The W
Views: 99895207
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
21.10.14 1653
The W - Hockey - Potential New Rules for 2004
This thread has 27 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 4.71
Pages: 1
(441 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (20 total)
fuelinjected
Banger








Since: 12.10.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 3260 days
Last activity: 3260 days
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.15
That is if there's a season. In 6 weeks, the GM's will meet again to finalize these then the Governor's will sign off on them in the summer.

1. Goaltenders cannot handle the puck behind the goal line. If they do, it's a 2 minute penalty.

2. Tag-up offsides are back

3. Move goal line back from 13 feet to 10 feet.

4. Reduce width of goalie pads from 12 inches to 10 inches.

Also, the AHL will experiment for one full season with 3 points for a win and 2 points for an OT Win. If the game is still tied after the 5 minute 4 on 4 Overtime, there will be a shootout for the 2 points.

And the AHL will also try the "24 inch" blue and red lines.

Two rule clarifications that will be put into place immediately:

1. Penalty shots will be awarded if a player is in pursuit of a loose puck that would be a breakaway and is hauled down instead of having to have clear possession.

2. Goals where the net is slightly off its pegs will count now.
Promote this thread!
raygun
Chorizo








Since: 24.7.02
From: winnipeg

Since last post: 3030 days
Last activity: 575 days
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.00
In my opinion, goaltenders handling the puck is not such a bad thing - I just hate to see a goalie sliding ten feet out of the crease to smother the puck.

I like the shootout idea - I saw many Manitoba Moose games when they used it in the IHL, and it was pretty damn exciting. I'm all for making a regulation win that much more important.

However, I'm wondering if the GM's are just doing this to silence the fans for a year or so.

(edited by raygun on 10.2.04 2147)


[GP] 1144 [G] 440 [A] 512 [PTS] 952 [PIM] 2974
Scar
Goetta








Since: 2.1.02
From: NS, Canada

Since last post: 1491 days
Last activity: 1147 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.00
Ok please tell me that they are not even considering shootouts for the playoffs. I swear to fuck I'd never watch again.



X-ring.
Big Bad
Scrapple








Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 hour
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.54
I read that the playoff overtime periods will keep on going until there's a winner, just like the current rule. Not even the NHL is dumb enough to screw that one up.



Wait…if it’s MLK Jr. Day AND Pat Patterson’s Birthday…who gets the token win here?-- Matt "Excalibur05" Hocking on a match between Mark Henry and Rico

MH: What’s a clever way to say that I have a penis?
CJ: Uh…Mark, nobody’s going to buy that shirt.
MH: How about if I say that I’ve got…a…uh…?
CJ: Coming up with T-Shirt ideas is hard Mark, why not leave it to the WWE marketing department.
MH: I know! I’ve got it!
CJ: Got what?
MH: Stank! That’s Mah Stank! I’m gonna make a fortune!!
CJ: “That’s Mah Stank”?
MH: On the front it’ll say “Can You Smell It?” and on the back it’ll say “That’s Mah Stank”. Everybody’ll buy it because they’ll think it’s a Rock shirt.
CJ: You know…you might be on to something there, sad to say.
MH: I can’t wait to show mah stank to Trish.

You know, I have a feeling that Spanky didn’t quit, he was fired. Why? So they could repackage Mark Henry as “Stanky.” Think about THAT!
--Matt "Excalibur05" Hocking, 1/19/04 Raw Satire


scabby
Bauerwurst








Since: 23.2.02
From: Toronto

Since last post: 2400 days
Last activity: 2400 days
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.75
I don't even like the idea of shoot-outs in the regular season.

It's a long shot, but if the Leafs missed the playoffs by a point due to another team gaining a point via a shoot-out victory, I would be pissed. It's not hockey, regardless of how exciting it may be.

Maybe I'm in the minority when I say that I'd prefer games to be decided by actually playing the game rather than holding a skills competition.

That being said, I hate the 3 points for a win proposal. Tag-up coming back should be great, I think moving the nets back is a good idea and it looks like goalies will be handicapped pretty severely if the rules are approved.

Sorry JS Gigueue, Garth Snow and your ilk. They also mentioned more "form fitting jersys" for netminders in addition to 10 inch pads.

(edited by scabby on 11.2.04 0043)




Oliver
Scrapple








Since: 20.6.02
From: #YEG

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.36
Hmmm...they're trying to impliment all theses rules while a lockout looms in the horizon? If the lockout happens, fans will be bitching, but more would if these happen.

I'm not a hardcore hockey fan, by any stretch of the imagination. I can't afford the high price of tickets to see the Oilers here in town, and I'm almost certain the price of Leafs tickets are really bad. Such is why I like to catch the minor leagues.

With such said, here's a casual fan's thoughts of the new rules. I'd be interested in hearing what other casual fans think of them, too.

    1. Goaltenders cannot handle the puck behind the goal line. If they do, it's a 2 minute penalty.
So...less strategy for goalies? I would much prefer to see a one minute penalty occur when goalies that hold onto the puck and force a face-off. I love fast paced hockey, and that kills it right there.

    2. Tag-up offsides are back
What's a tag-up offside? Sorry for asking a dumb question.

    3. Move goal line back from 13 feet to 10 feet.
Can't say I'd like that one, it'll offer less room for a camera to zoom in, I guess. Room is good, and offers more checking space.

    4. Reduce width of goalie pads from 12 inches to 10 inches.
THis isn't very fair for those who are taller and work the net. I think the height of the pads should be in proportioned to their physical stature. I think something like this was suggested in baseball, right?

    Also, the AHL will experiment for one full season with 3 points for a win and 2 points for an OT Win. If the game is still tied after the 5 minute 4 on 4 Overtime, there will be a shootout for the 2 points.
Great...another way to confuse fans. I still don't totally understand the OTL column in the newspaper, much as it confuses the hell out of me when I'm setting up some ProLine bets. Keep it simple, two for win, one for tie, none for a loss.

    And the AHL will also try the "24 inch" blue and red lines.
Not too sure what that'll accomplish. Can anyone explain?

    Penalty shots will be awarded if a player is in pursuit of a loose puck that would be a breakaway and is hauled down instead of having to have clear possession.
How about two man penalty shots? Add a little drama to the game?

    Goals where the net is slightly off its pegs will count now.
That's a good question. Depends on how the net came off the edges. If the goal was scored before it was noticed, maybe. How does that usually happen, anyhow? Someone skating into it? Goalie backed into it?

Sorry for the dumb questions, really. I tend to watch hockey when there's a promising match-up or rivalry...like Flames/Oilers or the occasional Toronto/Montreal game.





SD2: April, Year 3; what's the point to the Career mode, anyhow?
FF7: Disc 1; 4h into game; en route to the next reactor
FF8: Disc 2; 14h into game; Squall, Rinoa, Quistis vs. Master NORG.

Finally, my site's back online!
evilwaldo
Lap cheong








Since: 7.2.02
From: New York, NY

Since last post: 3406 days
Last activity: 3186 days
AIM:  
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
The touch up rule is when the puck is dumped into the zone and an offensive player is already in the zone it would be called a delayed offside with the defensive team allowed to bring the puck out of the zone. The offside would be waved off when the offensive player completely removes himself from the zone. With the touchup rule he would only have to touch the blue line to be back onside.

...or at least that is how I believe it works.

It would not make much of a difference because the guy is either going to touch the line and stop or skate a slightly smaller arc.

This may sound silly but the best way to increase scoring is doing something more radical like going to 4-on-4 play.



mmmmmm, Breakfast (x-entertainment.com)
fuelinjected
Banger








Since: 12.10.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 3260 days
Last activity: 3260 days
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.15
4 on 4 is not hockey, it's just not. It's fun for 5 minutes in Overtime but that's it.

The goaltenders sure spoke out about the puck handling rule today. Being a former goalie, I don't like it AT ALL. For one thing, they're just asking for defencemen to get murdered by forwards. The second thing is that the puck is shot in so hard that it's going to go all the way around and be chipped back out. Teams won't be able to break out of their zone properly and that'll kill off some action right there. I just don't think this a well thought out rule at all.

Johan Hedberg had a good idea. He said that they should make the goalies fair game if they come out to play the puck. I don't mind that rule at all because it rewards teams with a really good forecheck.

The major problem is that goaltenders have evolved faster then the players. The goalie used to always be the place where they put the kid who couldn't skate or shoot well. Most goalies now can outskate a lot of the players on their team even with the extra equipment on. They're big, skilled, fast, agile, knowledgeable, etc.

When two top teams or even a top and middle team play now, the games are usually REALLY GOOD. There's a lot of good exciting hockey out there. It's those fringe and borderline teams that suck the life out of the league. You knock a few of those teams out and you'll see a big increase in scoring chances.

You can tweak the rules all day long but if you're never going to get anywhere with a league filled with fringe players who couldn't make an exciting play if they came in 3 on 0.
Net Hack Slasher
Banger








Since: 6.1.02
From: Outer reaches of your mind

Since last post: 3588 days
Last activity: 2008 days
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.54
I don't like those complicated tie scenarios. If you are going with No Shootouts, I do like the 3 points for a win, makes it more important. Keep a point for a tie and zero points if you lose. No matter when you lose or win the game, I'd keep the 4 on 4, 5-minute overtime... Now if you want to have shootouts, then go simple wins/loses like pretty much ever other major sport in America. If you win the game during play or shootouts you get a Win, if you lose it, you get a loss. I don't want tabulating the NHL standings be as complex as tabulating my income tax forum.

Not allow goalies to handle the puck behind the icing line is dumb. That's a skill and to take it away from them is unfair... I do agree with Fuel, if a goalie is behind his net he should be allowed to be bumped off the puck. Don't think I want to see them charged at, but a solid bump off should be allowed without consequences



smark/net attack wienerville advisory is lowered to YELLOW alert - Elevated (Due to Lesner still being champ, Benoit winning the Rumble, but HHH as champ is still a threat) 1/27

Get your WWE CD copy autographed by Stone Cold Steve Austin, Chris Jericho, Trish Stratus and Lilian Garcia after Raw... Oh MY! Christmas has come late. Can't get better then that.
Scar
Goetta








Since: 2.1.02
From: NS, Canada

Since last post: 1491 days
Last activity: 1147 days
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.00
I think they should turn most things back to the way they used to be. If you LOSE in overtime, you LOSE the game. No points granted for it.
It doesn't seem necessary to have three points for a win. If the team needs the 2 points they'll play for the win.



X-ring.
Jaguar
Knackwurst








Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 197 days
Last activity: 197 days
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.71
But if ties give each team 1 point, why would anyone play to win in overtime?

-Jag



"I'm going to go now and demand beer money from my representative. We simply must deal with the problem of my sobriety." - PalpatineW
JayJayDean
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 48 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
Y!:
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.59
    Originally posted by Scar
    It doesn't seem necessary to have three points for a win. If the team needs the 2 points they'll play for the win.


Then why did they feel the need to change the rule in the first place? I think they should seriously look at three points for a win, no overtime.

I didn't realize this until I looked it up, but Colorado has SEVEN OT wins and the best record in the West, while San Jose has ZERO OT wins and the third-best record in the West. Change it to three point for a win and no overtime and San Jose has the best record and Colorado drops to third. I think the Avs play FOR OT because they know at four-on-four they have a bigtime advantage over almost any other team. Like someone said, four-on-four is NOT hockey. They don't go seven-on-seven in soccer, do they? (Of course they DO go to shootouts, so hockey gets a big ol' check in the "What's Better?" column.) Or play eight-man football on OT? Or take away the second baseman in extra innings?



“To get ass, you’ve got to bring ass." -- Roy Jones Jr.

"Your input has been noted.
I hope you don't take it personally if I disregard it." -- Guru Zim
BigVitoMark
Lap cheong








Since: 10.8.02
From: Queen's University, Canada

Since last post: 3376 days
Last activity: 3285 days
ICQ:  
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.10
    Originally posted by fuelinjected
    1. Goaltenders cannot handle the puck behind the goal line. If they do, it's a 2 minute penalty.

    2. Tag-up offsides are back

    3. Move goal line back from 13 feet to 10 feet.

    4. Reduce width of goalie pads from 12 inches to 10 inches


1. That's stupid...goalies should be allowed to go wherever they want, but should be fair game outside the crease. They're on the ice, they should be allowed to play the puck, but I hate the fact that they have an advantage over a forechecking forward.

2. Tag-up offsides should have never left. The current rule just creates extra stoppages and slows the game down.

3. The goal line is fine where it is. If you take away the space behind the net you'll cut scoring down even further.

4. Reducing the size of goalie pads is fine with me. Equipment is clearly too big now.



Don't you hate pants?
AmericanIcon
Bauerwurst








Since: 6.12.03
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Since last post: 3811 days
Last activity: 3808 days
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.97
    Originally posted by fuelinjected
    1. Goaltenders cannot handle the puck behind the goal line. If they do, it's a 2 minute penalty.


Stupid Rule!

    Originally posted by fuelinjected
    2. Tag-up offsides are back.

Good rule! They play this in Minor Hockey in Canada and it is a lot better than the rule that is in now!

    Originally posted by fuelinjected
    3. Move goal line back from 13 feet to 10 feet.

I am fine with that. It is the way it was back before 1993.

    Originally posted by fuelinjected
    4. Reduce width of goalie pads from 12 inches to 10 inches.

Fine with this as well. The goalies shouldnt be complaining back in the 40s their wasnt even helmets! Pads aren't the only issue though its those damn chest protecters. They are too big!

The blue Lines are going to 36 inches not 24. That is still stupid! Keep the damn 2 line offside rule in. Those Europeans are ruining the game and if the Americans don't like the game the way it is today well thats too bad!

3 Points for a Regulation win is alright but Id rather them play 5 on 5 in OT for 20 minutes! 2 Points. How about going to 0 points for a Tie?!

The other two rules are fine with me those are just minor changes.

(edited by AmericanIcon on 15.2.04 0103)

If they really want in increase scoring then the only answer is CONTRACTION! Get rid of any team that doesnt get ice outside in the winter! Anyways I think the NHL has too much scoring!

(edited by AmericanIcon on 15.2.04 0106)

"If we were to flush the crap out of the United States of America I'd pull the plug right here in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania!"
-Bret Hart Raw 1996
IncredibleHeelHeat
Linguica








Since: 18.6.02
From: Upstate Oklahoma

Since last post: 3683 days
Last activity: 2749 days
#15 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.00
IF they want to increase scoring, then why don't they just move the goal back behind the endboards, a la indoor soccer?


I agree on making the goalie fair game once he leaves the crease. Smaller goalie equipment sounds like quick fix solution to cover up poor shooting.





"Austin vs. MacMahon is to the WWE what the nWo was to WCW."

- Venom, 5-8-003
evilwaldo
Lap cheong








Since: 7.2.02
From: New York, NY

Since last post: 3406 days
Last activity: 3186 days
AIM:  
#16 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
The biggest change they could make is have the refs calls the rules on a consistant basis.



mmmmmm, Breakfast (x-entertainment.com)
Freeway
Scrapple








Since: 3.1.02
From: Calgary

Since last post: 303 days
Last activity: 15 hours
#17 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.96
    Originally posted by evilwaldo
    The biggest change they could make is have the refs calls the rules on a consistant basis.


I was watching The Score during the All-Star Break, and Scott Elliott (the bearded guy from the Winnipeg Free Press) mentioned that he thinks the reason refereeing is so damned lax in the NHL is the fact that there are now TWICE as many referees working games. A few years back you had half as many referees, so you'd probably get the better referees doing games. But they had to add more refs, so they hired more (and presumably lowered their standards). Thus, we get more referees...but most of them have less experience than the referees who used to officiate every game.

I say they should just cut back to one referee a game and tell them to call everything they can see. That'll cut down on men on the ice...AND we'd get more consistent calling.



THE FLAMES: 30-23-5-3 for 68 points in 59 games
IGINLA WATCH: 30 goals and 24 assists for 54 points in 58 games
Fezzik
Loukanika








Since: 17.2.03
From: Edmonton, AB

Since last post: 3890 days
Last activity: 3525 days
#18 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.00
    Originally posted by fuelinjected
    Johan Hedberg had a good idea. He said that they should make the goalies fair game if they come out to play the puck.
    br>



As much as there are a few goalies I'd like to see splattered across the boards, I don't think this is a practical idea. As you said, the goaltenders have evolved and become more important than ever and too much rides on a healthy #1 keeper. It would be foolish for the GM's to jeopardize what is often their most valuable resource.


(edited by Fezzik on 25.2.04 2255)


It is better to be silent and thought a fool then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Homer: "I better say something or they'll think I'm stupid"

evilwaldo
Lap cheong








Since: 7.2.02
From: New York, NY

Since last post: 3406 days
Last activity: 3186 days
AIM:  
#19 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
    Originally posted by Freeway420
      Originally posted by evilwaldo
      The biggest change they could make is have the refs calls the rules on a consistant basis.


    I was watching The Score during the All-Star Break, and Scott Elliott (the bearded guy from the Winnipeg Free Press) mentioned that he thinks the reason refereeing is so damned lax in the NHL is the fact that there are now TWICE as many referees working games. A few years back you had half as many referees, so you'd probably get the better referees doing games. But they had to add more refs, so they hired more (and presumably lowered their standards). Thus, we get more referees...but most of them have less experience than the referees who used to officiate every game.

    I say they should just cut back to one referee a game and tell them to call everything they can see. That'll cut down on men on the ice...AND we'd get more consistent calling.


Elliott is wrong. They didn't have to hire more refs. The extra ref was added because only the referee is allowed to call penalties and they were missing a lot of cheap shots behind the play. Guys were slowly skating up the ice behind the ref taking cheap shots at guys and getting away with it. The fear of letting the linesman call penalties is that everyone will be calling penalties with no clear leader and the flow of the game will slow down.



mmmmmm, Breakfast (x-entertainment.com)
AmericanIcon
Bauerwurst








Since: 6.12.03
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Since last post: 3811 days
Last activity: 3808 days
#20 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.96
    Originally posted by Fezzik
      Originally posted by fuelinjected
      Johan Hedberg had a good idea. He said that they should make the goalies fair game if they come out to play the puck.
      br>



    As much as there are a few goalies I'd like to see splattered across the boards, I don't think this is a practical idea. As you said, the goaltenders have evolved and become more important than ever and too much rides on a healthy #1 keeper. It would be foolish for the GM's to jeopardize what is often their most valuable resource.


    (edited by Fezzik on 25.2.04 2255)


From that comment you sound like a European! Come on now dont be a pussy!



You are Rob Van Dam
You are Rob Vam Dam


Which WWE Wrestler are you?
brought to you by Quizilla
Thread rated: 4.71
Pages: 1
Thread ahead: The worst team in hockey
Next thread: Lang to the Red Wings
Previous thread: Another Great Sutter Move: Flames Get Nieminen
(441 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Ditto for me =)
- El Nastio, Playoff Hockey Pool? (2003)
Related threads: Will ties be abolished? - Early, Early Playoff Picture - 2004 NHL All-Star Game Rosters - More...
The W - Hockey - Potential New Rules for 2004Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.103 seconds.