Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

NHL TO REFLECT ON RULES AT ANNUAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CAMP


Recommended Posts

NHL TO REFLECT ON RULES AT ANNUAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CAMP

96939686-218x150.jpg

Toronto, Canada (Sports Network) - It's for times like this that appointing Brendan Shanahan as NHL's senior vice president of player safety and hockey operations, made a whole lot of sense.

The ex-player will oversee the league's second annual research and development camp next week in Toronto where tweaks on the game will be put to the test, and there couldn't be a better man for the job. After a Hall of Fame worthy 21-year career spent terrorizing goaltenders with a pin-point accurate wrist- shot, Shanahan will help usher the game into a new era with his extensive knowledge and experience in tow.

The camp, which will put some of the game's top junior players through scrimmages, will test new rule changes and tweaks with many of the leagues general managers sporting a keen eye. Here are a few of the more interesting rule changes that will be tested.

THE "HYBRID" ICING RULE

The hybrid icing rule maintains the exciting race for the puck the fans love, while taking the danger of the end boards out of the equation.

Under the hybrid rule the linesman determines whether a play will be called icing based on which player reaches the faceoff dot first. If he believes the attacking player will be the first to the puck, icing is waved off. If he believes the defending player will eventually win the race to the puck, the whistle is blown and the play stops dead at the faceoff dot, instead of inches from the end boards.

This one is a no-brainer and should be implemented into the game as soon as possible.

NO ICING PERMITTED WHILE SHORTHANDED

Let's think about this one for a second. If icing isn't allowed in even strength situations then why is a team on the penalty kill, a situation in which they are being penalized, allowed to ice the puck?

This rule would not only make minor penalties more prohibitive, it would also enhance the effectiveness of the powerplay by increasing the amount of time spent in the offensive zone. The NHL is always conscious of boosting scoring and this would be a great way to do it.

OVERTIME VARIATION: FOUR MINUTES OF 4-ON-4 FOLLOWED BY THREE MINUTES OF 3-ON-3

It's no secret the shootout is widely disliked in NHL circles, but short of getting rid of it altogether, this tweak might offer some relief.

While asking NHL players to play in a 3-on-3 format seems kind of hokey, if a higher percentage of games could avoid going to a shootout as a result of this rule change, then it should be implemented. Speaking of the shootout, they will also test a five shooter format as opposed to the current three shooter format. The three shooter format makes coming back from a deficit near impossible, so if the shootout is here to stay then the move to a five shooter format should be welcomed.

NO LINE CHANGE FOR TEAM COMMITTING AN OFFSIDE

Penalizing teams for going offside would force players to be more careful upon entering the offensive zone. This would reduce the number offsides along with whistles and play stoppages that go along with them. It may also have the unintended effect of reducing creativity. If teams knew that they could be penalized by going offside then they would be more likely to simply dump the puck in the offensive zone. One thing the league wants more of is creativity and excitement, so they should be careful with this one.

AFTER OFFSIDE, FACE-OFF GOES BACK TO OFFENDING TEAM'S END

What's with the aversion to the offside call? Here's yet another rule aimed at making an offside a penalized offense. This would have the same negative effect as the previous rule discussed. If teams are scared to go offside due to the fear of a faceoff in their own end, they'll simply dump it in. Ask fans how exciting dump and chase hockey is and you have your answer on whether this rule makes it off the drawing board.

REMOVING TRAPEZOID BEHIND NET

The trapezoid rule should never have been implemented in the first place. The thinking was that if the goalies couldn't leave their net to play the puck in the corners it would increase the opposing team's time in the offensive zone, leading to more goals. What it's done is reduced quick breakouts and hampered the ability of goalies to help in the transition game. It's also slowed down the game by forcing the defenseman to skate all the way back to the corner to retrieve the puck.

The league needs to remove the trapezoid and bring back the old days where goaltenders served not only as puck-stoppers, but a helpful sixth-man on the ice. Being able to play the puck efficiently as a goaltender is a skill that should be taught and celebrated, not penalized.

IN-NET GOAL LINE CAMERA

On almost any given night during the hockey season there will be controversy surrounding whether a puck crossed the goal line or not. Well, why not give the boys upstairs another tool to help figure that out. A high definition camera pointed at the goal line would provide an invaluable angle for NHL headquarters when deciding whether a goal is in fact a goal. The technology to do this is out there and has been for a while; there is no reason to wait any longer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THE "HYBRID" ICING RULE

Acceptable. I think it would be beneficial in reducing the injuries after those long, fast chases into the corner where the first guy there usually gets creamed.

NO ICING PERMITTED WHILE SHORTHANDED

Not so sure on this, while a good idea to keep the play into the attacking end, it would give absolutely no relief to the four players who are trying to penalty kill for 2 minutes as they probably won't get out of their zone that much. Especially if the rule that you can't change after an icing is instituted in this version.

OVERTIME VARIATION: FOUR MINUTES OF 4-ON-4 FOLLOWED BY THREE MINUTES OF 3-ON-3

The different time thing doesn't fit well with me, I mean what's next, flip the net on its side and play shinny for the winner? 5 shooter shootout seems a better fit than messing around with times.

NO LINE CHANGE FOR TEAM COMMITTING AN OFFSIDE

It would definitely make going offside more of an issue, but I don't know how many teams actually change on an offside if someone's able to get that far ahead of the puck that quickly then they're probably pretty fresh.

AFTER OFFSIDE, FACE-OFF GOES BACK TO OFFENDING TEAM'S END

Makes sense.

REMOVING TRAPEZOID BEHIND NET

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

IN-NET GOAL LINE CAMERA

You'd need two.... even then you probably won't get most of the shots they're looking for unless they mount 65,000 cameras in the net, but that would just weaken it and they'd break like sticks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THE "HYBRID" ICING RULE

Acceptable. I think it would be beneficial in reducing the injuries after those long, fast chases into the corner where the first guy there usually gets creamed.

Yep...I fully back this...to me,its a no brainer

REMOVING TRAPEZOID BEHIND NET

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

So,were be back at square one again with the goalies being able to play the puck in the corners again,and when there's contacted with another player,he gets called for goalie interference?.....I hated that.......back then,I had no issue as long as the goalie was considered free game IF HE CHOOSES to go into the corner or behind the net to play the puck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THE "HYBRID" ICING RULE: yes

NO ICING PERMITTED WHILE SHORTHANDED: No

OVERTIME VARIATION: FOUR MINUTES OF 4-ON-4 FOLLOWED BY THREE MINUTES OF 3-ON-3: maybe

NO LINE CHANGE FOR TEAM COMMITTING AN OFFSIDE: No

AFTER OFFSIDE, FACE-OFF GOES BACK TO OFFENDING TEAM'S END: No

REMOVING TRAPEZOID BEHIND NET: Yes

IN-NET GOAL LINE CAMERA: Yes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THE "HYBRID" ICING RULE

Fair idea, but I hate it already. You're just giving the corrupt linesmen more power to screw over other teams.

NO ICING PERMITTED WHILE SHORTHANDED

Disapprove, you're pretty much killing the whole purpose of a penalty kill. Penalty kills are essentially gonna need offense now, or at least a forward who can carry a puck and dump it down from the halfway mark in order to get a line change. Will be received negatively by players.

OVERTIME VARIATION: FOUR MINUTES OF 4-ON-4 FOLLOWED BY THREE MINUTES OF 3-ON-3

As much as I like the shoot-out, nothing beats the overtime they use in the playoffs.

NO LINE CHANGE FOR TEAM COMMITTING AN OFFSIDE

Meh Im ok with that.

AFTER OFFSIDE, FACE-OFF GOES BACK TO OFFENDING TEAM'S END

Makes sense. <---- Stole uncivils

REMOVING TRAPEZOID BEHIND NET

Get it done.....NOW

IN-NET GOAL LINE CAMERA

Wouldn't totally solve the problem, but it'd help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

getting rid of the trapesoid will eliminate the need to adjust to a hybrid icing as the goalie will then be free to play those pucks and eliminate many of those races for the puck.

If the OT idea gets rid of the shootout then I am all for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure what it was like before the trapezoid,but everyone tells me it was better,all I want is that they make the game safer and fairer,I loved this RD camp last year it taught me a lot about hockey.

GO HABS GO :lol: :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever goes down, in Shanahan I trust.

Hey,I'm thinking he's an improvement.;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A goldfish is an improvement over Gary bettman the little weasel.

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the players will work as pawns to sample various scenarios, situations and equipment, fans should not expect the game to be turned upside down overnight.

"I think everything we go in and try in this camp is to teach us some things," said Brendan Shanahan, the NHL's Senior Vice President of Player Safety and Hockey Operations, said in an interview with That's Hockey on Tuesday. "It's not because we're not satisfied with the game, or we feel this need to continually change the game. It's just to continue to give us more information - and what a great time in the NHL to be studying the game and learning more about it."

One scenario they intend to dissect will be the shootout, which was just introduced to the NHL game after the lockout ended in the 2005-06 season.

The camp will look at both a five-man and three-man shootout, with repeat shooters being allowed if it's still tied. The repeat idea comes mainly from Jonathan Toews' entertaining array of shootout goals that carried Canada to a semi-final win over the United States at the World Junior Hockey Championship in 2007.

"That was exciting," continued Shanahan. "At the same time, if that were the rule, we would have been robbed of maybe the greatest shootout moment, I think, since it's been instituted, which is Marek Malik shooting 16th or 17th for the New York Rangers, doing the most beautiful, clutch shootout goal in the history of the shootout," he said.

Overtime will also see a new wrinkle at camp, as a three-minute, three-on-three sudden death session will be added to the current five-minute, four-on-four format. They will also look at the ice surface without the restricted trapezoid area, which was just recently installed and limits a goalie's puck-handling area.

Technology-wise, referees will get a chance to work with a wireless communication system, allowing the four-man crew to actually talk in-game.

And, in an effort to boost offence, they will look at ways to make power plays more potent - at the expense of the penalty-killing unit.

"If you look at the statistics over the years, penalty killing has become more proficient than the power play," explained Shanahan, as the R & D will try having the penalized player sit for the entire duration of his penalty. As well, delayed penalties will not be whistled dead until the offending team vacates their own zone with the puck. "I don't think we're at a point yet where we want to make a change. If it continues down that road, or if we feel that we need to make a tweak to that rule, this is a good way of looking for it."

With much debate and further injuries accumulating on touch-up icing, they will again look at the possibility of no-touch, and a hybrid of both. Of all the experiments and samples, Shanahan said testing icing is among the hardest to simulate.

"We get such great reads from these players. They're 36 of the highest rated 17-year-olds in North America and they bring a great level of competition. But icing is one thing where we get a difficult read from them because they are used to no-touch icing," he said.

"We don't get that true race for the puck that's instinctive with them that we see in the NHL. Often times even when we've instituted the NHL icing or the hybrid icing, their first instinct when the puck gets shot down is to straighten up and quit on the play. We're always trying to remind them that's not the rule."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THE "HYBRID" ICING RULE

Something needs to be done to the current icing rules. If they go this route with a race to the dot, then you need to have a thin red line accross the ice where the dots are IMO or it'll be too hard to call. I still don't understand the extreme aversion to no touch icing though. How often do we actually a see a forward win the race to negate the icing? No touch icing wouldn't be the end of the world and would actually be benefcial to teams in the late stages of a game trying to mount a comeback; they'd have less time burned when the other team ices the puck since the play would be dead immediately.

NO ICING PERMITTED WHILE SHORTHANDED

Not a fan. There is so much potential for PKers to be absolutely gassed by the end of a kill. Many teams have their best players killing penalties as well so that could negatively impact the rest of the game. If they decide to implement this rule, than you have to at least allow line changes for the PK team when they ice the puck IMO.

OVERTIME VARIATION: FOUR MINUTES OF 4-ON-4 FOLLOWED BY THREE MINUTES OF 3-ON-3

Sign me up. The shoot-out is a skills competition/gimmick anyway, so we may as well insert a new gimmick that at least involves more of a "team hockey play" to end the game.

NO LINE CHANGE FOR TEAM COMMITTING AN OFFSIDE

Don't really like it. You're already being penalized by having your rush stopped in it's tracks and giving the other team an opportunity to change. If it's an intentional off side you already have the rule in place anyway.

AFTER OFFSIDE, FACE-OFF GOES BACK TO OFFENDING TEAM'S END

See above; the current rule is fine IMO.

REMOVING TRAPEZOID BEHIND NET

Do it yesterday please, but if the goalie comes out and has the puck, he's fair game IMO.

IN-NET GOAL LINE CAMERA

It certainly can't hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one can accuse Shanny of not thinking outside the box!! :lol:

THE "HYBRID" ICING RULE

This one, or some other version, is a no-brainer. A boring chase for no-icing ending in a broken leg is the very definition of "stupid" sport.

NO ICING PERMITTED WHILE SHORTHANDED

Absolutely. If two minutes is too much of a PP, then shorten the time for a minor; don't instead "peel back" by allowing a hockey infraction (icing) :huh: . Pretty dumb logic to originate it (yes, correct, it wasn't my idea!).

OVERTIME VARIATION: FOUR MINUTES OF 4-ON-4 FOLLOWED BY THREE MINUTES OF 3-ON-3

Whatever works. The League should be aiming for a certain % of OT's to resolve before shoot-out. I recall my son running into minor hockey tournaments where it went 5-on-5, 4-on-4, on down to 2-on-2 (and yes, you could pull your goalie anytime). Hey, it was 8 year-olds, but it was a darn site more exciting than a lot of NHL OT's I've seen of late.

NO LINE CHANGE FOR TEAM COMMITTING AN OFFSIDE

Definitely no, mostly for the reason cited.

AFTER OFFSIDE, FACE-OFF GOES BACK TO OFFENDING TEAM'S END

Definitely no, mostly for the reason cited.

REMOVING TRAPEZOID BEHIND NET

Given the Habs have 24-year-old Price in goal 90% of the season (one day to be known as the greatest puck-handling goaltender of all time), I am all for this one. :D

IN-NET GOAL LINE CAMERA

Another no-brainer. 007 has hi-def cameras in his lapel button (thanks to 'Q') for crying out loud. Get on with it. And make sure to tell soccer the idea.

THE MAJOR ONE MISSING: 3 POINTS FOR A REGULATION WIN

And soccer has this one (partly) right .... 3 points for a regulation time win (= 3 points total get divvied up between the two teams each and every game). The math just does not work (make any sense) the way it is. Sometimes 2 points get divvied up, sometimes 3 points. :unsure: Why are some NHL hockey games worth more than others?!? :huh::unsure:

I do recognize the NHL generated the current status quo (and is very likely beholden to it) because it tightens up the standings and creates regular season stretch excitement around which teams make the play-offs and where the final standings work out. I do get that it works as such. But it is without logic, other than that objective. (There you go, I am sounding more and more like Spock. :lol: )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one can accuse Shanny of not thinking outside the box!! :lol:

THE "HYBRID" ICING RULE

This one, or some other version, is a no-brainer. A boring chase for no-icing ending in a broken leg is the very definition of "stupid" sport.

NO ICING PERMITTED WHILE SHORTHANDED

Absolutely. If two minutes is too much of a PP, then shorten the time for a minor; don't instead "peel back" by allowing a hockey infraction (icing) :huh: . Pretty dumb logic to originate it (yes, correct, it wasn't my idea!).

OVERTIME VARIATION: FOUR MINUTES OF 4-ON-4 FOLLOWED BY THREE MINUTES OF 3-ON-3

Whatever works. The League should be aiming for a certain % of OT's to resolve before shoot-out. I recall my son running into minor hockey tournaments where it went 5-on-5, 4-on-4, on down to 2-on-2 (and yes, you could pull your goalie anytime). Hey, it was 8 year-olds, but it was a darn site more exciting than a lot of NHL OT's I've seen of late.

NO LINE CHANGE FOR TEAM COMMITTING AN OFFSIDE

Definitely no, mostly for the reason cited.

AFTER OFFSIDE, FACE-OFF GOES BACK TO OFFENDING TEAM'S END

Definitely no, mostly for the reason cited.

REMOVING TRAPEZOID BEHIND NET

Given the Habs have 24-year-old Price in goal 90% of the season (one day to be known as the greatest puck-handling goaltender of all time), I am all for this one. :D

IN-NET GOAL LINE CAMERA

Another no-brainer. 007 has hi-def cameras in his lapel button (thanks to 'Q') for crying out loud. Get on with it. And make sure to tell soccer the idea.

THE MAJOR ONE MISSING: 3 POINTS FOR A REGULATION WIN

And soccer has this one (partly) right .... 3 points for a regulation time win (= 3 points total get divvied up between the two teams each and every game). The math just does not work (make any sense) the way it is. Sometimes 2 points get divvied up, sometimes 3 points. :unsure: Why are some NHL hockey games worth more than others?!? :huh::unsure:

I do recognize the NHL generated the current status quo (and is very likely beholden to it) because it tightens up the standings and creates regular season stretch excitement around which teams make the play-offs and where the final standings work out. I do get that it works as such. But it is without logic, other than that objective. (There you go, I am sounding more and more like Spock. :lol: )

soccer gives 3 points to a win and 1 point to a tie.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only one I care for is the trapezoid

But changing the points system would be beneficial

3 points for a win

2 points for an overtime/shootout win

1 point for an overtime/shootout loss

0 points for a loss

OT should like this IMHO 20mins 5 on 5, if no goal, 5 v 5 shootout like the AHL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TORONTO -- NHL nets could look a little bit different this season.

After using a shallower model over two days at the research and development camp, league executive Brendan Shanahan indicated that the new nets will likely find their way into NHL arenas soon.

"I think that the shallow nets are something that I'd really like to try in at least an exhibition game and see how players react to it," Shanahan said Thursday.

The new design is 40 inches deep as opposed to the traditional 44 inches. It also features a clear plastic strip along the top and thinner mesh -- changes intended to make video review decisions easier.

Shanahan also liked a new "verification line" that runs three inches behind the goal-line and can be used in video review to help determine if a puck completely entered the net.

Since the changes being discussed won't impact the rulebook, the procedure for implementing them is still being ironed out. They'll likely be used during training camps and exhibition games before the hockey operations department makes a decision on whether they'll be used during the regular season.

"We're talking about the process and the steps that would go forward for that," said Shanahan.

The two coaches working the benches at the research and development camp are in favour of the new nets. Dave Tippett of the Phoenix Coyotes and Dan Bylsma of the Pittsburgh Penguins both liked the extra space the shallower frames created for defencemen behind the goal.

"It's a small variation," said Tippett. "What you're doing is giving players more space to play. I don't think it has a negative effect on the game whatsoever. It's only a positive."

Another change likely coming to NHL arenas is a piece of curved glass near the benches designed to protect players from the stanchion. Montreal Canadiens forward Max Pacioretty suffered a concussion last season after taking a hit from Boston Bruins defenceman Zdeno Chara and slamming in to one of those at the Bell Centre.

"The curved glass, I think there's a really good chance we're going to see that in NHL games this year," said Shanahan. "I think we all agree that the curved glass makes the playing environment safer for our players so we want to have it in the game."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one can accuse Shanny of not thinking outside the box!! :lol:

THE "HYBRID" ICING RULE

This one, or some other version, is a no-brainer. A boring chase for no-icing ending in a broken leg is the very definition of "stupid" sport.

YEP...if this can eliminate the danger of injury occurring....yes ( though,some will argue the fact that it will take away the excitement of the rush/play for the puck ) <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YEP...if this can eliminate the danger of injury occurring....yes ( though,some will argue the fact that it will take away the excitement of the rush/play for the puck ) <_<

There would still be a race, only it would be shorter and the finish line less lethal ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

soccer gives 3 points to a win and 1 point to a tie.

Yes, that's correct. Non-elimination ("regular season") games in soccer do not have "tie-break" (no OT; no shoot-out/PK's). They have 3 points for a (regulation) win to incite teams to go for a win (in regulation). NHL hockey should have the same. As it is, the last 5-10 minutes of regulation NHL hockey in a tie game means kitty-by-the-door as teams lock-in at least one point and give them a "guaranteed shot" at 2 points. You may as well go mow the lawn and come back for the beginning of OT. Hang a carrot of 3 points in front of the two teams, and they suddenly have something to "lose" (that extra 3rd point), if they simply wind it down to a regulation tie. Watch that 3rd period pick up some if the opportunity for 3 points is about to the expire.
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...