Question for everyone Pls help

davidb · Guru

Question for everyone Pls help

Habhead · Veteran Member

Not sure of the "official" ruling on this from the league, but I recall the same thing happening in a Leaf's game I was watching a few weeks ago. In that one, the goalie (Leaf's opposition) was allowed back in the net. It would seem there is definitely some confusion on the matter within the officiating ranks.

Jedah · Guru

I personally would like to see the goalies allowed back, as they should be. It's not really a lineup change anyway, so what's the harm? It's just insane to have a faceoff in your zone with no goalie!

And as for that Leafs game, I know all the Leafers in this city were fuming about that one. Funny how they would have completely different views if it had been the other way around.

brooklynhabfan · Guru

Absolutely the wackiest of new rules. Seems like it wasn't thought through so carefully

habgirl · Guru

brooklynhabfan wrote:

Absolutely the wackiest of new rules. Seems like it wasn't thought through so carefully

If this is a new rule (forgive my ignorance) it's ridiculous. Brook, you said it - not thought through. Is this in fact the case? (now I have to go online to find out because it will drive me nuts).

habs93 · Veteran Member

The rule (to the best of my knowledge) is that if a team ices the puck - they can not make a line change or substitute players this was to discourage teams that in the past (see Jacques LaMaire/Pat Burns)when the pressure was on ice the puck and pay no consequences for their action - The icings can happen alot when coaches line match well 1st/2nd line
against a 3rd/4th line etc other times teams can get lucky when icing and they get a TV commerical time out therefore the players on the ice get a breather. In the LA game - LA screwed up and should not get a break and have their goalie returned to the net (It creates some suspense/entertainment) as they were well aware of the rule - one of their players may of panicked or they made a bad pass, it is just part of the game and from what I have seen the linesmen/refs have called this rule pretty consistently although like any rules in a judgement sport calls have been missed fromk time to time........

Jay1982 · Guru

Its a reverse-loophole in the rules that created something that wasn't meant to be.

barry33 · Guru

Jay1982 wrote:

Its a reverse-loophole in the rules that created something that wasn't meant to be.

Hard to believe that so called "knowledgeable hockey people" like Colin Campbell would overlook this. Glad to see the league is in good hands

Jay1982 · Guru

Yeah, but with all the coaches that try so many things to hinder the other team, while creating an advantage for their, I knew there would be alot of mis-readings of the new rules.

heet_150 · Guru

A couple of things that also haven't been addressed, publicly anyway:

In a shootout, what are the consequences if the goalie does something like trip the shooter or throw his stick and deserves a penalty? (Apparently, if the shooter doesn't score, he gets to go again. But that is not in the rule book)
At the end of OT, what stops a team, if they are two men down, from tripping, holding or hooking everything that moves? They cannot be any more than 2 men down (During OT, if one team gets 2 overlapping penalties, the opposition gets to add a 5th attacker), and even if they have 15 guys in the box, at the end of OT it is a shootout and there are no powerplays.
Instigator Rule. This was put into place to stop a team from sending out a goon, when the game is out of hand. An automatic suspension (unless you are Wayne Gretzky and the Coyotes) and fine are issued when the instigator penalty occurs in the last 5 mins of the 3rd OR in OT. Who is sending out someone to pick a fight in OT?

Also, a little tidbit about the NHL rules, there still isn't a rule requiring goalies to wear a mask or face shield (ie - cage w/helmet). However, there is a rule that the game must be immediately stopped, should a goaltender's face protection come off.

Jay1982 · Guru

heet_150 wrote:

A couple of things that also haven't been addressed, publicly anyway: In a shootout, what are the consequences if the goalie does something like trip the shooter or throw his stick and deserves a penalty? (Apparently, if the shooter doesn't score, he gets to go again. But that is not in the rule book) At the end of OT, what stops a team, if they are two men down, from tripping, holding or hooking everything that moves? They cannot be any more than 2 men down (During OT, if one team gets 2 overlapping penalties, the opposition gets to add a 5th attacker), and even if they have 15 guys in the box, at the end of OT it is a shootout and there are no powerplays. Instigator Rule. This was put into place to stop a team from sending out a goon, when the game is out of hand. An automatic suspension (unless you are Wayne Gretzky and the Coyotes) and fine are issued when the instigator penalty occurs in the last 5 mins of the 3rd OR in OT. Who is sending out someone to pick a fight in OT? Also, a little tidbit about the NHL rules, there still isn't a rule requiring goalies to wear a mask or face shield (ie - cage w/helmet). However, there is a rule that the game must be immediately stopped, should a goaltender's face protection come off.

for #1 a goalie can't do much on a penalty shot except throw is stick, if he throws his stick during a SO its an automatic goal. If the goalie were to charge at the player, and slide into him, he technically hit the puck 1st so its not considered a tripping penalty.

for #2, you are right, they can't be more than 2 men down, but that means that they will be fitghing the whole OT 4 on 3, and will burn out the players who are not in the box, until you have the minimum needed to play (4+1 goalie in OT).

for #3, the rule applies to the last 5 minutes of regulation, and THEN overtime

and as for your last point, thats just going on technicalities and it becomes hair splitting.

heet_150 · Guru

#1. The goalie may not necessarily even hit the puck. What if the goalie went for a poke check and tripped the shooter? In the "New NHL" rules, from everything that we have seen called so far, that is a penalty.

#2. I did not say the whole OT, I said at the end of OT. What I meant was if there were less than a minute and it was 5 on 3, you could kill a lot of time taking guys out by mugging them, or hauling them down.

#3. Um, that's my point. Why would that rule be there to include OT? Only a coach looking to get fired is sending a guy over the boards to start a fight, hence being called for an instigator penalty.

Splitting hairs or not (no offense CJ), this is proof that the NHL doesn't delve deep enough to verify the validity of their rules.