NHL Rule Changes For 2014-15

[awaz]

One question I had about that one...does the "side of the net" include the post? Like if someone rings one off the crossbar and it goes out of play without touching a defender, is that still an offensive zone face-off? I would imagine it is, but it just seems weird to not specify that.

Good point. I imagine it does as that would be an attempted scoring play?

 

[sabresfaninthesouth]

Sounds like it. Sounds to me that in the case of a kicked in call the burden of proof, regardless of call on ice, is on the actual kick. So if Chris Kunitz deflects it in with his skate in the crease, regardless of the call on the ice, the "booth" is looking for definitive evidence of a kick. In other words: they want more goals, so we'll see more and more of these stand.

I just don't like what that starts. None of us have ever been a particularly big fan of the officials, but that's one thing that's always been consistent is that the on-ice official's call stands unless you've got clear evidence to overturn. I don't want to move to a system where we essentially default to it being a goal regardless of the call on the ice, and wait for replay to overturn.

 

[pixburgher66]

Probably going to be one of the least discussed changes but the puck going out of play in the offensive zone changes essentially means every time the puck goes out of play it's either a face off in the offensive zone or a penalty. And a face off in the offensive zone.

I think part of the change may be to take the pressure off the refs a bit about who it hit last, etc.

 

[thedddd]

Here is a novel concept with the extended dive rules actually call a dive penalty consistently.

 

[thedddd]

Probably going to be one of the least discussed changes but the puck going out of play in the offensive zone changes essentially means every time the puck goes out of play it's either a face off in the offensive zone or a penalty. And a face off in the offensive zone.

Yeah basically trying to push the offense more and more in the NHL.

I love (part iv the best) basically teammate a takes a shot and deflects off teammate b and goes out of play. So lets penalize the defensive team and keep the face off in their end of the ice.

 

[thedddd]

And rule 24 who pissed in Denis Savards Cheerios?

 

[dash]

Bobby Lou with a great tweet yesterday:

Strombone @strombone1 · 16h Can we keep the spin-o-rama and ban the shootout instead @nhl ?

 

[IPostedWhat]

Coming soon to an NHL rink near you!

 

[IPostedWhat]

One of the most talked-about rule changes has been the crackdown on diving — specifically, the decision to fine coaches of offending players.

Now, in what should generate even more talk, it’s been said the players pushed for these punishments amid suggestions they were being coached to dive.

Coyotes GM Don Maloney, who is on the NHL’s competition committee, told the Arizona Republic as much in a recent interview discussing the rule changes:

“There really wasn’t anything there that I disagreed with, quite frankly, because we all sort of put it to the players and to their credit, the interesting thing was the diving fines.

“It was really the players that wanted to add the coaching portion to being fined because they were suggesting that they were being encouraged by the coaches to do it.

“So, OK, well then after a certain point, the coaches do get whacked.”

In early September, the league announced an escalating scale of fines for repeat diving offenders and their coaches:

While the implication was always there, Maloney’s comments are some of the first openly suggesting players were being instructed to dive. They also further confirm the crackdown was chiefly a player-driven initiative, as opposed to one spearheaded by the league.

Players pushed for coaching fines because they were ?encouraged? to dive | ProHockeyTalk

 

[forty_three]

In early September, the league announced an escalating scale of fines for repeat diving offenders and their coaches:

Players pushed for coaching fines because they were ?encouraged? to dive | ProHockeyTalk

And over at the swamp I was constantly attacked for suggesting that diving seemed to be part of certain coaches' gameplan.

 

[esls79]

And over at the swamp I was constantly attacked for suggesting that diving seemed to be part of certain coaches' gameplan.

There was a diving forum over at the swamp? I had no idea diving had its own forum.

Today has been a productive one, as I've learned something new.

 

[forty_three]

There was a diving forum over at the swamp? I had no idea diving had its own forum.

Today has been a productive one, as I've learned something new.

Yes, the Buffalo Sabres and Colorado Avalanche boards. I was very popular on both.

 

[Darkstone42]

I don't like the offensive zone faceoff rules. Some of them are alright, like breaking the glass (reward a guy for shooting that hard), and I'm okay with shots off the post staying in the zone, but deflections off teammates and screwing up and wrapping one around the boards and out of play should both result in faceoffs outside the zone in my opinion. Reward aggressiveness, but not mistakes.