Puck Over The Glass Rule...

[Oil Stain]

I'm OK with the rule.

I just think they should modify it so that when a player whacks the puck out of midair and over the glass it shouldn't be a penalty.

Same for when they take a big slap shot and it sails over the glass at the other end of the rink.

The rule wasn't made for those two situations so they should be exempt.

[CalgaryFan1988]

Originally Posted by Dan403

D - Leave it as is.

I remember the days when you could just fire it into the crowd to get a whistle.

That was worse.

But the reason they did that, was to get a line change. You can't do that anymore with an icing and it has reduced icings.......

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

I'm OK with the rule.

I just think they should modify it so that when a player whacks the puck out of midair and over the glass it shouldn't be a penalty.

Meh, I think this is unnecessary, it doesn't happen that often and NHL players are good enough to potentially abuse this.

Same for when they take a big slap shot and it sails over the glass at the other end of the rink.

This I agree with, there's no point in ever doing this intentionally, if you can get it to the other end you'd be better off just icing it anyway. This you could make the same as icing.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

I'm OK with the rule.

I just think they should modify it so that when a player whacks the puck out of midair and over the glass it shouldn't be a penalty.

Same for when they take a big slap shot and it sails over the glass at the other end of the rink.

The rule wasn't made for those two situations so they should be exempt.

I agree. That's pretty much exactly my opinion on the rule.

[FireGilbert]

It should be called icing with the same no change rule.

Also, they need to eliminate allowing icing when on the PK. It is one of the oddest hockey rules that while being punished for a rule infraction you are allowed to break one of the rules.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I am really good with the rule. I didn't think I would like it when it first got instituted, but I have learned to like it.

Sure, it sucks when your team does it and gets penalized for it, but I don't get the argument about it being 'an accident' vs 'on purpose'. There are many accidental penalties called. Some slashes are accidents when they happen, as are trips, when players are battling for the puck.

Keep the rule as is in my opinion. That is one of the rules that isn't terrible, and is not difficult to call CONSISTENTLY. Refs miss it sometimes, or miss the deflection of a stick or the glass, but I find it is one of the calls that refs get right almost all the time. NHL should look at rules that the refs seem to have a tougher time calling consistently.

[Dan403]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

But the reason they did that, was to get a line change. You can't do that anymore with an icing and it has reduced icings.......

They'd flip it over the boards to get a line change OR if they were in trouble and didn't have a good shot at clearing the zone. Flip. Stop. New face off.

Leave it as is.

[gottabekd]

I think they should make a rule where the penalty is immediately negated if any player on the opposing team or bench makes the puck-over-glass pointy gesture.

[Hey Connor, It's Mess]

Nm

[codynw]

Originally Posted by 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.

You don't think there's a difference between accidentally hitting someone in the face with your stick and accidentally flipping the puck over the glass?

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by codynw

You don't think there's a difference between accidentally hitting someone in the face with your stick and accidentally flipping the puck over the glass?

Well they are both penalties accident or not which is the way it should be. I don't recall officials ever not calling icing because a player accidentally iced the puck while trying to hit a long pass. The rule is the rule.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by H2SO4(aq)

The worst thing about this rule, is that in overtime in the playoffs when the refs swallow their whistles and "let em play" and the game gets rough and chippy and not a lot gets called that should, this over the glass still gets called. Because the refs cannot turn a blind eye and therefore its an unfair advantage to the team that gets the rare overtime powerplay when many infractions are not being called all over the ice. Its gonna cost someone a series and then the rule will finally get changed.

Its a dumb rule which i really hate. I blame Brian Leetch, it was his go to get outta jail free card.

Yeah the issue here is the refs swallowing their whistles and not the puck over glass rule.

Hate hate hate "game management" garbage. Rules like this that are black and white, along with some of the other ones like a slash that breaks a stick, a high stick that draws blood are great.

More objective calls would be great to not only keep the game fair, but also not put the onus on the refs to "control" the game because they're only human.

[Inferno]

B)

People say players do it so that they can stop play and change lines. Well you can prevent that by not allowing them to change like the icing rule. The rule as it is now is as stupid as it would be if you started penalizing teams for icing the puck and "delaying the game".

[N-E-B]

Originally Posted by Itse

Tripping and highsticking penalties (for example) are quite often completely unintentional.

The difference being those plays can physically injure players or prevent scoring opportunities. Puck over glass does neither of those.

[Anduril]

Originally Posted by N-E-B

The difference being those plays can physically injure players or prevent scoring opportunities. Puck over glass does neither of those.

Puck over glass definitely prevents scoring opportunities. Why have tired players in the defensive decide between icing the puck or potentially not even getting it out? If it were still allowed, puck over glass would alleviate all offensive pressure and reset the momentum temporarily.

[Tiger]

I would say it's fine as is. But if you are on a penalty kill already you should just get no line change. Not a 5 on 3

[taco.vidal]

It should be a one-minute penalty with an offensive zone face-off.

[N-E-B]

Originally Posted by Anduril

Puck over glass definitely prevents scoring opportunities. Why have tired players in the defensive decide between icing the puck or potentially not even getting it out? If it were still allowed, puck over glass would alleviate all offensive pressure and reset the momentum temporarily.

I suppose in a sense it does, but it really prevents potential scoring chances rather than actual scoring chances since the puck has to be on the defensive teams stick.

Again, I understand the reasoning behind the rule, but to me the issue was never really that big of a deal. Maybe I'm just forgetting how bad it was, but I honestly don't ever remember even thinking there was an issue with it before.

[Clarkey]

1 minute penalty, solved.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Regorium

Y...Rules like this that are black and white, along with some of the other ones like a slash that breaks a stick, a high stick that draws blood are great...

I personally hate this one because drawing blood has absolutely nothing to do with the severity of the hit of the stick. It is completely arbitrary. All high sticking penalties should be 2 mins, or they should all be 4 mins.