Abel to Yzerman
by VooX on 08/19/10 at 04:30 PM ET
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.
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?
Add a Comment
Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.
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: firstname.lastname@example.org