Chicago Fanatics Message Board :: View topic - R & D Camp: Proposed NHL Rule Changes

The other ones are on par with increasing the size of the net and adding a second puck to the game.

1. Not allowed to ice the puck while short handed

Dumb. The team is already down a man. Why punish them more? Arbitrary attempt to increase scoring. If the team on the man advantage can't keep the puck in the zone they should be punished by losing the time it takes to go get the puck.

2. Delayed penalty variation (offending team must exit zone in possession of puck to stop play)

Also dumb.

3. Remove the Trapeziod behind the goal lines

It was a stupid rule when it was implemented and needs to go away

4. After offside, faceoff moves to offending teams zone

Why are we punishing people for offside? Just going to lead to dumb and chase hockey which is what I thought the league was trying to move away from?

5. Icing Changes No Touch or Hybrid

No touch icing is long overdue. How many more players need to be horrendously injured? Hybrid will just lead to more confusion and the same amount of injuries as guys go flying towards the boards.

6. Line Changes on Fly Only

Bad. So remove the only real advantage a home team has? Also will lead to exhausted players and less scoring.

I would counter by asking why should the penalized team get to ice the puck? I don't look at eliminating icing as penalizing the PK team any more. It seems that these kind of rule changes would affect how teams played. It might clean up some of the goonery if the PP is a greater advantage. While these rules would need further testing, I'm not so quick to discount them.

Another idea toyed with was reducing the depth of the goal. They said that reducing the depth 4" had no impact on the sight of the goal but it did open up the area behind the goal. While I don't see how 4" makes that much difference, that's what the Puck Daddy guys stated.

Your first paragraph is an example of pure unadulterated retardation.

DAC wrote:

Your first paragraph is an example of pure unadulterated retardation. Taking away the icing from the PK would be a HUGE advantage to a power play and eliminate any sort of balance from the overall game. power plays would become so powerful that they would render even strength play basically useless. As for eliminating goonery, considering that 98% of the penalties taken in a game have nothing to do with gooning it up your comment has no validity.

.

Author:	Northside_Dan [ Thu Aug 25, 2011 8:51 am ]
Post subject:	R & D Camp: Proposed NHL Rule Changes
1. Not allowed to ice the puck while short handed Dumb. The team is already down a man. Why punish them more? Arbitrary attempt to increase scoring. If the team on the man advantage can't keep the puck in the zone they should be punished by losing the time it takes to go get the puck. 2. Delayed penalty variation (offending team must exit zone in possession of puck to stop play) Also dumb. 3. Remove the Trapeziod behind the goal lines It was a stupid rule when it was implemented and needs to go away 4. After offside, faceoff moves to offending teams zone Why are we punishing people for offside? Just going to lead to dumb and chase hockey which is what I thought the league was trying to move away from? 5. Icing Changes No Touch or Hybrid No touch icing is long overdue. How many more players need to be horrendously injured? Hybrid will just lead to more confusion and the same amount of injuries as guys go flying towards the boards. 6. Line Changes on Fly Only Bad. So remove the only real advantage a home team has? Also will lead to exhausted players and less scoring.

Author:	shakes [ Mon Aug 29, 2011 1:23 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: R & D Camp: Proposed NHL Rule Changes
3 and 5 are the only ones that have a chance of not being laughed out of the room. The other ones are on par with increasing the size of the net and adding a second puck to the game.

Author:	Douchebag [ Mon Aug 29, 2011 1:34 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: R & D Camp: Proposed NHL Rule Changes
shakes wrote: The other ones are on par with increasing the size of the net and adding a second puck to the game. Why is adding another puck so bad? I may tune in for that.

Author:	DAC [ Mon Aug 29, 2011 3:51 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: R & D Camp: Proposed NHL Rule Changes
Northside_Dan wrote: 1. Not allowed to ice the puck while short handed Dumb. The team is already down a man. Why punish them more? Arbitrary attempt to increase scoring. If the team on the man advantage can't keep the puck in the zone they should be punished by losing the time it takes to go get the puck. 2. Delayed penalty variation (offending team must exit zone in possession of puck to stop play) Also dumb. I would counter by asking why should the penalized team get to ice the puck? I don't look at eliminating icing as penalizing the PK team any more. It seems that these kind of rule changes would affect how teams played. It might clean up some of the goonery if the PP is a greater advantage. While these rules would need further testing, I'm not so quick to discount them. Another idea toyed with was reducing the depth of the goal. They said that reducing the depth 4" had no impact on the sight of the goal but it did open up the area behind the goal. While I don't see how 4" makes that much difference, that's what the Puck Daddy guys stated.

Author:	denisdman [ Mon Aug 29, 2011 3:54 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: R & D Camp: Proposed NHL Rule Changes
Northside_Dan wrote: 1. Not allowed to ice the puck while short handed Dumb. The team is already down a man. Why punish them more? Arbitrary attempt to increase scoring. If the team on the man advantage can't keep the puck in the zone they should be punished by losing the time it takes to go get the puck. 2. Delayed penalty variation (offending team must exit zone in possession of puck to stop play) Also dumb. 3. Remove the Trapeziod behind the goal lines It was a stupid rule when it was implemented and needs to go away 4. After offside, faceoff moves to offending teams zone Why are we punishing people for offside? Just going to lead to dumb and chase hockey which is what I thought the league was trying to move away from? 5. Icing Changes No Touch or Hybrid No touch icing is long overdue. How many more players need to be horrendously injured? Hybrid will just lead to more confusion and the same amount of injuries as guys go flying towards the boards. 6. Line Changes on Fly Only Bad. So remove the only real advantage a home team has? Also will lead to exhausted players and less scoring. I agree with all your comments. Some of these things are just too big of a change and don't make sense.

Chicago Fanatics Message Board https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/

R & D Camp: Proposed NHL Rule Changes https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=93&t=61683	Page 1 of 1

Author:	shakes [ Mon Aug 29, 2011 4:01 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: R & D Camp: Proposed NHL Rule Changes
DAC wrote: I would counter by asking why should the penalized team get to ice the puck? I don't look at eliminating icing as penalizing the PK team any more. It seems that these kind of rule changes would affect how teams played. It might clean up some of the goonery if the PP is a greater advantage. While these rules would need further testing, I'm not so quick to discount them. Another idea toyed with was reducing the depth of the goal. They said that reducing the depth 4" had no impact on the sight of the goal but it did open up the area behind the goal. While I don't see how 4" makes that much difference, that's what the Puck Daddy guys stated. Your first paragraph is an example of pure unadulterated retardation. Taking away the icing from the PK would be a HUGE advantage to a power play and eliminate any sort of balance from the overall game. power plays would become so powerful that they would render even strength play basically useless. As for eliminating goonery, considering that 98% of the penalties taken in a game have nothing to do with gooning it up your comment has no validity. As for your second comment about reducing the depth of the goal, this is actually a great idea and I fully expect it to go through. Adding 4" of playing surface behind the net may not seem like a lot to you, but to skilled players who like to cycle it would be a huge help and in the long run would increase offense in the game without sacrificing any of the game's integrity.

Author:	beni hanna [ Mon Aug 29, 2011 4:05 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: R & D Camp: Proposed NHL Rule Changes
shakes wrote: Your first paragraph is an example of pure unadulterated retardation. That's what I like about shakes. Some day he will be making big coin as a moderator.

Author:	DAC [ Mon Aug 29, 2011 4:48 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: R & D Camp: Proposed NHL Rule Changes
shakes wrote: DAC wrote: I would counter by asking why should the penalized team get to ice the puck? I don't look at eliminating icing as penalizing the PK team any more. It seems that these kind of rule changes would affect how teams played. It might clean up some of the goonery if the PP is a greater advantage. While these rules would need further testing, I'm not so quick to discount them. Your first paragraph is an example of pure unadulterated retardation. Taking away the icing from the PK would be a HUGE advantage to a power play and eliminate any sort of balance from the overall game. power plays would become so powerful that they would render even strength play basically useless. As for eliminating goonery, considering that 98% of the penalties taken in a game have nothing to do with gooning it up your comment has no validity. . Where do you get that 98% from? Maybe you didn't understand what I wrote. It's all about perspective. No shit it would be an advantage to the PP to eliminate icing but I ask why should the PK get the advantage of icing the puck in the first place? And you're speculating on several things that you don't really know the answer to. How much would the scoring go up? What would it do to the number of minor penalties called? How would it affect the game of the instigators? There are a lot of questions that these kind of rules would create and I'm not so willing to listen to your hollering after you give it 30 seconds of thought. If this idea was such "retardation" why did the R&D even toy with it?

Author:	Northside_Dan [ Wed Sep 07, 2011 7:16 am ]
Post subject:	Re: R & D Camp: Proposed NHL Rule Changes
Well these R & D camps try some pretty crazy shit every single year knowing most of it simply wouldn't work. I hope, at the very least, we see a no touch icing implemented, removal of the trapezoid and adding a few inches behind the net. These simple changes would help increase player safety and increase scoring.

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/