08-12-2020, 09:40 PM
|
#101
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by afc wimbledon
then presumably they should give a 2 minute for icing as well, its no different
|
If they want to increase scoring, sure. I'd be OK with that.
|
|
|
08-12-2020, 10:16 PM
|
#102
|
#1 Goaltender
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
|
I do think icing is different, I mean are you going to start penalizing players who are trying to make an outlet pass or a pass period on choppy ice late in a period?
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to CGY12 For This Useful Post:
|
|
08-13-2020, 06:03 AM
|
#103
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Singapore
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stud_McCool
This should negate any over-the-glass debate.
Discuss.
|
Also, endless overtime.
__________________
Shot down in Flames!
|
|
|
08-13-2020, 06:46 AM
|
#104
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by VilleN
I had this thought yesterday during the 5OT game, I wouldn't be opposed to:
-1OT 5vs5
-2OT 4vs4
-3OT 3vs3
And keep it at 3vs3 for subsequent overtimes (highly doubtful it gets further than 3OT with this format).
|
Uh no. The 3 on 3 is to gimmicky. If a compromise is necessary, then 5 on 5 for the 1st, 2nd, and maybe the 3rd OT and then 4 on 4 until a goal has been scored.
__________________
Remember this, TSN stands for Toronto's Sports Network!
MOD EDIT: Removed broken image link.
|
|
|
08-13-2020, 08:15 AM
|
#105
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CGY12
I do think icing is different, I mean are you going to start penalizing players who are trying to make an outlet pass or a pass period on choppy ice late in a period?
|
Well, you're penalizing players for bad ice or the puck being on edge (almost no one shoots the puck over the glass on purpose)
They both result in a stoppage, and icings are intentional more often than the over-the-glass is. That is why I think it's ridiculous that the latter is a penalty and the former isn't.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
|
|
08-13-2020, 09:07 AM
|
#106
|
Scoring Winger
|
No.... don't touch overtime in the playoffs.... it is one of the things that make the NHL playoffs epic and memorable.
About the over the glass penalty... I'm presuming you're asking this question because of the 5OT game between Tampa and Columbus, where a penalty was called on Kukan and one missed (opinion) on the SH breakaway shortly thereafter for “mugging”. This is my problem with the game… and I know the referees are human and maybe it’s hard to call a game the same way all the time… but… if it’s a penalty in the first game of the season, it’s a penalty in every game of the season, and every game of the playoffs, and in every period no matter what the situation is. All this nonsense about “ putting the whistles away” as to not affect the game is doing just that, affecting the game… because rules aren’t being consistently enforced. If a team is built on speed and finesse, and they win throughout the regular season because of their skill and speed, and then in the playoffs, you “put your whistles away” and a bubble team that was tough and dirty goes up against them in the playoffs – now they just changed the game and the regular season and the “rules” don’t apply the same way. Why did we lose last year in the playoffs, why did we need Milan Lucic this year? Because the rules change in playoffs and those changes are not subjective and enforcement is arbitrary at best.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to JackIsBack For This Useful Post:
|
|
08-13-2020, 09:56 AM
|
#107
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: May 2016
Location: ATCO Field, Section 201
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by afc wimbledon
then presumably they should give a 2 minute for icing as well, its no different
|
I would be more responsive to a penalty for dog ####ing on the way back to the dot. It seems like every crucial icing is followed by a 2 minute equipment check.
|
|
|
08-13-2020, 10:30 AM
|
#108
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden
I would be more responsive to a penalty for dog ####ing on the way back to the dot. It seems like every crucial icing is followed by a 2 minute equipment check.
|
League could enforce the hurry up faceoffs a little more. Teams have figured out how to game the icing rule.
|
|
|
08-13-2020, 10:40 AM
|
#109
|
Franchise Player
|
First offence treat it like icing.
Second offence 2 minute penalty.
Third offence you have to take on the Neal contract, or if it’s the Oilers, Lucic’s contract.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to The Cobra For This Useful Post:
|
|
08-13-2020, 10:46 AM
|
#110
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: The Pas, MB
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lubicon
League could enforce the hurry up faceoffs a little more. Teams have figured out how to game the icing rule.
|
Yep, if they want to piss around then you can give them a delay of game penalty. Or you just drop the puck and if they aren't set then that's their problem.
|
|
|
08-13-2020, 10:58 AM
|
#111
|
Franchise Player
|
Don't overthink things. The 2 things are fine the way it is.
|
|
|
08-13-2020, 11:05 AM
|
#112
|
#1 Goaltender
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
Well, you're penalizing players for bad ice or the puck being on edge (almost no one shoots the puck over the glass on purpose)
They both result in a stoppage, and icings are intentional more often than the over-the-glass is. That is why I think it's ridiculous that the latter is a penalty and the former isn't.
|
That becomes a discretionary call by the officials. The league eliminated that with the puck over the glass rule which is much more black and white.
However icing is much different as they already have a challenging time ruling whether the puck was playable by a defender, was it an attempted pass, did the offensive player tip the puck. You may get players who are trying to ice it but are firing it in the vicinity of a teammate. That would open up a huge can of worms if you ask me and probably would become a nightmare. The linesman would have way to much power. Keep it as is and don't let the opponent change.
|
|
|
08-13-2020, 11:07 AM
|
#113
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsawwassen
Uh no. The 3 on 3 is to gimmicky. If a compromise is necessary, then 5 on 5 for the 1st, 2nd, and maybe the 3rd OT and then 4 on 4 until a goal has been scored.
|
Yeah, upon further thought, no change is needed. The long OTs of the playoffs are some of the most intense, and engaging hockey that you can watch. It should absolutely not be changed.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by kurwamac
you should look in the mirror and worry about yourself.. you fight for scraps in Canada - I've got it made keep tap dancing for a bunch of guys son - I've got it good where it counts boy
|
|
|
|
08-13-2020, 11:08 AM
|
#114
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsawwassen
Uh no. The 3 on 3 is to gimmicky. If a compromise is necessary, then 5 on 5 for the 1st, 2nd, and maybe the 3rd OT and then 4 on 4 until a goal has been scored.
|
Could you imagine all the missed passes and icing once it got down to 3-on-3 and players were exhausted?
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
|
|
|
08-13-2020, 08:04 PM
|
#115
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CGY12
That becomes a discretionary call by the officials. The league eliminated that with the puck over the glass rule which is much more black and white.
However icing is much different as they already have a challenging time ruling whether the puck was playable by a defender, was it an attempted pass, did the offensive player tip the puck. You may get players who are trying to ice it but are firing it in the vicinity of a teammate. That would open up a huge can of worms if you ask me and probably would become a nightmare. The linesman would have way to much power. Keep it as is and don't let the opponent change.
|
It's not too different from the fairly rare intentional offsides (which doesn't always seem to be 'intentional').
I'd be fine with keeping puck over the glass as it is if we could add 'intentional icing' as a penalty...it's essentially intentional grounding in football if there is no 'pass receiver' in the vicinity.
|
|
|
08-13-2020, 08:17 PM
|
#116
|
Franchise Player
|
As I said earlier, I'd add goalies freezing the puck well out of their crease to this discussion, too. I'd favour an accumulation system, but I'd also consider making it a penalty for the goalie to freeze the puck if no part of his body is in contact with the crease. It's just not a 'hockey play'.
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:26 PM.
|
|