Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens

Nhl Looking To Change The Game


Guest Carey_Price

Recommended Posts

Guest Carey_Price

Brendan Shanahan and the league are attempting to change or improve some of the NHL game rules, the big one being to get rid of shootouts and the no touch icing rule. Some teams tested out the proposed suggestions by Shanahan and his group, and as per TSN, the games were played like this:

-- Teams could not make substitutions after an offside call, with the ensuing faceoff back in the offending team's end.

-- In the event of a faceoff violation, the opposing team could pick the replacement centre.

-- Teams were whistled for icing while short-handed and could not make substitutions before the ensuing faceoff.

-- In an effort to create more visibility during video review, Plexiglass was used on top of the nets for the morning session and a thinner mesh was used for the afternoon session.

Now the biggest one of all like I said was the shootout. They are looking to get rid of it and making OT's something along the lines of 4v4, 3v3, and maybe even 2v2.

Personally I think the no touch icing rule is great cause it not only makes it safer for the players (might lose their footing in a race and crash into the boards) and it's also removes any inaccuracy from the refs who sometimes have to decide who got to the puck first from the other end of the ice. As for the faceoff rule, I have no clue why the opposing team should be allowed to pick their opponents replacement centre lol, that rule would be horrible and most likely won't be approved by the other GMs. As for shootouts....I always hated them. I think it's a bad way to decide who should get the extra point because some goalies are simply not good under pressure, and I find it's a lazy way to end the game (although entertaining). Mostly, I don't like the shootouts cause i just miss the good old 20 minute sudden death periods. Now i'll understand if the league doesn't want to bring a full 20 mins of sudden death back, but 10 mins would be great, 5 on 5 or even 4 on 4 would be awesome and would make total sense cause the game would still be competitive...but 3 on 3, or even 2 on 2!! :blink: :blink: . You gotta be kidding me...honestly i think that would be boring and stupid. Your thoughts?

Here are a couple good links with some more information:

http://www.torontosun.com/sports/hockey/20...8/15069166.html

http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=331032

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with changing the icing rules, either to the no-touch or to the hybrid form, and with abandoning the shootout and going back to just a nice 5 minute overtime - make it 3 on 3, and there you go.

Except I'd also suggest to make a regulation win 3 points, and an OT win 2 points, a tie or OT loss 1 point. That'd make things a bit more interesting, methinks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm all for no-touch icing for obvious reasons, major injuries being the most important one.

Calling short-handed icing I don't like one bit, at least allow teams to change players before the ensuing faceoff in the o-zone.

As for the OT, I'm kinda on the fence. I like the excitement of the shootout, but I hate to see it being the decisive factor when teams are in direct competition for a playoff spot (like last year for example). It's a little tricky for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In general terms, apart from going to no-touch icing (and the points change I suggested - it'd make a regulation win worth that much more), the only changes I'd be in favour of is changes undoing changes - like going back to 5-min OT ending in a tie and no shootout, removing the trapezoid, etc.

Changes undoing stupid changes are good changes, so changes can be good! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The game has to be altered in so many ways. The nets, the game flow, the contact rules etc. there's so much revamping that needs done with hockey.

To those who say don't change the game need to look at videotapes from each year dating back to 1950. You'll note about 1000 things that changes not only from 1950 to today but many things changed several times along the way.

The game changes, always has and always will. People change, athletes change, management change, coaches change. business change and with that comes change on the ice. Refusing to change back to counteract things that change for the bad is just dumb.

People just don't like change, yet refuse to see it gradually happen before their eyes. Only when we try to forcefully change things will there be an issue but the gradual changes go unnoticed until recently with the "trap" stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked the idea of the blue box by the benches so its easier to identify. I like the idea of a yellow line in the goal. I think they should keep dropping the puck. The having to clear it on a delayed penalty was really interesting i would like to see more of that to see how it would work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay heres what i think on the whole thing.

Icing: Not a bad idea at all i have been a fan of no touch icing for sometime and think that touch icing is not something that will improve the game at all, its always fun to see the players race to the end to try and get the puck but i don't like the chances that they have of getting seriously injured. On the other hand it may slow down the game so i'm not sure if i am 100% sold on that system yet.

OT: What a Joke! 2 v. 2? Sounds like house league or pond hockey to me. Look i like it the way it is no need to change it. I think that this idea is one which right from the start i thought was a rediculously bad idea. I am sort of a fan on the whole "3 pts for regulation win 2 pts for OT win 1 pt for OT loss) but i think at this point they should just leave OT alone, they just changed it and i don't think anything is wrong with it. So i really hope they don't add that rule.

Obviously its a good idea to try these rules out and to try and improve the game any way that is possible. But i just don't like these rules very much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Carey_Price

I disagree with the people who are saying the NHL has changed the game enough and stop now...in some cases change IS good as a member has already stated, especially if it improves the game like going back to the good old sudden death periods (even though they're shorter). And another member said that the NHL has changed so much from the 1950s that we need to go back to making it the way it used to be...i say we do that. take out the shootouts, that's a start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm bothered by the idea of taking away icing while shorthanded.

I'm not clear on this one - would the opposing team be allowed to pick their opposition's center for a faceoff violation? If so, that is way out of line for me, because I don't like the idea of one team being allowed to decide who the other team can play and cannot play. Please clarify for me.

What I'd like to see is the deliberate icings eliminated for attempts to relieve pressure in their own zone. It's one thing to misfire on a pass and have the puck become iced, but all these attempts to clear the zone just to eliminate pressure in a situation where both teams are at full strength have always frustrated me. This more than anything else disrupts the flow of the game. I think these should be subject to delay of game penalties. BTW, I do like the no-touch icing idea.

And agreed to the one who suggested the elimination of the trapezoid. Dumbest rule ever put in. Make him stay in the goalie crease to handle the puck freely, and make him subject to checking if he handles the puck outside the crease. If he's going to come out, why should he be treated any different than any other player?

I think the motivation for putting in the shoot out during the regular season was to avoid having real long overtime games like you see in the playoffs, due to the long season, and to bring a resolution to a game. I actually like the concept, but have a real problem with someone getting a point just for forcing a shootout. The win in regulation or first overtime should get far more weight points wise than a shoot-out win. Leave the playoff format alone - great moments have been produced this way that cannot be done any other way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm all for no-touch icing for obvious reasons, major injuries being the most important one.

Yep...no brainer for me...the league has been far behind the 8 ball on this one,IMO.

Please do not touch the game any more they have dicked around with it enough.

I'm ok with the OT/shoot-out as it is now.....I guess. <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the kids played no icing on the PK all the observers said it made the game more exciting because the PKillers had to take the puck down the ice and they scored 2 shorthanded goals because of it,so I like the sound of that everyone seems to be in favor of the hybrid icing rule but that again leaves it up to the ref to make a call not the same as no touch,if you are going to award a point for losing in overtime you have to have 3 points per game to make it fair,but a loss is a loss lets just make it one point per game and the winner takes all,I don't mind any change as long as it's for the better but who's to decide what is better or not it's all a matter of opinion some fans will like it some won't so lets just make it whats safest

GO HABS GO :D :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you are going to award a point for losing in overtime you have to have 3 points per game to make it fair,but a loss is a loss lets just make it one point per game and the winner takes all,

Not to go off topic,but but I kinda still dislike the thought of awarding a point for a lose.....just my view,never can really grasp that.

You win....rewarded by points............you lose,nothing...but I guess it affects other aspects of the game/rules now if we change it back,right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep...no brainer for me...the league has been far behind the 8 ball on this one,IMO.

I'm ok with the OT/shoot-out as it is now.....I guess. <_<

I would prefer the old way 2 points for a win and 1 point each for a tie get rid of the shootout hockey is played as a team and shouldn't be decided in a skills competition they play tough as a team why leave ti to individuals to decide it like that not fitting for our great game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to go off topic,but but I kinda still dislike the thought of awarding a point for a lose.....just my view,never can really grasp that.

You win....rewarded by points............you lose,nothing...but I guess it affects other aspects of the game/rules now if we change it back,right?

The way see the current way of awarding points is that you get a point for the tie not for the loss, the game is 60 minutes. The OT/shootout is the tie breaker, a bonus second event if you will. You win that event, you get a point, you lose it you dont get a point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The game has to be altered in so many ways. The nets, the game flow, the contact rules etc. there's so much revamping that needs done with hockey.

To those who say don't change the game need to look at videotapes from each year dating back to 1950. You'll note about 1000 things that changes not only from 1950 to today but many things changed several times along the way.

The game changes, always has and always will. People change, athletes change, management change, coaches change. business change and with that comes change on the ice. Refusing to change back to counteract things that change for the bad is just dumb.

People just don't like change, yet refuse to see it gradually happen before their eyes. Only when we try to forcefully change things will there be an issue but the gradual changes go unnoticed until recently with the "trap" stuff.

Excellent, people or businesses that avoid change inevitably fall by the wayside.Lust for improvement should be lifelong to truly enjoy and feel as much as possible this includes hockey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...