rule changes you might like

[davnlaguna]

I was reading about some of the rule changes NCAA is thinking about to increase scoring and thought are there any rule changes anyone here would like to see. No this is not extreme hockey time.

Two minutes means two minutes. Just like a 5 minute penalty the penalty doesn't end when a team scores.

If a team scores on a delayed penalty the team still gets a powerplay.

(NCAA is thinking of this one) no icing on a penalty kill.-- Ok I don't like this one


and here is I site that has a list of some of the rule changes. Some of them seem funny today
National Hockey League (NHL) Major Rule Changes

1939-40 - A substitute replacing a goaltender removed from ice to serve a penalty may use a goaltender's stick and gloves but no other goaltending equipment

also there was a time when passing the puck forward was a minor penalty.

 

[Destroydacre]

I was reading about some of the rule changes NCAA is thinking about to increase scoring and thought are there any rule changes anyone here would like to see. No this is not extreme hockey time.

Two minutes means two minutes. Just like a 5 minute penalty the penalty doesn't end when a team scores.

If a team scores on a delayed penalty the team still gets a powerplay.

(NCAA is thinking of this one) no icing on a penalty kill.-- Ok I don't like this one


and here is I site that has a list of some of the rule changes. Some of them seem funny today
National Hockey League (NHL) Major Rule Changes

1939-40 - A substitute replacing a goaltender removed from ice to serve a penalty may use a goaltender's stick and gloves but no other goaltending equipment

also there was a time when passing the puck forward was a minor penalty.

I've been a proponent of getting the power play even if you scored on the delayed call for a long time. I'm also for getting a power play if you get a penalty shot during the delayed call regardless of the outcome of the penalty shot. They are 2 different infractions and should be treated that way.

I know some people favor not being able to ice the puck while shorthanded but I don't. May as well just had the team on the power play a goal.

 

[elocomotive]

Cool stuff.

"1931-32 - Attacking players forbidden to impede the movement or obstruct the vision of opposing goaltenders. Defending players with the exception of the goaltender forbidden from falling on the puck within 10 feet of the net."

Hey, the Avery Rule already existed.

 

[IPostedWhat]

Opposing team playing the Sabres must pull their Goalie the entire game.

 

[Winged_Wheel88]

I'd like the NHL to lift its sixty-year ban of vuvuzelas.

 

[Rossinole]

I was reading about some of the rule changes NCAA is thinking about to increase scoring and thought are there any rule changes anyone here would like to see. No this is not extreme hockey time.

Two minutes means two minutes. Just like a 5 minute penalty the penalty doesn't end when a team scores.

If a team scores on a delayed penalty the team still gets a powerplay.

(NCAA is thinking of this one) no icing on a penalty kill.-- Ok I don't like this one


and here is I site that has a list of some of the rule changes. Some of them seem funny today
National Hockey League (NHL) Major Rule Changes

1939-40 - A substitute replacing a goaltender removed from ice to serve a penalty may use a goaltender's stick and gloves but no other goaltending equipment

also there was a time when passing the puck forward was a minor penalty.

I can't imagine the 2nd rule adding much to scoring but I'm down with the first one. In fact, wasn't the first one a rule in the NHL before?

 

[davnlaguna]

I can't imagine the 2nd rule adding much to scoring but I'm down with the first one. In fact, wasn't the first one a rule in the NHL before?

They both were, however the Canadiens power play was so good that they changed the rules over the years to give other teams a chance. They lowered a minor from 3 minutes to 2 minutes as well.

Feel free to add any you think would help. It is the off season so we have some time to kill. The NHL makes rule changes almost every year so change is part of the game.

 

[awaz]

i have a couple..

first off in response to the bigger nets (which seems to have been shot down anyway) i think bevelling the posts (aka instead of making them round all the way, make them slope towards the net).. that would cause more post shots to go in.. not a huge change, hardly visible, and will increase scoring a decent, but not obscene amount.. i just think thats better than bigger nets, i'm pretty satisfied with the goal scoring, i dont wanna see 8-6 and 9-7 games, waters down the importance and excitement of scoring

as far as not getting called for icing when you're PK'ing.. i think dont think it should be flat out icing.. maybe have the faceoff in the zone and allow the PK'ers to change? or i think i would suggest a faceoff in the offsides dot and allow the PK team to change? but that will ruin any break in plays that teams have on the PP

also.. i dont wanna see matching minors when someone dives.. i think 1 of 2 things.. either diving should be a 4 minute penalty, so the diver's team has to PK.. or only call the diver.. it would all but eliminate diving IMO.. it drives me crazy when ref's call diving and tripping, or diving and interference, its ridiculous.. obviously sometimes it can be both, but i think the diver deserves to be punished not just equal with the other guy

 

[awaz]

oh and they need to take a seriously look at goaltender interference.. if a forward gets pushed over the goalie its not goaltender interference.. i've seen that called WAY too many times.. and if a player is driving to the net and a defender is groping him, he slips and falls into the goalie (toews in game 6 is an example) that isn't interference either

 

[puckhead]

biggest thing that bugs me:

accidentally shooting the puck out of play should not be an automatic penalty. it should be the same call as an icing, as it is the same infraction as an icing (getting the puck out of your zone to relieve pressure). Face-off deep, offending team can't change.
I would still give the ref the option of calling a delay of game minor if it is deemed as intentional.

 

[postmaster]

allowing a roster change between the second and third period in case of injury or just looking for a spark. If done for intentional fighting or retaliation would need to be handled with a harsh penalty though.

 

[ritari330]

allowing a roster change between the second and third period in case of injury or just looking for a spark. If done for intentional fighting or retaliation would need to be handled with a harsh penalty though.

that is an intersting idea...

 

[chy1127]

Penalty shots always piss me off. Either have the penalty shot and a PP or let the team chose which one they want. Who is not tired of the automatic 2 minutes for breaking another players stick. How about automatic 4 minutes for blood. Accidently hit a player and draw blood, 4 minutes. Cross check a guy in the face, no blood, 2 minutes.

 

[awaz]

i dno chy.. the broken stick one i kind of understand.. i know the sticks break pretty easy, but you have to have that rule in there, otherwise sticks will constantly be wacking away at eachother and teams are going to score goals because they broke the other teams sticks.. not only would it be the easiest way to play defense, but you could do it in front of the net on offense too and break the d-men's sticks.. ya its frustrating sometimes, but i think its a rule that you have to have

as far as blood goes, i just think they should hand out double minors a little easier.. cross-check to the face should be 4 more often than not (assuming the reciever doesn't head but a stick)..

thought of another one in writing about the stick stuff.. when a goal is disallowed because of a high stick, the rule currently focuses on where the puck hits the stick.. from my understanding this rule is intended to protect players from sticks to the face, it shouldn't matter where the puck hits the stick, the blade is still dangerously close to faces, IMO if any part of the stick is above the x-bar it should be disallowed

 

[scottflyers88]

get rid of automatic slashes for a broken stick, 4 minutes for someone bleeding on a high stick, and call diving.

 

[Destroydacre]

get rid of automatic slashes for a broken stick, 4 minutes for someone bleeding on a high stick, and call diving.

That's great if you want people purposefully trying to break other players' sticks. The only way to get rid of that being a penalty is to ban the composite sticks.

 

[scottflyers88]

or the refs can call a slash a slash. i do not want to see a stick lift and have it called a slash.

 

[Destroydacre]

i dno chy.. the broken stick one i kind of understand.. i know the sticks break pretty easy, but you have to have that rule in there, otherwise sticks will constantly be wacking away at eachother and teams are going to score goals because they broke the other teams sticks.. not only would it be the easiest way to play defense, but you could do it in front of the net on offense too and break the d-men's sticks.. ya its frustrating sometimes, but i think its a rule that you have to have

as far as blood goes, i just think they should hand out double minors a little easier.. cross-check to the face should be 4 more often than not (assuming the reciever doesn't head but a stick)..

thought of another one in writing about the stick stuff.. when a goal is disallowed because of a high stick, the rule currently focuses on where the puck hits the stick.. from my understanding this rule is intended to protect players from sticks to the face, it shouldn't matter where the puck hits the stick, the blade is still dangerously close to faces, IMO if any part of the stick is above the x-bar it should be disallowed

So are you saying goals like these shouldn't be allowed?

 

[scottflyers88]

chara could never score because a part of his stick is always above the crossbar.