The Instigator Penalty

[Classless Manked]

This is by far the worst rule in the NHL.

It's terrible. I think you know why I'm starting this thread if you're a Sens or Bruins fan.

I've read HFBoards for years and I know that this topic has been beaten to death, but I want to see what people currently think of it.

It's god awful. Discuss.

[Black and Gold]

I think everyone here can agree that it's a terrible rule. But I do have to say there was no reason to fight Quaider there. It wasn't a dirty hit.

[Fitch89]

Yep, let's try to encourage players to wear visors by penalizing them for doing it. What the **** is the thought process at the NHL?

[TheStig]

Get rid of it. If someone is dumb enough to take a run at one of my players, why should I get a penalty for standing up for him?

[djavan]

What are the pros & cons of getting rid of the instigator rule...

And for those who want to get rid of fighting wouldn't eliminating the instigator create more fights?

[Classless Manked]

Originally Posted by Black and Gold

I think everyone here can agree that it's a terrible rule. But I do have to say there was no reason to fight Quaider there. It wasn't a dirty hit.

What? It was the right call.

They gave Wiercioch the right penalty according to the rulebook.

That's why it's a problem.

[Yeti of the Flow]

Originally Posted by Black and Gold

I think everyone here can agree that it's a terrible rule. But I do have to say there was no reason to fight Quaider there. It wasn't a dirty hit.

There was plenty reason to fight McQuaid. There doesn't need to be a penalty for a fight to be smart.

[Novak Djokovic]

Agreed. NHL can't possibly ask the players to wear visors, and then penalize them for instigating (+ instigating with a visor).

[crapeze11]

I hate the instigator with a passion. Losing Chara to it for sticking up for his teammate after a cheapshot likely costed the Bruins the last Habs game.

[Paranoid Android]

I like the instigator. It's necessary and makes sense.

[swiftwin]

At the very least, they should get rid of the extra 2mins for instigating with a visor. It's a retarded double standard considering they want to promote player wearing visors.

[crapeze11]

It should be 2+5 not 2+5+10.

[Machinehead]

There has to be some sort of rule. We can't just have unchecked melees whenever players feel like throwing punches.

That being said, I think it can be amended to allow some sort of self-policing. As of now, you can't do anything.

The visor penalty has to go, especially with talks of making it mandatory.

[swiftwin]

Originally Posted by crapeze11

It should be 2+5 not 2+5+10.

It was actually 2+2+5+10

[njdevil26]

The instigator rule AND the the puck over the glass rule are the two most stupid rules in the game.

[source]

Well the Sens would have had a power play if Wiercioch didn't react as he did. The NHL doesn't want to encourage teams to settle scores, they want the refs to. What's so unreasonable about that?

Fighting is dangerous - why encourage it? Don't you guys remember DD got a concussion last week?

[Penalty Kill Icing]

Dumb rule is dumb.

[MountainHawk]

Originally Posted by crapeze11

It should be 2+5 not 2+5+10.

Should be 5+10, and no 2.

[Yeti of the Flow]

Originally Posted by source

Well the Sens would have had a power play if Wiercioch didn't react as he did. The NHL doesn't want to encourage teams to settle scores, they want the refs to. What's so unreasonable about that?

Fighting is dangerous - why encourage it? Don't you guys remember DD got a concussion last week?

No they wouldn't have. There was no penalty on the Bruins until the fighting major.

[Rysto]

Originally Posted by Yeti of the Flow

Yes. Saying you hope someone is hospitalized is definitely a way to express a reasonable sentiment. :|

Just responding to the incentives that the NHL has in place. Apparently attempting to injure the opponent is your best path to winning.

[Mayor Bee]

I think the instigator is both a good and necessary rule. Those who rail against it are either too young to remember pre-instigator hockey, or else have sepia-toned nostalgia for it.

With that said, here's how I would adjust it. If an instigation is in response to a cheap shot or dirty hit, waive the penalty. If it's not (as in the standard "jumping after a clean hit"), make the instigator a major and game misconduct in addition to the fight.

What we've seen in the last 10 years is a huge increase in guys getting jumped for daring to deliver a hard but clean hit. It's complete crap, and I have no idea why it is that on one hand we see complaining about the instigator but also complaining about jumping for a clean hit.

[LegionOfDoom91]

Originally Posted by Serbian Power

Agreed. NHL can't possibly ask the players to wear visors, and then penalize them for instigating (+ instigating with a visor).

Agree the visor one is even dumber. If only they'd listen to Don Cherry.

[crapeze11]

Originally Posted by swiftwin

It was actually 2+2+5+10

I know. I'm watching the game. I'm talking about the rule in general.

[Fitch89]

Originally Posted by source

Well the Sens would have had a power play if Wiercioch didn't react as he did. The NHL doesn't want to encourage teams to settle scores, they want the refs to. What's so unreasonable about that?

Fighting is dangerous - why encourage it? Don't you guys remember DD got a concussion last week?

Because the penalty was for wearing a piece of equipment, not the fight. The same piece of equipment the league is trying to promote

[source]

Originally Posted by Yeti of the Flow

No they wouldn't have. There was no penalty on the Bruins until the fighting major.

Wiercioch got a double minor yet the Bruins had a 2 minute power play...