The Bruins don't have too many D that can reliably make a long pass from D-zone to offensive blue line compared to other teams. Therefore it takes away a tactic that would generally be more effectively used by the opposition. So, I think it would help the B's.
this woudl be a dumb rule to bring back. it will not reduce the number of concussions and i think you could make a case that it will increase them.
bring back the two line pass and you make the trap a far more effective strategy again. it cuts down on the where passes can be made to thus you have more players in a smaller are of space. sounds to me like it will be easier for d-man to anticipate and demolish forwards looking over their shoulder to receive a pass from a d-man.
the concept is simple. you can see it in football. from 20 yard line to 20 yard line the defense has to cover huge expanses of field. the closer the offense gets to the end zone the less space the defense has to cover the harder it is to make passes that arent defended. same thing in hockey you'll have a neutral zone area that is a small space that is easy to defend. players will still skate fast unless your going to let players get away with water skiing
Wouldn't this actually make concussions more common?
If you put the red line back in, you need to make more passes to get from one end of the rink to the other. This means that players will be less spread out across the rink since stretch plays are ruled out, so you'll have both more passes in more traffic.
The concussions that this proposal is intended to avoid are the open-ice ones (and it's not clear whether these account for the increase in recent years), but if you've got more plays in open ice, where players are looking down to collect passes, you're creating more situations where a player is vulnerable to the kind of hits that result in concussions (picking pucks out from their skates, etc.).
While putting the redline back in may slow the game overall, I don't see how this alone achieves anything: most players can get up to top skating speed in just a couple of strides, and will do so whether there's a red line or not.
It would be interesting to see a breakdown of the different types of plays that lead to concussions. With the possible exception of Horton's in the SCF, I can't think of any of the concussions that any of the bruins have recently suffered that would have been avoided by this rule change. Most were along the boards at the end of the rink (e.g., Bergeron), or predatory (Savard, Horton's recent one). Even Boychuk's injury from Neil, while an open ice hit, took place well inside the defensive zone.
This is such a bad idea. I'm not even going to list the reasons as to why for the game as a whole, this is terrible, because I'd be typing all day. As it relates to the Bruins, yes it would hurt them, like it would hurt every team in the game.
Say NO to the red line. Get rid of the trapezoid instead. Game flows better with no red line, and skill/speed players are more fun to watch when they can let one fly.
Caught up in the day's concussion issues, people are making a rush decision to revert back to a time they perceived as slower and, thus, safer.
They're forgetting the days of Scoty Stevens and other bruisers stalking the red line like vultures, waiting for an ill-timed pass or a puck in the skates to tee off.
Caught up in the day's concussion issues, people are making a rush decision to revert back to a time they perceived as slower and, thus, safer.
They're forgetting the days of Scoty Stevens and other bruisers stalking the red line like vultures, waiting for an ill-timed pass or a puck in the skates to tee off.
Exactly. People are still going to get destroyed even with the Red line in.
it doesn't protect anyone, there will be less goal scoring and the league will be wondering why there is still alot of concussions. If you can't hold up an oncoming freght train than guys will continue to get hurt. picking and interfering with an opposing forechecker needs to be allowed again for injuries to go down. in old days pouliot would of interfered with chris neal and the huge check would of been not as hard
when has a player recieving a stretch pass ever been injured? I don't recall any
This. The d needs to be able to slow done the forecheckers. This plus no touch icing should ne priorities
Wouldn't this actually make concussions more common?
If you put the red line back in, you need to make more passes to get from one end of the rink to the other. This means that players will be less spread out across the rink since stretch plays are ruled out, so you'll have both more passes in more traffic.
The concussions that this proposal is intended to avoid are the open-ice ones (and it's not clear whether these account for the increase in recent years), but if you've got more plays in open ice, where players are looking down to collect passes, you're creating more situations where a player is vulnerable to the kind of hits that result in concussions (picking pucks out from their skates, etc.).
While putting the redline back in may slow the game overall, I don't see how this alone achieves anything: most players can get up to top skating speed in just a couple of strides, and will do so whether there's a red line or not.
It would be interesting to see a breakdown of the different types of plays that lead to concussions. With the possible exception of Horton's in the SCF, I can't think of any of the concussions that any of the bruins have recently suffered that would have been avoided by this rule change. Most were along the boards at the end of the rink (e.g., Bergeron), or predatory (Savard, Horton's recent one). Even Boychuk's injury from Neil, while an open ice hit, took place well inside the defensive zone.
ha we had nearly identical posts at the exact same time.
also i just went back and looked and the two line pass rule would have done nothing to prevent hortons concussion. the pass to horton was made around the top of the circle and he caught it right at his own blue line. he then passed it at the red line to krejci who was just a smidge ahead of him.
I'm not going to talk about whether it should come back or not because that's not the question that was posed. If they bring back the red line I think the Bruins will adapt just fine. Sure, they have set stretch plays but for the most part, they rely on short passes to break out of their own zone anyway. On the defensive side, they are a big, strong, physical team so I assume they'll be even tougher to score on.
The concussion issue is an equipment issue. We need new equipment that is designed for a higher impact game. We also to a lesser extent need to get the talentless energy guys out of the game.
I think most stretch/two line passes result in the receiving player getting in behind the D, anyway, so it's not like guys are getting stood up while receiving a stretch pass that often.
Exactly. People are still going to get destroyed even with the Red line in.
True, in fact you could argue that there were more hits like that when there was a red line because it was harder for forwards to get in behind the D with the puck. With no two-line passes, players are forced to skate the puck past defenders trying to hold the blue line, resulting in more opportunities for open ice hits.
I wholeheartedly agree with the idea of allowing more interference/picks on forechecking players. Forecheckers are allowed way too much speed below the dots nowadays.
Overall I think it helps, but it also has its downsides. It will help us because generally the Bruins D isn't fast/ agile, they are strong and overpowering. As of right now they tend to get beat by the quick up pass and can't get back into the play. With the red line back it would slow down entry and really cut down on breakaways and odd man chances because the offense essentially will have to start with the puck on their side of the red line rather than the offensive blue line. it will allow the D better gap control and the forwards would be able to back check more efficiently.
That being said the negative is for the offense. Paille wont get those breakaways, it will make getting into the offensive zone even harder, and scoring as a whole will be down across the entire league. Another negative is that everyone will start playing a style similar to the Bruins, and you would see a lot more power forwards and less finesse players.
I don't think it will necessarily benefit anybody, but I think the B's will be way ahead of the curve compared to most, so in that respect it would help. Still a lame ass idea that makes me wanna pull my ****ing hair out.
The B's are 1 of the more methodical teams I've seen on the breakout, so I think they'll adapt a lot quicker than most teams on that front.
The B's already have 1 of the best dump and chase games going, so that's no big change for us. It'll just be 10 times harder to get it started, and 100 times harder for me to stay awake watching them try to go on offense.
Where it would really help us is in neutral defense. My god, Manchuk will be an all star if he's not constantly getting suspended I can just see him lighting up wingers every chance he gets.
Putting the red line back in would really favor the bigger teams in the league. That said, if they do bring it back, I don't think I'll be watching hockey before long because I really doubt they'll stop there. Concussions won't go down, they'll go up. When that happens, what do you think they'll do next?
This game needs to keep evolving with it's players if they want to make it safer. Not revert back to old tricks from an era that damn near ruined the best game ever. This whole topic just bugs me. I really don't trust the people in charge to do the right things here. Their either unwilling to explore some options or just flat out incompetent or in some cases both. Bad news
