they should go to a shootout after a period of overtime, but I've seen the light and realized that wouldn't be a good idea after all.

 

They better not go to 4-on-4 in regulation. That would be unspeakably pathetic.

[the.weej 0]

The thing is, if you want overtime longer than five minutes in a regular season game, you need to break for another ten minutes to clean the ice. Even the best ice in the NHL becomes pretty crappy after a period of play; anything longer than five more minutes and you're skating on mush. The quality of the play would be awful, and really, who wants to see another ten or fifteen minutes of tired players in a game no-one really cares about?

 

I agree on full 4-on-4 though. That'd just be stupid.

Edited February 14, 2004 by realitycheck

[Youth N Asia 0]

This is assuming they even play next season. I love the NHL, but they're not the money making darlings of sports and they sound like they're not willing to budge any and will strike.

[The Czech Republic 0]

The thing is, if you want overtime longer than five minutes in a regular season game, you need to break for another ten minutes to clean the ice. Even the best ice in the NHL becomes pretty crappy after a period of play; anything longer than five more minutes and you're skating on mush. The quality of the play would be awful, and really, who wants to see another ten or fifteen minutes of tired players in a game no-one really cares about?

 

I agree on full 4-on-4 though. That'd just be stupid.

Well, just because there's a ten-minute period doesn't mean they'll always be out there for ten extra minutes.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

The defensemen are going to get killed out there if the Goalies can't get the puck.

[Lightning Flik 0]

I agree with the rule of goalies not allowed behind the red line.

 

Just because some goalies do take awful sweet time behind that red line, or slid back behind the line when the puck is going by and whammo someone takes said goalietender out.

[Guest Olympic Slam]

I think goalies should be fair-game once they get out of the net. Nobody wants to see the goalies casually play the puck to their defencemen, but the fans would like to see them get drilled by an incoming forward. THAT would make things a tad more, GASP, interesting.

[treble 0]

I hate the no-playing the puck behind the net for goalies rule, since I really think them going back there speeds up the game by creating breakouts. Instead of sitting in the net and waiting for the defenceman to come back and play it they can go out and pass it out before they come all the way back.

 

I do think that they should be fair game if they leave the crease, too, but no one would hit them, anyway, because they'd have everyone on the other team after them.

[Lightning Flik 0]

As long as they get rid of that instigator rule... Then I could see goalies be fair game.

 

Enforcers can't do squat these days with how obscene they make some of the calls lately. And the instigator rule.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Instigator rule is lame. So are anal-retentive officials who feel they ahve to call everything. Sometimes you just let the players police themselves.

[nl5xsk1 0]

I used to think that the league should make hitting the goalies legal, but have just recently changed my views on the subject. With the number of teams in the league, there aren't enough quality goalies for each team to have an NHL-level backup. And I'd hate to see a team's chances of doing ANYTHING worthwhile get pissed away by a 4th string nobody taking out another team's goalie for any stretch of time. (e.g. if the Bruins lost Raycroft for any stretch of time, they'd be FUCKED with Potvin as their #1). The goalie is like a quarterback, and needs some special rules to ensure their safety.

 

The rules changes that I'd like to see: no-touch icing; touch-up offsides; limiting the size of the goalies pads; not allowing the goalies to handle the puck behind the net; eliminate the instigator rule; change the OT rules so that no points are awarded for a tie, it's 2 points for a win or no points for a loss or tie. And the biggest, most important change of them all: FIRE GARY BETTMAN, and replace him with someone who CARES ABOUT THE SPORT.

[treble 0]

There's one thing I've seen mentioned at various places that I don't understand, which is if they do put in the rule saying that goalies can't play the buck behind the goal line is that they'll put in no-touch icings to protect the defencemen. Now, unless I'm missing something, what the fuck will that do? The goalies don't come out to play the puck on icings so the defencemen will still have to come back and get the puck when a goalie would be playing it now.

 

As for whether or not goalies should be fair-game outside the crease, even if they are, no one's going to hit them as hard as they would a 'regular' player because everyone on the team will be gunning for them the rest of the game. However, I've seen a lot of cases where goalies have wandered around the ice and hit, tripped, or did other things to skaters that I don't think should be legal. A few years ago I remember a goalie and a winger in a race for the puck along the boards, the forward got their first but was leveled by the goalie and there was no penalty call on the play. Now, even ignoring the fact that it was obviously charging, as there were at least 10-15 strides from the net to where the hit was (and the goalie was skating full force), the goalie has an unfair advantage in that he wears a hell of a lot more equipment than anyone else on the ice so he shouldn't be allowed to hit players without getting a penalty.

 

Also, I think it's unfair to think that Bettman doesn't care about the sport. I don't think he understands it that well and the Commissioner should be someone who does, but I really think he wants what's best for the game.

[nl5xsk1 0]

TC, goalies not handling the puck behind the goal line and the no-touch icing are two different entities. You're right, goalies don't touch the puck on icing, so the one rule change (no-touch icing) doesn't effect the other rule change at all. If it's icing, blow the play dead as soon as the puck crosses the goal line, without the footrace for the puck. If it's not an icing call, the defenseman will have to come back and play the puck.

 

I don't endorse the no-touch icing rule as a way to protect the defensemen, but instead support it because I like the flow of it better. I also think that a team that's shorthanded shouldn't be able to ice the puck without repurcussion. If a team was unable to ice it on a PK, and the no-touch icing rule was in effect, a team would have to work to get the puck out of it's zone which would increase the chances of a turnover and thus an odd-man rush.

 

I do agree with you that the goalies are allowed to make too much contact for a player that can't be hit. If their ability to handle the puck was limited, though, their chances to hit people would be limited as well. But for obstruction, charging, tripping, etc. penalties, call the goalie the same as every other player.

 

Lastly, most of the problems that I see in today's game have happened since Bettman took office (e.g. over-expansion, escalating salaries, stupid rule changes, etc.). He's made it into the NBA-lite, and I hate that fact. Someone that had more love or respect for the game would have taken care of it better for this last decade, and I don't think that the game would be in such dissaray today.