Take a look at this link- NHL Rule changes.?

Question

http://www.nhl.com/nhl/app/?service=page&page=NewsPage&articleid=366263

All look good to me. First faceoff of a powerplay in the defending zone of the team that committed the foul- Good- I like it a lot. Increases scoring without being a gimmick, creates another reason not to take a penalty.

Preventing injuries on icing, fair enough. Not as dramatic as I would have liked to see, but functional.

If the puck deflects of the the goal frame, faceoff stays in the zone. What took them so long?

And Recommendations from the Goalie equipment group to make the equipment proportional to the goaltender were endorsed. They don't have the specific standards on that yet though.

Thoughts?

Answer 1

I'm not really sure about the first one. Come on the Power-Play team has 2 minutes and an extra skater. If the puck was in their end when the whistle was blown why shouldn't they have to go back. They had no reason to keep it in their own zone, so the other team either intercepted a pass or broke the rule when they had the puck usually. I prefer the face off is where the whistle blew, this sounds like a gimmick to me.

Answer 2

The new faceoff rules are fair, but I have a problem with the "playing the puck, and not the man" rule on icings. I thought the interference rule was on the books already, just never called in these situations.  If they were going to do this, they should of just gone to no-touch icing.  Yet another halfway rule the refs will s***w up in its interpretation.

Goalie proportional equipment? Will they make the nets proportional to each goalie then too? I can see a lawsuit for discrimination against short goalies having to wear smaller pads.  It has to be some standard for all. Otherwise, "Big Fat Goalie" might become a reality.

Answer 3

I like them all. All seem fair and legitimate- nothing's too much of a reach.

Answer 4

All of those rules changes fair.

One thing though regarding the puck hitting the crossbar and posts.

Last I check(if I'm not mistaken) the NHL doesn't count a shot on goal if the puck hits any of the posts and doesn't go in right ? So why not have count as a shot on goal regardless of?

Doesn't count as a shot on goal if the puck goes off any of the posts and in the net?

Answer 5

The rule about faceoffs after a deflection off the goal was a no-brainer.  The first rule about power play faceoffs is an obvious attempt an increasing scoring.  Not a bad thing, but I wonder if the "time-limit" rule about line changes will be relaxed in those situations; you know, the one that says hurry up and get your line out there or we'll drop the puck without you?

Now, the rule about contact on icing challenges, not sure if I like this one.  It's far too subjective--is there even a standard for what is and is not an attempt to take out the player trying to recover the puck? You could be going for the puck and still wipe out the opposing player.  I can see this getting changed at least a couple of times over the next few seasons.  I don't think the refs will know what to look for to be honest.

The goalie equipment crack down continues...good.  Marty Brodeur will continue to whine, but who cares?

Answer 6

I like it.  The faceoff rule can create offense, supposing the team on the powerplay can control the puck and score.  The puck deflection change is also good and another one of those offensive things.  But I think the icing change is my favorite.  I said earlier in the year that if they all just played the puck instead of the body, that guy from Minnesota wouldn't have been injured.  Now they have to play the puck, which is great because that other stuff looked ridiculous.

Answer 7

i love them, i hate when it hits the post and goes outside keep it in the zone!

Answer 8

I don't like the Power Play rule or the "icing interference" rule either.

The Power Play rule is excessive, the penalized team is already missing a player.

The "icing interference" rule is taking the sport down a path I don't like.  This rule is trying to prevent physical play and I believe rules should not do that.  I am all for preventing serious injury, but this rule is too preventative in my opinion.

The deflection rule is OK and Standardizing Goalie equipment is fine as well.

Answer 9

Yup I like them all.

first and last one, like you said increases scoring without a gimmick.

And I'm all for preventing injuries along the boards.

I think they should make a limit to how big pads are because some goalies, not gonna mention any names..., are getting ridiculous.

Answer 10

1. This is not thought out at all. The bull that is going to take place over this will not be worth the hassle.

2. This is too subjective. An accidental brushing may or maybe won't be a penalty. Then all a player has to do is make a beeline for the puck. If he is stopped there is a penalty and a face off in the offensive zone. This will definitely lead to more icings Risk Reward is too great.

3. Not a bad rule but with netting why doesn't the puck remain in play?

4. Maybe this can extend to all players. Fat players can wear larger pads for blocking shots.