Does the League Need to Rethink These 2 Things?

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by united

My issue with puck-over-glass is it is the only penalty called with any degree of consistency. Regardless of whether it is the first period of the first game of the season, or the eighth period of a playoffs game, it's called consistently.

The standard of every other penalty diminishes significantly by period in the regular season, further into the playoffs, and even further into overtime in the playoffs. What is considered a hook in the first period of the first game of the season is wildly different than what is considered a hook in the eight period of a playoffs game. In that sense, puck-over-glass is more punitive as the game goes on, particularly in playoffs overtime situations.

Last night, aside from the puck-over-glass penalty, the teams combined for one penalty in 4.5 periods of overtime hockey, with the Lightning not committing a single penalty-worthy offense throughout overtime (allegedly).

Ideally a penalty is a penalty regardless of period or game, but it's the NHL so the referees' job is more managing the game rather than enforcing the rule book. Why not manage puck-over-glass, too, while we're at it?

Because, as Wes MacAuley might say, “you can’t do that.”

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

No and no.

I've never gotten the puck over ice argument. The NHL wants more opportunities for scoring. Giving a penalty for that infraction is one of the things that helps with that. A tired team can't just fire the puck into the stands without consequences. Penalizing it is absolutely the right call IMO.

then presumably they should give a 2 minute for icing as well, its no different

[CsInMyBlood]

Originally Posted by btimbit

OT is fine the way it is

Puck over the glass? Maybe it's just me but I really don't remember players shooting into the stands on purpose being an issue. I've always said that's the worst rule in hockey and I try to make a point to say it even when the call si in our favour. Replace that one with an icing call (Own zone faceoff, no line change) and I think you still get the desired effect without a seemingly over the top punishment for a nothing play

It was always an issue. It always happened and was really annoying. Why wouldnt you just throw it over the glass when the pressure is high? That's a no brainer.

Its the reason the rule was made.

[DeluxeMoustache]

I don’t get the people equating icing with throwing the puck over the glass. Icing, the puck remains within the playing surface. And it is something allowable when short handed. Very different

I absolutely hate the idea of novelty reduced skaters constructs for overtime. That is one thing they have right. Normal hockey until someone wins, no matter how long it takes.

[calf]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I don’t get the people equating icing with throwing the puck over the glass. Icing, the puck remains within the playing surface. And it is something allowable when short handed. Very different .

Let the players go and get the puck if it goes over the glass. The team in defense gets it, the puck goes back into play and the game resumes. Faceoff in the defense's zone if the team on offense gets it. Just like icing.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I don’t get the people equating icing with throwing the puck over the glass. Icing, the puck remains within the playing surface. And it is something allowable when short handed. Very different

.

No because it is, at worst, done for exactly the same reason, to relieve pressure and yet one gets a minor slap on the wrist and the other a 20% chance of a goal against, the consequence is massively out of scale

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I don’t get the people equating icing with throwing the puck over the glass. Icing, the puck remains within the playing surface. And it is something allowable when short handed. Very different

Because both had rule changes for the same reason. People hated how teams would constantly ice the puck to kill time and slow the game down.

People who support the rule say that if there wasn't a penalty that players still get 15-30 seconds of rest. Well just have quicker faceoffs then.

[Stud_McCool]

This should negate any over-the-glass debate.

Discuss.

[Sainters7]

Given the time parameters with the hub city idea, I understand why maybe an alternative for neverending 5 on 5 OT would be looked at for this year specifically (though it's a bit late for that now). But permanently going forward, its fine the way it is. If next year its a similar hub city idea, they should probably do something. Maybe even 4 on 4 / 3 on 3 after 2 OT or something? Definitely against a shootout. But the second the hub city is done, you scrap it.

Puck over glass is a brutal penalty, the only alternative I can think of is to treat it as an icing. But the majority of the time when it happens, it's in the offending team's zone anyway, so it's just giving them a free pass if it's not a penalty.

[Esoteric]

Originally Posted by Sainters7

Given the time parameters with the hub city idea, I understand why maybe an alternative for neverending 5 on 5 OT would be looked at for this year specifically (though it's a bit late for that now). But permanently going forward, its fine the way it is. If next year its a similar hub city idea, they should probably do something. Maybe even 4 on 4 / 3 on 3 after 2 OT or something? Definitely against a shootout. But the second the hub city is done, you scrap it.

Puck over glass is a brutal penalty, the only alternative I can think of is to treat it as an icing. But the majority of the time when it happens, it's in the offending team's zone anyway, so it's just giving them a free pass if it's not a penalty.

I'd rather them push back games than do 3 on 3 overtime in the playoffs.

There's no asterisk next to your name when you when a cup this year, but if they change OT rules in the playoffs to something other than 5 v 5, there's definitely going to be an asterisk.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The thing with tennis though, is that they need the court for the next match (like the bubble this year). But in every other year, that doesn't apply to hockey

Also, that match pretty much screwed over John Isner, who got absolutely steamrolled in the next match because he had nothing left in the tank. Similarly, I think the Jackets are basically done now because of how much hockey they've played since the restart (the equivalent of 9 games in 10 days).

[CroFlames]

Imagine wanting to change the best thing about playoffs.

[Robbob]

I don't think you can get more drama than an OT game. I get it that the networks hate it, buy with multiple dedicated sports channels it really should be an issue. I would prefer to watch a game in multiple OTs than repeats of the best play of the year or re-runs of Jays games. Look at the ratings that sportsnet is getting.

[CalgaryFan1988]

Puck over glass once = warning
Puck over glass the second time, then 2 minute penalty?

I'm tired, bare with me.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

No because it is, at worst, done for exactly the same reason, to relieve pressure and yet one gets a minor slap on the wrist and the other a 20% chance of a goal against, the consequence is massively out of scale

While you can draw some similarities, they are simply not the same.

Again, teams can ice the puck on the PK. Should they then be able to shoot it over the glass intentionally, but only when short handed? Obviously not.

One keeps the puck in the playing surface, the other is removal from the playing surface. That is a point they have decided has gone too far.

I will take the odd case where a guy accidentally puts it too high, when he knows the rule, and knows the risk, over opening it up to new “accidentally on purpose” stoppages in play

Simple but effective rule. Not 100% perfect, but I can sure live with it

[Geeoff]

Puck over the glass and trapezoid were both rules made to nerf the New Jersey Devils and their trap

[Erick Estrada]

The offside review rule was a knee jerk reaction to rare egregious offside play resulting in a goal. IMO the league is better without it as there have been too many marginal reviews resulting in goals taken off the board which deflates arenas after goal celebrations.

We have a record OT game and once again the knee jerk reactions come out. There's nothing wrong with playoff overtime as most games don't go past the 1st or 2nd OT.

As for the puck over the glass penalty. There's little doubt it sucks when it happens like it did for Gio yesterday but it's a good rule and what he did fully deserved 2 minutes. He's a professional NHL player and should be able to shoot a puck around the boards without lifting it over the glass. It's bad enough we have teams collapsing all around the net when holding on to late leads making it more difficult to get pucks through and the last thing we need is to start letting teams simply dump the puck over the glass when in trouble.

[powderjunkie]

I have never liked how sloppy/careless/poorly executed plays are penalized the same as infractions that negate a scoring chance or dangerous plays (but not obvious enough to warrant a major). Ticky-tack calls are also more likely to have an extended delayed penalty period, so the 'penalty' is often even more severe.

[Strange Brew]

I don’t love the puck over the glass penalty but don’t have much of a better solution.

The difference in severity amongst all 2 minute penalties is rather unfortunate and don’t always correlate to how “disciplined” a team plays. Which IMO is one of the reasons you see NHL referees manage the game to the extent that they do.

[powderjunkie]

Icing
Puck over glass
Goalie freezing the puck outside of the crease

All treated the same - no line change - for the first 7* instances each period.

Everytime thereafter it's a penalty (in my fantasy world it would be 1 min along with O-zone infractions, etc, but I digress).

*I don't know the exact right number, but probably somewhere between 5-10.



Punishes teams who have been under siege, rewards teams who haven't (can kill pressure more easily late in periods).

In my fantasy world, periods would only end when the defensive team at 0:00 achieves possession outside their zone, so you can't really rely on killing things indefinitely this way