Kukla's Korner Hockey
Entries with the tag: rules
From Pierre LeBrun at his ESPN blog:
The NHL’s 30 general managers met in Chicago on Thursday and left with some homework. They’ve got to chew on three rule change recommendations before reconvening at their next meeting in March and possibly voting on them.
• The first is the Larry Pleau idea that I first detailed last weekend, essentially changing the delayed penalty rule to the penalized team having to fully clear the puck from their defensive zone to get a stoppage in play, as opposed to simply having puck possession. The St. Louis Blues GM believes, and he’s probably right, it would create more offensive chances with the sixth attacker on the ice for a bit longer before a whistle goes. I like this one.
• The second has to do with hand passes and making them more consistent all over the ice.
From James Deacon at AOL Sports Canada,
Still, most fans agree the pace has quickened and there is more excitement. And the fact is that the current goal-scoring rate, while down, exceeds the 5.14 goals-per-game average from the last pre-rules change season, 2003-04.
So if the game’s moving in the right direction, why are goal totals heading the other way? Some rarely cited stats offer insight: the difference in the last three seasons is entirely made up by a drop in power-play goals. There have been eight fewer penalty minutes per game this season compared to the same period in 2005-06, and the current number of even-strength goals through 637 games is 2,434, exactly the same total as two seasons ago.
To some, that suggests referees have eased up. But players and refs say the big difference is that players’ behaviour has changed. Four years ago you practically had to draw blood to be penalized for hooking, so water-skiing was the defensive technique of choice.
Not any more.
more… on the “new” NHL and its unlikely poster boy, Brendan Shanahan
from Loose Change at the Hockey News,
Now the question being raised is one about player eligibility, specifically whether a player, who takes a penalty in the overtime, should be allowed to shoot in the shootout. The logic here being that a player who commits a foul has somehow forfeited his right to participate in the fun and educational extra-curricular activities.
So, it’s now come to this. The National Hockey League, in an attempt to simply spice up its product in a terribly hokey creative move, has now turned the simple endeavor into a complete civil rights question. That being: Is a player (a human) still considered a player (a human) after he’s committed an act against his society (the other team)?