Bad Rule

HabsfaninVan · Newbie

Bad Rule

24 Rings · Guru

How else are you supposed to curb guys shooting the puck into the netting to alleviate pressure? The line change thing would work, but only to a point. If you just changed lines 20 seconds ago what would stop you from shooting it over?

HabsfaninVan · Newbie

Then should icing the puck be a penalty as well? I really don't see the difference between the two, maybe you could enlighten me?

brooklynhabfan · Guru

HabsfaninVan wrote:

Then should icing the puck be a penalty as well? I really don't see the difference between the two, maybe you could enlighten me?

Icing's not always that easy to achieve, and dumping the puck over the boards can be done while ordering a hot dog from the vendor it's going to hit, which brings up the other aspect, the possibilty of injuring a spectator and bringing shame to the Kwan family name (no, wait, that last part is running from a kung-fu battle, never mind)

Habs and Avs Fan · Veteran Member

HabsfaninVan wrote:

Then should icing the puck be a penalty as well? I really don't see the difference between the two, maybe you could enlighten me?

That's how I feel too. People are saying instead of calling a penalty, the team who shot the puck out gets a faceoff in their zone + they can't change up players. 2 minutes is too harsh because I don't really see the difference anyone can golf the puck down for icing just like over the boards.

Andy · Veteran Member

The glass should be standard in each rink. I beleive Markov took a penalty in game 5 and it was noted that the glass was a little lower then montreal.

-- Edited by Andy at 14:10, 2006-06-03

AB Habman · Guru

HabsfaninVan wrote:

I don't want to make excuses for Buffalo losing (even though I was cheering for them), but that rule about shooting the puck over the boards in your own zone being a penalty should be changed. It cost Buffalo a goal last night when Brian Campbell shot it over the glass, and of course Carolina scored on the ensuing powerplay. Shooting the puck over the glass is no different than icing the puck, so if it happens, then the defending team should just not be able to change their lines, the same as when they ice the puck. Giving the team a 2 minute penalty is too much, especially when most of the time the defenseman doesn't mean to do it.

Good post, I agree!

brooklynhabfan · Guru

Maybe they should have a new 30 second penalty, just enough for the other team to get a decent couple of plays in...

I can think of a few times this might come in handy...

Johab · Guru

30 seconds? Heck, i cant put my pants on in 30 seconds....

I say if someone shoots the puck over the glass, they shouold have to do the chicken dance at center ice by themselves infront of the fans....thats bad enough no?

barry33 · Guru

Maybe an intentional offside should be a penalty? Every icing? I mean that causes a stoppage in play and a longer delay than shooting the puck over the boards. It is a D U M B penalty. The only reason it was implemented was to take the heat off the refs who had to make a judgement call in the past and decide whether it was intentional or not. Now there is no grey area and it gives the refs a scapegoat in that "Hey I only enforce the rules, not make them". So I have a compromise. Go back to the judgement call. If it is blatantly obvious, give them a penalty. If it simply goes out by accident, why not do what they do when you ice the puck now. Do not allow a line change by the offending team?

brooklynhabfan · Guru

barry33 wrote:

If it is blatantly obvious, give them a penalty.

thought that's what we were talking about all this time... For sure it's nonsense if it wasn't intentional...

Habtastic · Guru

The rule was also put in to offset the auto-panalty for goalies doing the same, so if they switch the rule back and add the no line-change, then they have to do the same for the goalies.

Habtastic