HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

LaFontaine's radical power-play idea

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-06-2009, 11:21 AM
  #1
ogie
Registered User
 
ogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Staten Island
Country: United States
Posts: 1,271
vCash: 500
LaFontaine's radical power-play idea

From Puck Daddy. http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puc...urn=nhl,194300

"Maybe if there's five minutes to go in the third period, if there's a penalty taken, maybe there's an optional penalty shot?

"Here are your options: You either get one penalty shot or a two minute penalty where the player doesn't come out of the box. You have a chance to go for two goals instead of maybe one goal. But what if the penalty occurs with, say, 30 seconds left in the game? What it does is allow some excitement into the game. You need to put the breakaway back in the game."


I like part of this idea. Definitly a fan of serving the whole 2 minutes. Will create more scoring, and also more excitement if your team kills off the whole two minutes. Not sure about the penalty shot though, i think that actually decreases scoring. Instead of having a bunch of chances to score on the PP you get just One.

Let the battle of words begin!

ogie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 11:25 AM
  #2
RGY
(Jagr68NYR94Leetch)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 8,257
vCash: 500
Stupid. Don't mess with tradition. The whole trying to make the game more exciting aspect has become a bit of overkill.

RGY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 11:29 AM
  #3
Shadowtron
Registered User
 
Shadowtron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,524
vCash: 500
Don't like it. Mind you this is only my opinion, but I think it would suck royally to be clinging to a one-goal lead with 5 minutes to go only to see it evaporated by a gimmick. Also don't like the idea of the player serving the full two minutes of a penalty despite PP goals being scored. It's a crummy way to lose a hockey game in my opinion. Coughing up a goal is punishment enough. But to open the opportunity for multiple GA's would be demoralizing and would probably create over-cautious hockey players.

Shadowtron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 11:29 AM
  #4
Staalwart
Registered User
 
Staalwart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 334
vCash: 500
Not a fan of the penalty shot idea at all. Hockey is a TEAM sport, it should be about the team and not an individual competition. Shootouts are bad enough. Yes they are exciting to watch, yes they are great for the casual fan and helping to grow the sport, and then ensure games don't end in ties so they are a necessary evil in the regular season but to me they are still en exhibition. To me part of the reason penalty shots are exciting when they do in fact occur during a game is because they are rare. This takes away from that.

Staalwart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 11:40 AM
  #5
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,934
vCash: 500
Dont like the penalty shot idea, but i do like the stay in the box for the whole two minutes.

If they want to open up the scoring more, i would much rather see that then expanded net sizes or major reduction in goalie equipment. I think there would be less penalites called and the flow of the game would be better. Think about what would happen on a full 5 on 3 for 2 minutes. That could change the game greatly.

HockeyBasedNYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 11:42 AM
  #6
ManicSubsidal15
Registered User
 
ManicSubsidal15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 596
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to ManicSubsidal15
I vote no to everthing haha I think the rules are fine the way they are and like a poster said all the trying to get scoring up is becoming a bit of an overkill. You want defense to actually exist and not every single shot being a goal.

ManicSubsidal15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 11:42 AM
  #7
DontStepanMe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Queens, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagr68NYR94Leetch View Post
Stupid. Don't mess with tradition. The whole trying to make the game more exciting aspect has become a bit of overkill.
actually if we wanted to stick with tradition, we would make all penalties be served in full. You get a two minute minor, you serve the full two minutes.

That is what used to happen, until Montreal had a PP so lethal they actually changed the rule to being once you score, the PP is over.

I would actually like it if the player had to stay in the box for the full two minutes, but at any point in the game... not just the last 5 minutes.

I would also like to see extra time added on to the game, if a team is on the PP when time actually expires. This way teams (and players) are really penalized when they take a penalty w/ under 2 minutes to go.

DontStepanMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 11:45 AM
  #8
SML
Registered User
 
SML's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 3,743
vCash: 500
Worst idea ever. All that would happen would be that the refs would put the whistle away in the last 5 minutes unless you murdered someone. The goal of officiating, I would think, is consistency. You want the game called fairly, and evenly, throughout the entire game and throughout the entire season. All this does is make things completely skewed. So I trip a guy in the first period, it's rwo minutes, but I trip him with four left and it's a penalty shot? What if it's a game that means one team gets into the playoffs, and the other misses? You're going to put all that on a penalty shot for tripping in the neutral zone? Screw that. I don't think we should take suggestions from guys who had to pack it in from getting too many shots to the head.

SML is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 11:47 AM
  #9
BlueShirts702
Registered User
 
BlueShirts702's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: City of Sin
Country: United States
Posts: 1,256
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rags225 View Post
actually if we wanted to stick with tradition, we would make all penalties be served in full. You get a two minute minor, you serve the full two minutes.

That is what used to happen, until Montreal had a PP so lethal they actually changed the rule to being once you score, the PP is over.

I would actually like it if the player had to stay in the box for the full two minutes, but at any point in the game... not just the last 5 minutes.

I would also like to see extra time added on to the game, if a team is on the PP when time actually expires. This way teams (and players) are really penalized when they take a penalty w/ under 2 minutes to go.
This is a good post, and it made me look at things a bit differently. Especially your last point. I think I like that a lot. Thanks for the good read, bud.

BlueShirts702 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 11:48 AM
  #10
jniklast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: Germany
Posts: 4,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rags225 View Post
actually if we wanted to stick with tradition, we would make all penalties be served in full. You get a two minute minor, you serve the full two minutes.

That is what used to happen, until Montreal had a PP so lethal they actually changed the rule to being once you score, the PP is over.

I would actually like it if the player had to stay in the box for the full two minutes, but at any point in the game... not just the last 5 minutes.

I would also like to see extra time added on to the game, if a team is on the PP when time actually expires. This way teams (and players) are really penalized when they take a penalty w/ under 2 minutes to go.
So then losing teams could intentionally take a penalty in the last seconds, just to have some added time where they could tie it (although shorthanded). I don't think that would work.

I'd just leave it how it is right now, why make everything even more complicated? I haven't recognised late penalties as anything major disturbing the game, so I don't think that needs to be atttended to.

jniklast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 11:58 AM
  #11
thesnake
Registered User
 
thesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fair Lawn, NJ
Posts: 248
vCash: 500
I think a good change to the PP format would be to do away with the "no icing" rule while on the PK. This would allow the team with the PP to have more time in the zone resulting in more chances for goals. Teams on the PK wouldn't be able to just hammer the puck down the ice...

thesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 12:00 PM
  #12
DontStepanMe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Queens, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jniklast View Post
So then losing teams could intentionally take a penalty in the last seconds, just to have some added time where they could tie it (although shorthanded). I don't think that would work.
So make it that play stops at end of regulation, and the team with the PP has the choice to continue (faceoff in offensive zone for PP team), or end the game.

That fixes that problem. B/c if you are winning and have the PP of course you will choose to end the game. and if you are on the PP and losing, of course you will try to score again.

DontStepanMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 12:06 PM
  #13
ogie
Registered User
 
ogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Staten Island
Country: United States
Posts: 1,271
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rags225 View Post
I would also like to see extra time added on to the game, if a team is on the PP when time actually expires. This way teams (and players) are really penalized when they take a penalty w/ under 2 minutes to go.
I tossed this idea around with my friends a few weeks back here is the problem ...20 seconds in the game and you are down by 3 goals. draw a power play. So unless they change the rules to having the guy serve the full two minutes there is no way it would help. Also what happens if you are down by one and they extend the game and the other team scores shorthanded? I like the idea of this but the logistics are too much.

ogie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 12:06 PM
  #14
1940rip
Registered User
 
1940rip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 148
vCash: 500
Claptrap all of it. This game is as fast and exciting as it's ever been. The NHL is presenting the best overall product that they've ever been able to. FOX glow pucks anyone? Leave the game alone.

1940rip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 12:10 PM
  #15
gravytrain6t
Registered User
 
gravytrain6t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 2,867
vCash: 500
I think that's a ridiculous idea. With 5 minutes left in the game your team should only be allowed to have a penalty shot if the type of penalty warrants it from a traditional stand point.

But if someone gets hooked in the corner or cross checked into the boards (for example) to have a penalty shot rewarded is definitely un-called for. Just give the offender 2 minutes in the box. Or, depending on the severity of say a "cheap shot" like the one Betts was the recipient of against the Caps, then use the 4 or 5 minute PP with the possible game misconduct.

The only thing I would possibly change is the 4 minute penalty. Just like with the 5 minute penalty, to me, It wouldn't be too drastic an idea to allow the team on the PP as many opportunities to score within the given time frame.

As far as a 2 minute minor goes, I would elect to keep it the same. If you score a goal, the player who took the penalty should come out of the box. Besides, with the new rules in place, there are enough 2 minute power plays and 5 on 3's to go around anyway. Sometimes it seems like a whole game is played on special teams.

By listening to Pat Lafontaine, we would be taking away too much of the team concept. The shoot out is good enough. Please Pat. No more ideas. Bettman is dumb and may listen. Besides, any goal the Rangers score can be just as exciting as a "hand me" break away goal. Who doesn't appreciate a Kotalik slap shot from the point?

What happens when these guy's keep coming up with new ideas to try and change the game some more, they forget who supports the great game of Hockey to begin with. The NHL has been around since the early 1920's and hockey fans loved it without the shootout and borderline, technical calls.

Keep the traditional hockey fan happy for the love he/she has for the game. It doesn't matter what you do for the people who have always had limited interest in the sport. The only result will be the NHL "ticking off" the hockey fan who supports the game no matter what. No need to turn this into a circus in order to attract new fans.

I'm not a big baseball guy. I think if the teams are tied after a full 9 innings they should have a home run derby and I'll watch some more games. See what long time base ball fans think of that.

gravytrain6t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 12:12 PM
  #16
pete3589
Registered User
 
pete3589's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 115
vCash: 500
The diving in the last 5 mins would become rediculous then.

pete3589 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 12:21 PM
  #17
blue2noise
Registered User
 
blue2noise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,487
vCash: 500
I see Patty hasn't fully recovered from the concussions

blue2noise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 12:22 PM
  #18
I Pee Blue
Registered User
 
I Pee Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 48
vCash: 500
soooooo bad. no, just no.

I Pee Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 12:25 PM
  #19
clmetsfan
Registered User
 
clmetsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 3,782
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pete3589 View Post
The diving in the last 5 mins would become rediculous then.
This. Not to mention that as bad as so much of the officiating is right now, all this would do is give the refs even more of an influence over the outcome of a game.

The rules are fine the way they are. Shadowtron called it a gimmick, which was dead on. No need for this nonsense.

clmetsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 12:29 PM
  #20
ogie
Registered User
 
ogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Staten Island
Country: United States
Posts: 1,271
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pete3589 View Post
The diving in the last 5 mins would become rediculous then.
well that is one thing they need to address overall... it still drives me mad that even though they call a dive the other play still gets a penalty. Either it is a dive or a legit penalty...can't be both. I think EddieO talked about this in last nights game... called for a dive then the original penalty is negated.

ogie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 12:32 PM
  #21
clmetsfan
Registered User
 
clmetsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 3,782
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ogie View Post
well that is one thing they need to address overall... it still drives me mad that even though they call a dive the other play still gets a penalty. Either it is a dive or a legit penalty...can't be both. I think EddieO talked about this in last nights game... called for a dive then the original penalty is negated.
I disagree completely, because there are plenty of penalties that don't necessitate a player falling to the ice. If a guy gets his stick up in the waist area for a legitimate hook and the other player takes a dive to make sure that the refs see it, why can't you call both players? They both broke the rules.

clmetsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 12:39 PM
  #22
ogie
Registered User
 
ogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Staten Island
Country: United States
Posts: 1,271
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by clmetsfan View Post
I disagree completely, because there are plenty of penalties that don't necessitate a player falling to the ice. If a guy gets his stick up in the waist area for a legitimate hook and the other player takes a dive to make sure that the refs see it, why can't you call both players? They both broke the rules.
well if the hook wasn't blatant enough to draw a penalty on its own.. then the dive facilitated the penalty for the hook. so without the dive there would have never been a hooking penalty.

ogie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 12:40 PM
  #23
n8
WAAAAAAA!!!
 
n8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: san francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 7,405
vCash: 500
on paper, it may be interesting, in practice you are just setting up the refs to get crucified and vilified even more than they are now. Either they will be hated for making calls that "decide the outcome of the game" or they will be hated for putting away their whistles at the end of games and "missing" calls.

n8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 12:42 PM
  #24
pwoz
Registered User
 
pwoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 2,505
vCash: 500
Just get rid of the shootout.

pwoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-06-2009, 12:46 PM
  #25
Shadowtron
Registered User
 
Shadowtron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,524
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pete3589 View Post
The diving in the last 5 mins would become rediculous then.
Exactly. Crosby's already a better diver than Greg Louganis.

Shadowtron is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 04:28 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.