New Rules.

[DoobeeDoobeeDoo]

The conclusion is that both teams played equally and it was great entertainment. Sports aren't life and death even though we fans tend to live and die every game with our favorite teams. Maybe it's because I'm on the backside of my life that I've mellowed and some things just aren't that important to bother me much any longer.

Ox

That's a good point Ox, I remember going to games that ended up in ties and being all mad that there was no winner and loser. Now days it probably wouldn't bother me so much anymore.

 

[LALakersboy24.7]

Kind of disappointed with getting rid of the spin o rama in penalty shots & shootouts. I know it rarely happens, but who doesn't enjoy a good spin o rama?

kinda wack.

 

[Deader2818]

I dont think the problem was so much of the game ending in a tie, it was if a game was tied late into a third both times just kinda stopped trying because they didnt want to risk losing a point. Made for some boring end of games and OT.

I don't like the SO, but there really isn't much of a better way.

 

[CaptHowdy00]

I believe the shoot out was put in because during the regular time, if teams were tied towards the end of the game they played for the tie. And the same thing applied to OT. Teams played not to lose and very frequently just played careful boring hockey.
It's not that the NHL realy wanted to get rid of the tie. They believes that people were upset because teams did not give it all when tied at the end of a game or over time.
I agree that the spin-o-ramma is in fact the puck moving backwards. But since I am not a fan of the shoot out I really don't care.
Also, I do have an issue with the tripping penalty. If the defending Ayer is playing the puck and his stick touches the puck before it touches the offensive player, the contact should be thought of as incidental and no penalty shod be called.

 

[oxnardkingsfan]

I believe the shoot out was put in because during the regular time, if teams were tied towards the end of the game they played for the tie. And the same thing applied to OT. Teams played not to lose and very frequently just played careful boring hockey.
It's not that the NHL realy wanted to get rid of the tie. They believes that people were upset because teams did not give it all when tied at the end of a game or over time.

That is exactly why the league brought in the shootout. Especially in non-conference games where it really didn't hurt their playoff chances to give the other team a point, teams would just lay back and play defense. Made for some pretty boring 5-minute overtime periods. But now you have teams with a lot of talented forwards playing for the shootout. No matter what we think though the shootout is here to stay. It's really too bad the travel and back-to-back games prohibit playing until somebody wins like the playoffs.

Ox

 

[CaptHowdy00]

What I would like to see instead of the shoot out is something along the lines of what is in the playoffs. You keep playing until someone wins. They do that in baseball and basketball.
Or they can simply do what football does. Have 3 forwards go against 2 d-men and a goalie. If a team scores the other team gets a chance. Keep going until one team misses.
If not that then go back to ties.

 

[davnlaguna]

Towards the end of the 04/05 lockout, I was in a panel of fans that meet with Dave Taylor. He asked if we would like a shoot out to decides games. The way he asked the question made it seemed like giving the point for OT would let the teams try harder because they wouldn't lose a point for losing in OT. I asked if teams would just hold on for the shoot out. The moderator of the group ( some non hockey PR guy) said that players would try harder to win instead of putting so much pressure on the goalie and fans would like a winner more than a tie.
They also tried to tell us that the trapezoid would increase scoring and limit the dump and chase. Said it worked in the AHL. I didn't know anything about that, so I could not argue that.
Two things I am proud of from that panel: Dave Taylor die hard seats were from my idea, to get people in the building cheap and create life long fans. My idea was really that only students could buy those seats but Dave said that there are people in their 50s that have student IDs. And the free preseason game was my idea. As a thank you to fans for coming back. I wanted all seats to be general admission, but the PR guy said season ticket holders should get lower bowl seats because they might upgrade next year if they liked the better seats.
I got free pizza that day and a 50.00 gift certificate for my time. I didn't cash it in until Taylor was gone and the team store almost didn't take it

The problem is the NHL thinks we want more scoring. Maybe the broad base of fans do want more. They make rules that they think will make the game more enjoyable to most people. Nothing in this group of changes looks to be drastic. The average fan on the street won't remember that a face off used to be moved outside the zone on a tipped puck. These changes will maybe add a goal every 10 games. If they want to increase scoring, unfortunate goalie pad size is the easy choice. They can increase safety by using plastics or light weight compounds but goalies will fight them.