Kukla's Korner

Abel to Yzerman

Shanny’s Jig Wraps Up And Clarifying Yellow Lines On The Ice

Update - 17:15 -Puck Daddy objects to my use of “misconceptions” when linking his article.  While I was referring to misconceptions on the Gore in general, and not his article specifically, I should have been clearer.  That being said, did anyone else other than Greg notice or care in the first place?

Looking around the Gore, I noticed there has been some confusion regarding a rule change experiment I neglected to mention yesterday.

During Wednesday’s second session, the one with the traffic light face-off circles, a second goal line was added.  It was painted yellow, and contrary to some misconceptions, was not a virtual line but a real one painted slightly more than a puck’s width (3”) behind the goal line.

Along with hybrid icing, this may be a change which becomes a rule shortly.  I asked if Jim Nill would push to have it named the “Brad May Goal-line” but he only chuckled and would neither confirm nor deny this.

The idea is that on an overhead replay (which can be obstructed by the crossbar) or a behind the net replay, which has perspective issues with the goal line, if the puck is shown to touch the yellow line, the puck MUST have fully passed over the real goal line.

It makes so much sense, the NHL likely won’t adopt it.  But that’s my tinfoil hat talking.

Updates from today’s session after the jump.

Let’s start off with the rule changes for the last session of the R&D camp:

1) “No Touch” Icing.  If you’ve watched the 2010 Winter Olympics, you know what it is.
Effective in keeping the flow of the game quick and the players safe.  I prefer the hybrid system introduced yesterday to the No-touch icing rule.

2) No change after an Offside.  Face-off goes back to the offending team’s zone.
This is garbage, let me explain why.  Icing is punished with a face-off in the offending team’s zone because most times icing is a desperation play to relieve pressure in your zone and get a line change.  That’s why the face-off is enforced like it is now.
Offsides aren’t desperation plays, they are offensive plays that misfire.  To penalize players on the rush for going offside will slow them down through the neutral zone.  As well, if you have the puck deep and it trickles past your defenceman on the blueline who tries and stop the puck from going outside the zone, but fails and goes offside, does it seem reseaonable to be punished with a defensive zone face-off and no line change?  Not to me.  That will cause way more problems and unfair scoring chances than it would prevent.

3) Face-Off Variation: After a face-off violation, your opponent selects who will take the draw from your players on the ice.
Whether this selection will be based upon forwards only, or defencemen as well is unclear.  Like I said yesterday, consistency in dropping the puck and enforcing the face-off rules will solve any perceived flaws in the face-off system.

4) Second referee located off the playing surface.  Two ref system, with one stationary between the benches.
This is all win.  First, locating the referee between the benches eliminates Pierre McGuire’s broadcast perch, and hopefully the Douche Canoe never calls a TV broadcast again because of the new rule.  Also, we can use this off-ice ref to attract non-traditional hockey fans to the sport.  I suggest the NHL uses the referee between the benches to judge Crosby’s dives based upon execution and degree of difficulty.

5) Delayed penalty rule.  Team who has committed a penalty, but does not have possession of the puck, needs to not only gain possession of the puck but also clear it out of their zone before the play is stopped.
Stupid rule, didn’t really notice it either.  Here is how team’s will work around it:  ice the puck as soon as they touch it.  A stupidly simple solution for a stupidly conceived rule.

6) Overtime Variation: switch ends.  Long change like in second period.
This works, and is the change Hitchcock most supports.  I support this too, but would like to see O/T go for ten minutes, either all 4-on-4, or as Jimmy D suggested, 5 mins 4-on-4 and 5 mins 3-on-3.  Death to the shootout.

7) Shootout Variation:  I said death to the shootout and I mean it.  Nothing to talk about here for hockey fans.

8) Nets: Thin mesh on top of the nets.  Same dimensions.  To assist in instant replay.
You know what would have been smart?  Testing this with the yellow line yesterday.  Overall, I have no idea if this works or not.  Ever since the JLA incident this year, arenas are reluctant to let me climb the rafters to get the story.

Other Updates:
No Red Wings there today so no Jimmy D interview.  I’ll get him soon, he’s worth the time tracking down.  As he lives in Toronto, I may take him hat shopping.  Also as Jim Nill wasn’t there, I didn’t care about talking to any other person for an interview.  Except for Shanahan, but all the MSM were all over his nuts today and I avoid places where MSM congregate like the plague.  I’m not a journalist, I’m a fan.  I avoid media scrums as there are far too many loud shirts clashing in one place.

Instead of listening today, I spent the day preaching.  Preaching the gospel of the Western Conference according to Red Wings fans.  I continued my debate with Terry Mercury from XM and made him realize his own ignorance about the West.  It’s not his fault, Terry is a good guy, it’s just when you drink the water around here it makes you sleepy by the time the West Coast games are on.

The resolution Terry and I have come up with for this dilemna is he will be having me on his XM Radio show, Ice Cap, as a regular guest in-studio to educate people on the proper way to understand the Western Conference, from a Red Wings perspective.

I will be discussing the media and real/faux journalism shortly, but let me tell you this:  When I told the members of the media that I am not a journalist, but rather a highly-biased fan who makes no apologies about being a Homer, most were actually jealous.  They want to be like us, but can’t.  Which sums up why it’s better to be a fan rather than being a journalist perfectly.

Thanks to the Emperor, Paul, for letting me show the Diggers how it’s done.  There will be much more to talk about yet, as I have to write about the chat I had with Bettman and Nill in detail.  Until then, what are you drinking, bitches?

Filed in: | Abel to Yzerman | Permalink
 

Comments

Andy from FightNight's avatar

good update Voox. Loved the dig at Cindy

Posted by Andy from FightNight on 08/19/10 at 04:46 PM ET

Rumbear's avatar

Outstanding report!

....most were actually jealous.

Wait till they learn that your real job is bartender in the last car on the little train that could.  Envy will ensue.

Posted by Rumbear from Top O the Hasek, for the 23rd postseason.... on 08/19/10 at 04:47 PM ET

Jennemy of the Skate's avatar

The idea is that on an overhead replay (which can be obstructed by the crossbar) or a behind the net replay, which has perspective issues with the goal line, if the puck is shown to touch the yellow line, the puck MUST have fully passed over the real goal line.

That only makes sense if the puck is flat on the ice when it crosses the goal line(I say that without seeing it of course). What about if it’s on it’s side? I still say they should do some sort of sensors in the goal frame and puck.

Posted by Jennemy of the Skate from the bar car on the stress train on 08/19/10 at 04:51 PM ET

jennyquarx's avatar

Great update VooX.  Thanks again.

Posted by jennyquarx on 08/19/10 at 04:53 PM ET

VooX's avatar

That only makes sense if the puck is flat on the ice when it crosses the goal line(I say that without seeing it of course). What about if it’s on it’s side? I still say they should do some sort of sensors in the goal frame and puck.

Posted by Jennemy of the Skate from putting the b*tches in the box on 08/19/10 at 02:51 PM ET

We will get into “plane of the verification line” stuff.  On it’s side, if the edge of the puck is directly above the yellow line, it will be a goal.  The puck is 3” wide, the verification line is “slightly” more than that behind the goal line.

What “slightly” is exactly, the NHL is not clear about.  Even their diagram of the system says the line is 3”.  If I were to guess, it would be 1/8 - 1/4 of an inch more than that.

Posted by VooX from Behind the Bar in the Hasek Club Car on 08/19/10 at 04:54 PM ET

SYF's avatar

WOW!!!  Another gem of a post.  I love it.  Congrats on the radio gig, VooX.  Give ‘em hell.

2) No change after an Offside.  Face-off goes back to the offending teams zone.
This is garbage…

Completely agree.  Just leave it the f*ck alone.  For teams with strong puck possession games, this is going to be a drag on the players, the clock, and the scoring opportunities.  Wasteful energy being spent here.

Posted by SYF from Zata's Epic Viking Beard on 08/19/10 at 04:57 PM ET

CaptNorris5's avatar

That only makes sense if the puck is flat on the ice when it crosses the goal line(I say that without seeing it of course). What about if it’s on it’s side? I still say they should do some sort of sensors in the goal frame and puck.

Posted by Jennemy of the Skate from putting the b*tches in the box on 08/19/10 at 02:51 PM ET

Ding ding ding, tell her what she’s won.

It’s not like the NHL hasn’t played seasons with all kinds of electronic shit buried in the puck - cough glowpuck cough - and it would immediately alleviate everything. Just use it for instant replay. Done and done.

Posted by CaptNorris5 from The Winged Wheel, stuck in Chicago on 08/19/10 at 05:04 PM ET

Osrt's avatar

What about if it’s on it’s side? I still say they should do some sort of sensors in the goal frame and puck.

Posted by Jennemy of the Skate

Good call.

Congrats on the radio gig Voox! Toronto is gonna shake.

Posted by Osrt on 08/19/10 at 05:05 PM ET

dougie's avatar

To whomever has kidnapped our VooX, and replaced him with this accomplished writer and able analyst, you need to know that we are onto you.

If you return him NOW, with no recent surgical scars and his sense of humor intact, we’ll let it go.

Otherwise, all bets are off, and we will hunt you with dogs.

Posted by dougie on 08/19/10 at 05:08 PM ET

RWBill's avatar

Great job v00x (w00t!), agayne.

Right now Propel grape flavored water.

Some rule suggestions just sound redonk and though hockey players aren’t as smart as our bartender it won’t take them long to figure out technical work arounds to the new rules.

Very well done, Bitch!

Posted by RWBill from the open bar on The Hasek. on 08/19/10 at 05:10 PM ET

Down River Dan's avatar

The idea is that on an overhead replay (which can be obstructed by the crossbar)


I can’t believe the league is still struggling with getting Clean & Clear camera angle of the goal line!!!!

  The technology exists right now to place a small ( 3 x 5 ) wireless camera on the backside ( clear of any potential damage ) of the crossbar and “looking” straight down. I guarantee this can be done tomorrow at a cost of less than $10-K per arena.

Hell, NBC and versus does it for all the games now with that monstrosity in the back of the goal, which always gives such terrific views of Homers ass. If the league is gonna allow cameras to be placed in the net, why not put it in a position so as to resolve questionable goals.

The idea of using a camera that is 100-150 feet away in the top of the arena and provides ZERO resolution because of the crossbar is a JOKE.

Whomever is in charge of New Technology at NHL HQ, should be embarrassed and resign in disgrace because this is such a NO BRAINER !!!!!

Posted by Down River Dan on 08/19/10 at 05:13 PM ET

Nate A's avatar

Even if some of these new rule ideas are ridiculous, I give the league tons of credit for having the balls just to test them out and see how it does. Never know till ya try it, and even a crappy idea can spawn some better ones.  Just so long as they do more thorough and controlled testing with some of the more significant changes that pass first round of scrutiny before implementing them.

Nice work on all these VooX. Keep it up.

Posted by Nate A from Detroit-ish on 08/19/10 at 05:16 PM ET

AndrewFromAnnArbor's avatar

Another good write-up.  Great to have you back, barkeep, and with super spy secrets in your pocket to trickle out as time allows.  Until then…

Flaming Moe, heavy on the cassis.

Posted by AndrewFromAnnArbor from Fortress Europe on 08/19/10 at 05:23 PM ET

cementslinger's avatar

The only thing I would miss about the shoot out is watching Dangle Dangle and his drawer of tricks.  That being said, with the supposed Flying Circus being reunited, there will be plenty of Danglisms going on. 

I dig the yellow line.  Except one may confuse it with Turco.

Posted by cementslinger from Midland MI on 08/19/10 at 05:25 PM ET

redxblack's avatar

I have to disagree, Nate. Some of the ideas attempted are just mucking up the traditional game to a crazy level. 3 face-off circles? More painted zones on the surface? Keep the traditions of the sport alive and stop tinkering. The best way to improve NHL hockey is to find a way to make officiating consistent. Everything else short of that is masturbatory (and possibly redolent).

Posted by redxblack from Akron Ohio on 08/19/10 at 05:27 PM ET

Kate from Pa.-made in Detroit's avatar

7) Shootout Variation:  I said death to the shootout and I mean it.  Nothing to talk about here for hockey fans.

 

Death to the shootout. Death to OT during the regular season. 

Well done bartender, well done.


Lets Go Red Wings!!!!!

Posted by Kate from Pa.-made in Detroit on 08/19/10 at 05:36 PM ET

stayouttamalibu's avatar

Nice work again VooX. I look forward to hearing you preaching the ways on XM. I’m drinking white russians.

Posted by stayouttamalibu from California on 08/19/10 at 05:37 PM ET

YzermanZetterberg's avatar

Maybe it’s just me, but isn’t one of the underlying objectives of Shanny’s Shinny Shindig to help increase offense?

It seems like some concepts tested (i.e., larger crease, crease reset) are flat out designed to inhibit offense, while the no change after offsides idea not only penalizes the team working to create offense, but also provides an unearned opportunity to the defending team.

Anyway, carry on with the great work, VooX. Can’t wait to read your lil’ gary and Jim Nill write-ups.

Posted by YzermanZetterberg on 08/19/10 at 05:44 PM ET

CaptNorris5's avatar

Ok, so I’m not sure that it’s a great idea to necessarily implement the idea of having the NHL commissioner beat to death by a group of lumberjacks wielding rotten fish at the first intermission of every game just to increase attendance by “fringe fans” interested in seeing the carnage.

I’m just saying, why not try it out? Seems like the Shanny summit would be a good place to test it and see how it goes.

Posted by CaptNorris5 from The Winged Wheel, stuck in Chicago on 08/19/10 at 05:50 PM ET

Lucce's avatar

Excellent!

Now bring me some Abdelkader news…

Posted by Lucce from Kingdom of Zweden on 08/19/10 at 05:55 PM ET

AndrewFromAnnArbor's avatar

I’m just saying, why not try it out?

MMA is the fastest-growing sport, and has a lot of young fans.  I don’t see why it shouldn’t at least be tried.  Not much to lose aside from a few idiot commissioners.

Posted by AndrewFromAnnArbor from Fortress Europe on 08/19/10 at 05:56 PM ET

Nate A's avatar

But what’s it hurt to test out even the ridiculous ideas? It’s not affecting any real games. It’s a publicity event at worst. And at least the league is doing its due diligence. I think it’s silly to just completely dismiss an idea.

It tells me they’re trying and thinking…or at least Shanny is.

Posted by Nate A from Detroit-ish on 08/19/10 at 06:12 PM ET

YzermanZetterberg's avatar

Posted by Nate A from Detroit-ish on 08/19/10 at 04:12 PM ET

You’re absolutely right. I thought the no change on offsides idea might have some merit when I first heard about it (I didn’t know the faceoff would move all the way to the other end though). The only way to see if something might really work is to try it.

Kudos to the NHL (*mumble*includingbettman*mumble*) for making an honest effort to improve its product.

Posted by YzermanZetterberg on 08/19/10 at 06:57 PM ET

YzermanZetterberg's avatar

Update - 17:15

Methinks he doth protest too much. I guess one way to prevent Mr. Wyshynski from having his own misconceptions is to not send people to his site. smile

Posted by YzermanZetterberg on 08/19/10 at 07:25 PM ET

redxblack's avatar

If it ain’t broke ... “Tinkering in the offseason, just for fun” is a small step away from “let’s try it in the AHL”. Why should such things be discouraged? Let me draw a trapezoid around my argument and I’ll try to stay within it. If the league wants to entertain more casual fans by increasing scoring, what does that mean for scoring records? If they want to eliminate defensive play by calling any bump interference, what does that do for balancing team’s offensive and defensive priorities? It mucks up the game itself by making these changes. We start to have discussions about pre-lockout and post-lockout officiating standards on hooking, etc. The game itself changes and no longer is comparable to the history of the game. This is a sport with a rich and long history, and Gary needing to put asses in seats in Phoenix should not sacrifice the integrity of the game as a whole.

I’d really like to know if the 1954 Red Wings could beat the 2008 Red Wings, but they can’t even be compared because of all the changes. Yet the 1954 and 2007 Cleveland Indians are very comparable.

Posted by redxblack from Akron Ohio on 08/19/10 at 07:31 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

The idea is that on an overhead replay (which can be obstructed by the crossbar) or a behind the net replay, which has perspective issues with the goal line, if the puck is shown to touch the yellow line, the puck MUST have fully passed over the real goal line.

It makes so much sense, the NHL likely won’t adopt it.  But that’s my tinfoil hat talking.

except if the puck is on edge it could be completely between the two lines - all the way behind the goal line but not touching the yellow line.

the solution is so simple and obvious.  tiny cameras in the crossbar and posts.  maybe 6 total - 2 in the crossbar, one about 2/3 of the way up each post and one an inch or two above the ice.  all cameras point along the plane of the goal line and posts.

simple.

could it STILL be obstructed?  sure.  anything is possible.  but there are SO many cases where you can see the puck just fine, but the camera angle is off…this would solve all of them.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 08/19/10 at 08:02 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

.  On it’s side, if the edge of the puck is directly above the yellow line, it will be a goal. 

but what if it’s on edge, not touching the yellow line, but is completely behind the goal line?

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 08/19/10 at 08:03 PM ET

WingsFaninCO's avatar

The game itself changes and no longer is comparable to the history of the game. This is a sport with a rich and long history, and Gary needing to put asses in seats in Phoenix should not sacrifice the integrity of the game as a whole.

QFT

Posted by WingsFaninCO on 08/19/10 at 08:03 PM ET

YzermanZetterberg's avatar

I’d really like to know if the 1954 Red Wings could beat the 2008 Red Wings, but they can’t even be compared because of all the changes. Yet the 1954 and 2007 Cleveland Indians are very comparable.

Posted by redxblack from Akron Ohio on 08/19/10 at 05:31 PM ET

Is that in spite of changes to the height of the pitcher’s mound, how baseballs are made, the overall size and conditioning of athletes (not even getting into PEDs), and more?

Things change from one era to another in every sport. What if basketball never allowed slam dunks? Or if nobody ever thought of making a forward pass in football? How would NHL history be different if they never changed the unlimited scoring on every penalty rule? Or if players still used wooden sticks with flat blades? Even in something as basic as boxing, things have changed enough over time to make it difficult to compare participants from different eras.

Posted by YzermanZetterberg on 08/19/10 at 08:05 PM ET

VooX's avatar

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 08/19/10 at 06:02 PM ET

While I agree it is not a perfect solution, it is a lot lower in cost and maintenance than alternate systems.  It can be deployed quickly and cheaply.

In cases, as mentioned, where the puck is on edge/between the lines/etc., shit happens.  We better hope the cameras already in place for the purpose pick up the puck.

As it is, a yellow line will still make that process more reliable in some cases than before.  Any measure employed cheaply that will increase the proportion of correct to incorrect calls is fine by me.

Posted by VooX from Behind the Bar in the Hasek Club Car on 08/19/10 at 08:07 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

wait, I’ve got it!!  many of the problems associated with judging if the puck crossed the line are due to the puck being on edge.  a puck does not have a consistent radius in all directions.  they need to make it spherical, then there will never be an issue with changing dimensions due to angle of view.

 

 

 


what?  it’s no crazier than half the other things they are talking about.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 08/19/10 at 08:10 PM ET

PaulinMiamiBeach's avatar

Things change from one era to another in every sport. What if basketball never allowed slam dunks? Or if nobody ever thought of making a forward pass in football? How would NHL history be different if they never changed the unlimited scoring on every penalty rule? Or if players still used wooden sticks with flat blades? Even in something as basic as boxing, things have changed enough over time to make it difficult to compare participants from different eras.

I find it just as interesting to compare eras as it is to compare teams from the eras.

I believe that not a single NHL team in the last 20 years could beat a team from 40 or 50 years ago, if played under the rules of the past era.  same for football.

why?  these two sports were BRUTAL back then.  things that were routine back then would get you suspended now.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 08/19/10 at 08:17 PM ET

OlderThanChelios's avatar

This is all win.  First, locating the referee between the benches eliminates Pierre McGuire’s broadcast perch, and hopefully the Douche Canoe never calls a TV broadcast again because of the new rule.

And that goes double for Murph. But if they don’t go for the second-ref idea, put ice girls in there. Or turn it into a jackatorium. Anything that will keep the Douche Canoe and Murph out of that spot is fine with me.

Posted by OlderThanChelios from Grand Rapids, MI on 08/19/10 at 08:20 PM ET

Krononymous's avatar

Yellow lines, stop light face off circles, trapezoids, lines by the bench.  My eyes are spinning in my head and that’s not even considering the advertisements on the ice and on the boards.  It would look like a NASCAR jumpsuit (speed suits for any Venture Bros fans out there).  Here’s hoping that none of these come into play.  I can’t even imagine trying to explain this to people who rarely watch the NHL.

Nice updates and I am totally jealous.

Posted by Krononymous on 08/19/10 at 08:23 PM ET

WingsFaninCO's avatar

(speed suits for any Venture Bros fans out there). 

Amazing.  I am totally with you.

Posted by WingsFaninCO on 08/19/10 at 08:47 PM ET

Andy from FightNight's avatar

I want to keep Murph between the benches.


Also, has anyone noticed how much Shanny has learnt them-speak now? I dislike that

Posted by Andy from FightNight on 08/19/10 at 11:29 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

I believe that not a single NHL team in the last 20 years could beat a team from 40 or 50 years ago, if played under the rules of the past era.  same for football.

why?  these two sports were BRUTAL back then.  things that were routine back then would get you suspended now.

Posted by PaulinMiamiBeach on 08/19/10 at 06:17 PM ET

I’m sure guys like the six-foot-five Chris Pronger with skates that let him go faster than all but the speediest of guys from the 60s and pads and a helmet that absorb all of the hits from the 5’7” average-sized player back then would be more than a match for the brutality that even an idiot like Pronger could adjust to within half a period.

Hockey hasn’t pussied down, it’s sped up.  The players are bigger, faster, stronger, healthier, better trained, better equipped, and smarter than they were back then.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 08/20/10 at 12:35 AM ET

AndrewFromAnnArbor's avatar

Or if nobody ever thought of making a forward pass in football?

As a rugby player, sounds fine to me.

Posted by AndrewFromAnnArbor from Fortress Europe on 08/20/10 at 02:43 AM ET

George Malik's avatar

I will be discussing the media and real/faux journalism shortly, but let me tell you this:  When I told the members of the media that I am not a journalist, but rather a highly-biased fan who makes no apologies about being a Homer, most were actually jealous.  They want to be like us, but can’t.  Which sums up why it’s better to be a fan rather than being a journalist perfectly.

That’s exactly why you and me will never be journalists.  It takes passion out of the equation, and I do what I do because I’m passionate about hockey and love my Red Wings.  I have an emotional connection to ‘em and root for them win or lose.  Without that, I can’t imagine attempting to do this for a living.

Posted by George Malik from South Lyon, MI on 08/20/10 at 04:31 AM ET

VooX's avatar

Abdelkader resigns.

http://twitter.com/RedWingsFeed/status/21925177202

Posted by VooX from Behind the Bar in the Hasek Club Car on 08/23/10 at 02:29 PM ET

Add a Comment

Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.

Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.

Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.

Smileys

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Feed

Most Recent Blog Posts

About Abel to Yzerman

Welcome to Abel to Yzerman, a Red Wing blog since 1977.  No other site on the internet has better-researched, fact-laden and better prepared discussions than A2Y.  Re-phrase: we do little research, find facts and stats highly overrated and claim little to no preparation.  There are 19 readers of A2Y. No more, no less. All of them, except maybe one, are juvenile in nature.  Reminding them of that in the comment section will only encourage them to prove that. Your suggestions and critiques are welcome: wphoulihan@gmail.com