Proposed Rule Changes

[GirlySports]

They are overcomplicating hockey, fans don't need to know much of this.

[shadowlord]

I remember the time when Sean Monahan received a delay-of-game penalty for shooting the puck over the glass, but it went over the glass at the opponent's end of the arena and Monahan was in our end when he shot the puck.

[OILFAN #81]

There needs to be a 60 second clock on challenges that the viewers and people in the arena see.

If we are zooming in and zooming in on offside calls and they take 5-6 minutes then it really doesn't matter. The original call on the ice should stand after 60 seconds no matter what on offside calls and goalie interference calls.

[GirlySports]

And why are challenges only 1 way? You can challenge a puck over the glass penalty to remove it but you can't can't challenge that it was. Same with major penalties.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Still nothing on one of the dumbest rules in hockey: the ability for a shorthanded team to ice the puck feely at will.

No idea why that rule was ever implemented, and silly it's still around today. If you take a penalty you should play by the same rules, just with one less player on the ice. Would make too much sense and almost certainly result in more offense.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Still nothing on one of the dumbest rules in hockey: the ability for a shorthanded team to ice the puck feely at will.

No idea why that rule was ever implemented, and silly it's still around today. If you take a penalty you should play by the same rules, just with one less player on the ice. Would make too much sense and almost certainly result in more offense.

it would result in constant whistles

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by dino7c

it would result in constant whistles

More maybe, constant? Nope, you want to keep it icing it, keeping the same guys on the ice and keep having draws in your own end? It will result in the puck in the back of your net sooner than later.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

Still nothing on one of the dumbest rules in hockey: the ability for a shorthanded team to ice the puck feely at will.

No idea why that rule was ever implemented, and silly it's still around today. If you take a penalty you should play by the same rules, just with one less player on the ice. Would make too much sense and almost certainly result in more offense.

Also...

If you score on a delayed penalty you should still get a PP. You pulled your goalie to get the extra attacker, you shouldn't lose your PP because the other team couldn't touch the puck.

And.

If you miss on the penalty shot you should still get a 2 minute power play. You took a blatant penalty that resulted in a lost scoring chance. Your penalty shot replaces the scoring chance that was taken away, but you should still get the PP and the player should still get a penalty.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

I think this would pretty much kill the stretch pass, slow the game down and result in less odd-man rushes. I also think it would result in a lot more plays that get the puck off the glass and out.

Ya I think it would need to be discretionary like 'intentional grounding' - if there is no intended recipient close or there isn't a really close race to the dot then it's an intentional icing --> 1 tally.