HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

My New Rule Proposals...

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-12-2003, 08:07 AM
  #1
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
My New Rule Proposals...

I haven't really heard this brought up, so here is my rule...

1). Any icing that is deemed by the linesman to have been caused by an attempted pass, is waved off and play continues.

If a team is tied or trailing, the following rules would be nice to see.

2). The centre red line is not in effect if the opposition has 3 or more players in the neutral zone (between the puck carrier and their end). This applies to both the offside pass (or it's wrongfully coined term of two-line pass), and icing.

How will these work?

Less icings will probably result in fewer whistles and stoppages, as well as all of those races for the puck don't simply result in a stoppage, but a sustained attack.

The second one has a theoretical side that could work. If a team jams up the neutral zone, they basically worry about the redline back for the most part, simply because they know the redline is the minimum distance you need to go. So most teams have 4 guys from the redline back.

Now, my proposal means a couple of things (in theory).

1. It will force teams to spread out a lot more than they want to, or forecheck more than they want to. If you are standing behind the net with no pressure, and the opposition is all in the neutral zone, you have the option to send a forward breaking, and have the player behind your net hammer the puck down the ice, and your forward has the jump on the opposition.

Question: What will prevent the defence from simply backing up all the way?

Answer: With the offside pass rule gone (in this instance), If the defensemen back up, either the forwards need to back up, or there is a large gap between the forwards and defense which can be used.

Question: But what if they both back up, and instead of the trap being in the neutral zone, it is at the blueline?

Answer: Coaches are smart, if a defensive zone trap was more effective than a neutral zone one, it would be used.

2. With more room in the neutral zone, you can generate more speed going through it. It gives the puck controlling team more options, and at the same time requires a very structured and sound defense to combat it (so as to not completely eliminate the defensive minded teams). For instance, on a line change... you could have a guy waiting up at the oppositions blueline, while the other team is making their change, and you have a couple of options to get it to him.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 08:28 AM
  #2
Asiaoil
Registered User
 
Asiaoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country: Thailand
Posts: 5,259
vCash: 500
Just a thought.

If you want to get rid of DELIBERATE icings that slow down the game - just make it a delay of game penelty similar to when the goalie shoots the puck over the boards (except when a team is killing a penelty). That would probably lead to more sustained pressure in the offensive zone, more goals and fewer stoppages.

Asiaoil is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 08:35 AM
  #3
blah
Registered User
 
blah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 4,269
vCash: 500
How about you treat it like a scratch in pool. If you ice it the other team gets puck in hand.

blah is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 08:46 AM
  #4
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asiaoil
Just a thought.

If you want to get rid of DELIBERATE icings that slow down the game - just make it a delay of game penelty similar to when the goalie shoots the puck over the boards (except when a team is killing a penelty). That would probably lead to more sustained pressure in the offensive zone, more goals and fewer stoppages.
That would be too simple and too easy... that isn't the NHL way.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 08:51 AM
  #5
Yanner39
Registered User
 
Yanner39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ottawa ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,334
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
I haven't really heard this brought up, so here is my rule...

1). Any icing that is deemed by the linesman to have been caused by an attempted pass, is waved off and play continues.
This I like alot. A large % of all icings are due to this. It may encourage players to make these passes more often and without icing, will speed the game up. Also, hard forechecking team like Edm could have a better chance to go get the puck and generate offense.

Yanner39 is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 09:48 AM
  #6
Asiaoil
Registered User
 
Asiaoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country: Thailand
Posts: 5,259
vCash: 500
Icing is a very low-cost way for teams to negate an advantage their opposition has in their defensive zone. Basically it kills offensive advantage, goal scoring opportunities and slows down the game. Icing also allows bigger less skilled defensemen to survive in the NHL over guys with better skating/puck handling skills (think Ferguson doing off the glass and out over and over and over).

Icing is illegal – I just don’t think the current penalty (a face-off in the defensive zone) is any sort of deterrent and in fact it benefits the defensive team by allowing a stoppage in play and face-off which they have about a 50/50 chance of winning.

By making the penalty for icing more severe – you don’t allow teams to escape when they are under pressure in the offensive zone so easily. They could still ice the puck – but all that gets you is a penelty and more pressure either form of a power play - unless you are playing the Oilers of course

Asiaoil is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 01:35 PM
  #7
LawnDemon
Registered User
 
LawnDemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Danger Bay
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,984
vCash: 500
a penalty for icing?

somehow i'm not interested in watching "let's take turns on the powerplay all night long"...

the best idea (and simplest) is to make it illegal for the goalie to go behind the goal line. then teams could actually dump the puck past the neutral zone trap. sure, it hurts goalies like brodeur and turco but so what?

the fact that they can go out and play the puck out of the zone is what makes the trap work. take that ability away and you have returned the ability to forecheck to every team in the league.

oh yeah, and for the love of god put "touch-back" offsides back in the game. the touch-back offsides make it natural for a team to fall into the trap rather than forecheck. hell, they aren't ALLOWED to forecheck so what else are they going to do?

two very simple rules = one much better game.

LawnDemon is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 05:59 PM
  #8
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by LawnDemon
a penalty for icing?

somehow i'm not interested in watching "let's take turns on the powerplay all night long"...

the best idea (and simplest) is to make it illegal for the goalie to go behind the goal line. then teams could actually dump the puck past the neutral zone trap. sure, it hurts goalies like brodeur and turco but so what?

the fact that they can go out and play the puck out of the zone is what makes the trap work. take that ability away and you have returned the ability to forecheck to every team in the league.

oh yeah, and for the love of god put "touch-back" offsides back in the game. the touch-back offsides make it natural for a team to fall into the trap rather than forecheck. hell, they aren't ALLOWED to forecheck so what else are they going to do?

two very simple rules = one much better game.
I love the touch-back offsides... those should definitely be brought back in...

As for your goaltender rule... I hate it, and here is why.

You take an act that requires a lot of dedication and skill (goaltender handling the puck) out in order to combat a system used to make up for a team that has a lack of skill... I don't understand that.

I think it adds another dimension to the game (the goaltenders handling the puck), and this game needs more skill, not more skill taken out.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 09:33 PM
  #9
creative giant*
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone

If a team is tied or trailing, the following rules would be nice to see.

2). The centre red line is not in effect if the opposition has 3 or more players in the neutral zone (between the puck carrier and their end). This applies to both the offside pass (or it's wrongfully coined term of two-line pass), and icing.
You'd need about 10 linesman out there on the ice to keep track of all that

creative giant* is offline  
Old
11-12-2003, 09:56 PM
  #10
Narnia
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Narnia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,394
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Narnia
No Touch Icing

It's really frustrating when two players race for the puck and there's a risk for injury. Do teams have to risk injury to their players because they want to race to the puck. I don't think so.

__________________
"He just ate up Robyn Regehr for dinner, a spectacular play by Hemsky, and Robyn Regehr has got doo doo all over his face" - Rod Phillips call on Hemsky's goal vs the Flames
Narnia is offline  
Old
11-13-2003, 01:48 AM
  #11
Yanner39
Registered User
 
Yanner39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ottawa ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,334
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
I love the touch-back offsides... those should definitely be brought back in...

As for your goaltender rule... I hate it, and here is why.

You take an act that requires a lot of dedication and skill (goaltender handling the puck) out in order to combat a system used to make up for a team that has a lack of skill... I don't understand that.

I think it adds another dimension to the game (the goaltenders handling the puck), and this game needs more skill, not more skill taken out.
I think the goalie handling the puck is very important but within reason. I think there should be a circle around the net where goalies are "allowed" to go. If they step outside the circle to play the puck, that's fine but they are fair game and subject to the same physical contact as other players on the ice. This means you can't run a goalie, can't hit him from behind, can't hit him when he doesn't have the puck, but just a normal body check.

Geez, when a goaltender goes out of his net in hockey, other players can touch him and they look as ridiculous as football players avoiding a "no-yards" penalty in the CFL(what a stupid rule).

How many times have we seen Roy or Turco wander out of his net and Smyth has to almost kill himself to avoid them.

Yanner39 is offline  
Old
11-13-2003, 09:41 AM
  #12
Kenadyan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Asheboro, NC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LawnDemon
oh yeah, and for the love of god put "touch-back" offsides back in the game. the touch-back offsides make it natural for a team to fall into the trap rather than forecheck. hell, they aren't ALLOWED to forecheck so what else are they going to do?

two very simple rules = one much better game.


I've been saying this ever since they took it out!!!! In fact, when they decided to take it out, I told all my friends that it would slow down the flow of the game. Guess what?? IT HAS!!! Put it back in the game!!!!!Gary Bettman, can you hear me????

Kenadyan is offline  
Old
11-13-2003, 09:50 AM
  #13
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by creative giant
You'd need about 10 linesman out there on the ice to keep track of all that
No you wouldn't... it's not like the linesmen are over-burdened with duties as it is.

It isn't complicated to count 3 players.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
11-13-2003, 09:52 AM
  #14
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. van Nostrin
I think the goalie handling the puck is very important but within reason. I think there should be a circle around the net where goalies are "allowed" to go. If they step outside the circle to play the puck, that's fine but they are fair game and subject to the same physical contact as other players on the ice. This means you can't run a goalie, can't hit him from behind, can't hit him when he doesn't have the puck, but just a normal body check.

Geez, when a goaltender goes out of his net in hockey, other players can touch him and they look as ridiculous as football players avoiding a "no-yards" penalty in the CFL(what a stupid rule).

How many times have we seen Roy or Turco wander out of his net and Smyth has to almost kill himself to avoid them.
Goalies should be just as much fair game as any other player handling the puck.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
11-13-2003, 10:34 AM
  #15
LawnDemon
Registered User
 
LawnDemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Danger Bay
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. van Nostrin
I think the goalie handling the puck is very important but within reason. I think there should be a circle around the net where goalies are "allowed" to go. If they step outside the circle to play the puck, that's fine but they are fair game and subject to the same physical contact as other players on the ice. This means you can't run a goalie, can't hit him from behind, can't hit him when he doesn't have the puck, but just a normal body check.

Geez, when a goaltender goes out of his net in hockey, other players can touch him and they look as ridiculous as football players avoiding a "no-yards" penalty in the CFL(what a stupid rule).

How many times have we seen Roy or Turco wander out of his net and Smyth has to almost kill himself to avoid them.
interesting thought about contact with the goalie. after all, the crease exists for a reason - it is the "goalie no contact zone". if a goalie leaves the crease he should be fair game for any legal hit. that includes coming out to cut down on the angles.

frankly, this isn't anything other than enforcing the existing rules and it would certainly lead to more goals. good call...

LawnDemon is offline  
Old
11-13-2003, 10:48 AM
  #16
creative giant*
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
No you wouldn't... it's not like the linesmen are over-burdened with duties as it is.

It isn't complicated to count 3 players.
It is not the counting that is complicated, it is the players moving in and out of the neutral zone that would make this a VERY difficult, if not impossible rule to enforce

creative giant* is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:36 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.