HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Montreal Canadiens (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   New Rules on Habs-D (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=51426)

BJCOLLINS 02-11-2004 01:19 PM

New Rules on Habs-D
 
I think the new rules will make it more important than ever to have mobile puck handling D-men guys like: Konstantin Korneyev, Ron Hainsey, Mark Flood even Breezy(I can't believe I just added him after last year :D ) maybe even Linhart have just become more valuable to our team. Wingers will have to alot quicker and get back into their zone so they can back up the D on dump in's, this should also help our current stock of prospects given that we have alot of fast very good puck handling wingers....I believe the new changes will help...one other thing I would have liked is a full 2 min. served for penalties and a mandatory minimum 4 min.(full 4 min.) for high sticking....thoughts ...thanks

Dynasty 02-11-2004 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BJCOLLINS
I think the new rules will make it more important than ever to have mobile puck handling D-men guys like: Konstantin Korneyev, Ron Hainsey, Mark Flood even Breezy(I can't believe I just added him after last year :D ) maybe even Linhart have just become more valuable to our team. Wingers will have to alot quicker and get back into their zone so they can back up the D on dump in's, this should also help our current stock of prospects given that we have alot of fast very good puck handling wingers....I believe the new changes will help...one other thing I would have liked is a full 2 min. served for penalties and a mandatory minimum 4 min.(full 4 min.) for high sticking....thoughts ...thanks


I agree that we should have a mandatory minimum 4 min (full 4 min.) for high sticking but not sure about full 2 min. served for penalities.

How do you guys feel about playing the complete game with 4 on 4. Personally, I'm still debating this one. :dunno:

BJCOLLINS 02-11-2004 01:36 PM

How do you guys feel about playing the complete game with 4 on 4. Personally, I'm still debating this one. :dunno:[/QUOTE]



NO THANKS.....this is the most wondeful game in the world. none better.I LOVE HOCKEY and while I respect most anybodies opinion I think we need to keep the integrity of our current game in tact personally I believe 4 on 4 is fun ON THE POND
:yo:

Kirk Muller 02-11-2004 01:47 PM

The new rules would mean teams need to carry more defeneman because they are going to crushed left, right, and centre. Forwards are going to come in barrelling after the dman, and are going to cause some injuries. I would expect concussions to increase again as dmen get plastered in the boards.

Personally I think goalies should be able to come out, but just behind the net (was that Bowmans idea). No more wandering into the corners or side boards.


Also, the simplest way to improve the game would be to enforce the damn rule book. Truly crack down on hooking, holding, and interference. No more mini one month phases, all year including playoffs

#1 Habitant 02-11-2004 01:54 PM

New Rules on Hab-D
 
I agree that the rule changes being proposed will be of benefit to the Habs because of the number of puck-carrying defencemen we currently have in our system. A guy like Hainsey could become very valuable in the long term. As you wrote, we also have Breezy, Markov, Korneev, Linhart. I also agree that having prospects like Perezhogin, Higgin, Balej, and others is to our advantage in helping with an opponent's dump-in.
I like most of the proposed rule changes up for consideration. I would make it a 5-minute major for all high-sticking infractions. I would also agree that a player should serve his full 2-minute minor regardless of how often the opponent scores on the powerplay. The only other thing I would like to see changed is the overtime, either going to a shootout or playing just the 60 minutes. Giving 3 points or 2 points for an overtime win will not make a team "go for it" anymore than when the overtime was first instituted. Too many points are awarded now. If they start handing our 3 points, the Laffs might get 100 points every year! My God...what a thought! :lol:

Munchausen 02-11-2004 02:31 PM

If anything ALL teams will need more mobility and quickness on the blueline, but also Dmen able to take hits. Souray and Komisarek are so big and strong that I don't think they would suffer much from this. Markov is so intelligent, agile and quick that he'll find ways to avoid forwards coming full speed towards him. The one I'm really concerned about is Rivet. IMO, this guy will look painful if Theo cannot bail him out like he's doing now. He will get crushed into a bloody pulp. He's not fast nor strong enough and therefore could end up caughing up the puck all the time in order to avoid the regular hitting that he IMO will not be able to sustain. That could be a major problem, especially if the Habs plan on using Rivet in a top-4 role next year (hopefully they're not).

jacklours 02-11-2004 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nash13
The new rules would mean teams need to carry more defeneman because they are going to crushed left, right, and centre. Forwards are going to come in barrelling after the dman, and are going to cause some injuries. I would expect concussions to increase again as dmen get plastered in the boards.

Personally I think goalies should be able to come out, but just behind the net (was that Bowmans idea). No more wandering into the corners or side boards.


Also, the simplest way to improve the game would be to enforce the damn rule book. Truly crack down on hooking, holding, and interference. No more mini one month phases, all year including playoffs

I know you ideas make sense, but I feel they kinda oppose each other. it is true D-man will get killed several times in a game as they will go get the puck in the corner and behind the net. But forward need to help them by slowing down the opposing forwards. If all the hooking and obstruction is called, THEN d-man will really get plastered.

I'm against hooking and obstruction as a fan. But as a D who got crushed in the corner by much more massive players then me, i'm thinking: DON'T CALL IT.

Darz 02-11-2004 03:20 PM

Remember these are just ideas being considered....there aren't actually been decided on. I have a feeling the goalie not allowed behind the goal line suggestion will never actually go through and become an actually rule.

Kirk Muller 02-11-2004 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacklours
I know you ideas make sense, but I feel they kinda oppose each other. it is true D-man will get killed several times in a game as they will go get the puck in the corner and behind the net. But forward need to help them by slowing down the opposing forwards. If all the hooking and obstruction is called, THEN d-man will really get plastered.

I'm against hooking and obstruction as a fan. But as a D who got crushed in the corner by much more massive players then me, i'm thinking: DON'T CALL IT.

My point was the single thing that would help is calling the rule book as written with the current rules in place. Leave it as is, but call the rules properly. The goalie ideas was kinda if a things were changed, this is what I would do.

I still think goalies should be able to stop the puck when its wrapped around the boards, its just when Broduer or Turco wonder into the corners and fire it right out. At least behind the net, they still have to get it high on the glass to get it by the forechecker.

Munchausen 02-11-2004 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darz
I have a feeling the goalie not allowed behind the goal line suggestion will never actually go through and become an actually rule.

I'm sure the NHLPA will protest against that one vehemently. Firstly because it will increase the chances for injuries to the Dmen and secondly because it's also goalies like Turco and Brodeur's bread and butter.

Corey 02-11-2004 03:31 PM

I can't agree with this full 2 minutes suggestion without reservation. For having too many men on the ice? Faceoff violations? The goalie's clearing the puck over the glass? Opening your yap to the referee? Let the punishment fit the crime. Reserve it for injury or obstruction, not for every rule in the book.

Munchausen 02-11-2004 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corey
I can't agree with this full 2 minutes suggestion without reservation. For having too many men on the ice? Faceoff violations? The goalie's clearing the puck over the glass? Opening your yap to the referee? Let the punishment fit the crime. Reserve it for injury or obstruction, not for every rule in the book.

I like it the way it is, except for the high sticking (this is becoming an epidemy and should be treated with drastic measures, like maybe 4 minutes for every high stick penality).

And please, for crying out loud, take out the dumb instigator rule so that a situation where we saw Souray fight to defend his captain doesn't end up in a ridiculous 17 minutes of penalities. This is ridiculous. Now players can take vicious runs at players without fearing for consequences.

Dynasty 02-12-2004 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Munchausen

And please, for crying out loud, take out the dumb instigator rule so that a situation where we saw Souray fight to defend his captain doesn't end up in a ridiculous 17 minutes of penalities. This is ridiculous. Now players can take vicious runs at players without fearing for consequences.


I definitely agree with this!


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:02 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.