NHL rule changes for 2024/2025

[bluejays]

Originally Posted by butterfly

They're 1 mm offside and 30 seconds later they get a goal. What about if the same thing happens and you're losing, but they don't get a goal? Should you be able to challenge that to put all the time back on the clock?

Just let them play; nothing feels worse than celebrating a goal only to look foolish when it gets called back for some ticky-tack thing like that.

Agreed. If it’s two feet offside and led to a goal five seconds later, sure. But half a foot and the goal occurs 30 seconds later? Silly.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by bluejays

Agreed. If it’s two feet offside and led to a goal five seconds later, sure.

Then the official that missed a 2 foot offside should be dismissed.

The problem is that it would become even more discretionary if you allow some room for not calling back something that was offside. It should be black and white. It's either offside or it isn't. I have no issue with video replays to improve officiating. It sucks when it does against your team, but I don't think it's a waste of time. Just my opinion.

[Eric Vail]

So, coaches can now delay the game by challenging a delay of game penalty. What's the logic here? Let's slow it down as much as we can.

[bluejays]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Then the official that missed a 2 foot offside should be dismissed.

The problem is that it would become even more discretionary if you allow some room for not calling back something that was offside. It should be black and white. It's either offside or it isn't. I have no issue with video replays to improve officiating. It sucks when it does against your team, but I don't think it's a waste of time. Just my opinion.

Part of it is the camera angles requiring humming and hawing, but truly when it's so close why not leave it to discretion? I can see taking an extra few minutes to review if a goal actually went in, but the amount of times we went to 3 minutes or so just to figure out if a skate was an inch or two off, seems a bit much. Especially if the "offside" happened a minute before the goal went in. I don't have much of a problem with replays, but just like baseball, when you're reviewing plays talking about an inch, I think it's too nitpicky. What's next - reviewing a hold that may have led to a goal? Some of this should be left to judgement within reason.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Still nothing about teams that are shorthanded not being able to ice the puck with impunity, eh? Perhaps the dumbest rule in hockey.

Disappointed, but not surprised, yet again.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Still nothing about teams that are shorthanded not being able to ice the puck with impunity, eh? Perhaps the dumbest rule in hockey.

Disappointed, but not surprised, yet again.

I don't think the PA would like that one. The PK team can barely get off the ice in the 2nd period even with being able to do that.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by butterfly

I don't think the PA would like that one. The PK team can barely get off the ice in the 2nd period even with being able to do that.

Tired players = more goals. Just what the league wants.

Plus, the team that took the penalty being allowed to ice the puck while the other team isn't is just so dumb. The rules shouldn't change. Take a penalty, just play with one less player, rules stay the same. It's just so obvious.

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Still nothing about teams that are shorthanded not being able to ice the puck with impunity, eh? Perhaps the dumbest rule in hockey.

Disappointed, but not surprised, yet again.

Ok I believe short handed teams should be able to ice the puck with impunity, that’s their last line of defence while being down a skater. The defending team should rarely have possession of the puck with additional passing lanes open as well as the room of an extra skater.

What would your alternative be?

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Tired players = more goals. Just what the league wants.

Plus, the team that took the penalty being allowed to ice the puck while the other team isn't is just so dumb. The rules shouldn't change. Take a penalty, just play with one less player, rules stay the same. It's just so obvious.

It's logical, but since this is the status quo I doubt it changes.

And that would lead to increased PP efficiency, thus more control of the game in the hands of the officials - which I doubt anyone wants.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by butterfly

I don't think the PA would like that one. The PK team can barely get off the ice in the 2nd period even with being able to do that.

Let them ice the puck, but freeze the powerplay clock once the puck crosses the goal line of the attacking team, then start it back up once the puck enters the neutral zone.

It would allow icing still, but not with impunity.

[Young Guns]

Originally Posted by Bonded

I’d rather go without any challenges than adding more.

Wrangles last home playoff game the OT goal against was a foot offside and possibly goalie interference. No replay in the AHL.. we got hosed

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Let them ice the puck, but freeze the powerplay clock once the puck crosses the goal line of the attacking team, then start it back up once the puck enters the neutral zone.

It would allow icing still, but not with impunity.

That's creative.

At first thought, I liked it, but if you're winning and on the PP, why wouldn't you just stay back there forever?

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

Ok I believe short handed teams should be able to ice the puck with impunity, that’s their last line of defence while being down a skater. The defending team should rarely have possession of the puck with additional passing lanes open as well as the room of an extra skater.

What would your alternative be?

Both teams play by the same rules, the team that took the penalty plays with one less player. Nothing else changes.

Easy peasy.

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Both teams play by the same rules, the team that took the penalty plays with one less player. Nothing else changes.

Easy peasy.

I don’t agree at all, powerplays would be far more advantageous with no PK icing. This seems like a Pandora’s box for a bunch of divers like the 2011 Canucks to win a cup.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

You know what I'm even more excited for?
That 2 minute wait between the ref announcing the penalty, then the team stalling the faceoff long enough to review it on their Ipad 20 times, then challenging.

2 unnecessary delays for the price of 1!

Is there a time limit for coaches to decide to challenge? In MLB they have 15 seconds to decide, which seems like it should be plenty. If it isn't obviously wrong then you don't need to slow the game down to look at it for 10 minutes.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Are players sitting on the boards by the bench really an issue?

A linesman was cut by the skate of a player sitting on the boards this season.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Puck over glass should be equivalent to an icing call.

100%

It is an equivalent crime and should have an equivalent punishment. Not only is a penalty too severe for an accidental play, but now we are going to have replays for it as well. Just treat it like an icing, and it solves the problem.

The other change that we absolutely need, is to have a time limit on calling for a replay. Fifteen seconds, or STFU

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Please remove video review on offsides. The pursuit of meaningless perfection is ruining the games.

Limit it to plays that directly result in the goal.

45 seconds ago? Too effing bad

[Ped]

The NHL can't help but complicate things. The skate in the crease rule was a similar joke until it blew up in their faces.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Still nothing about teams that are shorthanded not being able to ice the puck with impunity, eh? Perhaps the dumbest rule in hockey.

Disappointed, but not surprised, yet again.

I have argued this foreever.

A team gets a penalty, and suddenly we reward them by relaxing the icing rule.

You want more goals? Don't let the PK ice it with impunity.

To take things a step further, I could get on board with penalties being a full 2 minutes, even if scored upon. But that's a different discussion