Puck Over The Glass Rule...

[polak]

To continue the discussion from yesterdays Game Thread, what are your thoughts on the puck over the glass, delay of game rule?

Personally I'm a fan and I was shocked to see so many people against it. I don't really see a viable alternative, especially with people complaining about the lack of scoring lately.

What could the NHL do?

A) Scrap it completely and return to the days of players shooting the puck out of play any time they were hemmed in their zone.

B) Turn it into something similar to icing where you can't change and it's a face off in your zone.

C) Make it discretionary so that the refs could decide if it's accidental or intentional and only intentional incidents would count as a delay of game penalty.

D) Leave it as is.

Personally, I think A) is out of the question. The rule has definitely helped the flow of the game and getting rid of it would be as big of a step backwards as getting rid of touch up offside. I also do not like giving the refs any more decision making power than they have so I'd say no to C), if there is a rule it should definitely be as black and white as possible.

That leaves B) and D). I think the problem with B) is that it's very easy to just fire the puck up out of play when you're in trouble. At least to ice the puck you have to get it past all of the players on the ice and that can prove to be difficult when you're tired. There's no way of defending the glass and I don't think not being able to change is a big enough deterrent when a team is in trouble in their own zone so I think you would see a massive spike in players just shooting it out any time they get stranded on the ice.

Another problem with option B) is what do you do about the rule on the PK? Such a comparatively easy way of getting a whistle compared to clearing the zone, I think it would quickly become a part of every teams PK strategy.

So yeah, like I said, I like rule and would leave it as is. Gives incentive for the players to keep the flow of the game going and it increases scoring chances (even if it's marginal) by making it tougher for tired teams to clear the zone and by increasing penalties. There was a thread on HFBoards that was also overwhelmingly in favor of keeping the rule as is.

Maybe the mods could add a poll?

[MrMastodonFarm]

Infinity glass. Toss out the netting altogether. Puck can never go out.

[FlamesAddiction]

Before the rule came into effect, there were some pretty brutal games where players would flip the puck over the glass to get a break. I recall one team doing 3 times in a row before the ref finally called it a delay of game.

I think it used to be the referee's discretion to give a penalty, which I think puts too much on them. Refs are brutal when it comes to discretionary calls, so I prefer the automatic penalty.

[Itse]

Don't make it discretionary, that would be terrible. I think the refs would hate trying to make those calls too.

I would try "similar to icing". I think it would work. The glass is so high anyway that getting it safely over the glass is probably harder in most situations than just icing the puck, which would give you a few more seconds of breathing time.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Infinity glass. Toss out the netting altogether. Puck can never go out.

they should play the puck off the netting (unless it got stuck up there)

/you're going to make me bring back my radical rules thread

[SOMBRI2]

The fan who gets the puck can make the decision.

[Roof-Daddy]

Same as icing would be my preference.

[troutman]

Bubble Hockey.

[stang]

I like it... sucks when its your team, but man tossing the puck out under pressure used to be a thing, and it was horrible. Making it like an icing wouldn't deter it like a penalty does. I think their are other things the league needs to work on besides this.

Speaking of which... whats the resoning of the trapezoid?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by polak

C) Make it discretionary so that the refs could decide if it's accidental or intentional and only intentional incidents would count as a delay of game penalty.

The refs can barely do their ####ing job as it is.

[calf]

When the glass is flipped out of play, a new puck is thrown onto the ice from the timekeeper's box (in any direction) and the teams can have an XFL style faceoff to get the puck.

[CaptainCrunch]

The Hatcher Brothers were the kings of firing a puck over the glass when the pressure got to much.

If their team was scrambling in their own zone, flick over the glass it went.

The goalie leaves a big juicy rebound. Frash over the glass it goes.

I think it has to remain a penalty. Teams are willing to stop the clock and reset in their own end even if there's a penalty involved. And if your a good penalty killing team, you'll take the chances.

[DJones]

Same as icing.

Ideally I would like to leave a discretionary option for the refs but I just don't trust them enough.

Also like the infinity boards.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by stang

I like it... sucks when its your team, but man tossing the puck out under pressure used to be a thing, and it was horrible. Making it like an icing wouldn't deter it like a penalty does. I think their are other things the league needs to work on besides this.

Speaking of which... whats the resoning of the trapezoid?

to keep goalies in their net so there's less scoring.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

The Hatcher Brothers were the kings of firing a puck over the glass when the pressure got to much.

If their team was scrambling in their own zone, flick over the glass it went.

The goalie leaves a big juicy rebound. Frash over the glass it goes.

I think it has to remain a penalty. Teams are willing to stop the clock and reset in their own end even if there's a penalty involved. And if your a good penalty killing team, you'll take the chances.

They can do that with icing still

[Erick Estrada]

I like it. It sucks when it happens to your team but what fans don't realize is how many stoppages there would be due to defensemen flipping the puck over the glass when under pressure if there wasn't a penalty for it. Half of the time they are usually bonehead plays by the defenseman. The game doesn't need more stoppages in play. Making it the same as icing is useless as the puck would be faced off in their end anyway seeing that's the end they shot the puck over the glass.

[Flash Walken]

I love the rule.

Promotes high skill plays and solid systems/team play, teams that lack those get burned.

More penalties = more tic-tac-toe goals and I like those, so I think that's a positive.

Not having heavy pressure reduced to college basketball timeout scenarios is much more entertaining.

As a rule to promote offense I think it's one of the better ones the NHL has. I wish there was maybe more consequences in the game for things that hurt the pace and flow of a game.

[JohnnyTitan]

For sure no more subjectivity by the refs. That can't happen...it would outrage us all.

For starters, I like making the glass even higher than it is now. Even two more feet would help.

The thing about this rule that really "Grinds My Gears" is when it results in a 5-on-3. When a team is already short-handed they get some benefit of the doubt by the refs when it comes to assessing an additional penalty. Honestly - we all know it happens and it's actually good for the game. (Like a penalty in playoff overtime...put the whistles away!).

The problem is, the second penalty for over-the-glass is automatic and must be assessed. So a lot of "Cheap" 5-on-3s are awarded in my opinion.

What if an over-the-glass minor could not be served during another minor? Not saying don't issue the penalty...but start the new minor at the end of the previous one. Team is still penalized...but at least there wouldn't be a huge scoring chance created by something that is fluky / accidental?

Flame away. I'm literally making this up on the spot. I think the delay of game call needs to stay...but I hate it leading to the closest thing to an automatic goal (other than a penalty shot).

[bob-loblaw]

What bothers me about it is that it's the most consistently correctly called penalty out of anything in the rule book. It's such an innocuous one too.

Maybe modify it so that there has to be x number of opposing team players in the zone to count, or make it a penalty if it's in the last x minutes of a period/game, or reduce the actual penalty to a one minute penalty. On the severity scale it doesn't even relate to a missed elbow to the head.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

I like it as is. I think shooting the puck over the glass should be a penalty. Most other penalty calls are just as legitimate, even if accidental. Not sure why intent is focused on so much for this one.