To be known now—and forevermore—as The Avery Ammendment.

All agreed?

Good name for it!  Thank god...I don’t usually have a problem with Avery and his tactics, but this was pathetic and embarrasing!

Not often that a hockey player becomes an eponym.

i can’t believe how much this offended people. But hey, the NHL moved quickly to be clear in case another incident occurred. Impressive and scary.

I can’t wait for this “new” penalty to be called in a game…

I can’t wait for this “new” penalty to be called in a game…

As long as it doesn’t move off the rink.  Imagine if people could be arrested for, in essense, acting like an ass.  It would be easier to get around with fewer drivers, however…

When you say rink, Baroque, does that include the folks in the stands?  Because I sure would like to see a few of those “hand wavers” get tossed too!

Great coaching by decision by Renney last night to put Avery to screen Marty on the 5 on 3. In return for Avery being very productive the NHL makes what will be known as “The Avery Rule”. I guess Avery isn’t just the most hated players by players around the league, he is also most hated player by the NHL itself. The NHL should be embarresed for making this rule today.

there was absolutely nothing wrong with what avery did.  to call it a penalty is embarassing.  the same Colin Campbell that gave Chris Simon 30 games for stomping on a skate, and Chris Pronger 8 for the same infraction decides to create a rule in the middle of the playoffs. 
I am ashamed for the NHL
*Just a note, the next time down the ice, Sean Avery scored on the powerplay

I laughed so hard when I saw Avery do this, and I couldn’t beleive it!

Now I’m laughing even harder!

When winning trumps sportmanship then that is where you have to draw the line. When your own player gives you a shove during play to stop you from embarrasing yourself you should know you crossed the line.

Its behaviour expected of a Scarberian poseur that grew up too close to a Nuke plant and wants to be appear urbane by stealing Lisa Loebs glasses and black nail polish.

I agree BD.

This ‘interpretation’ of Unsportsmanlike is a joke.

“offensive player positions himself facing the opposition goaltender and engages in actions such as waving his arms or stick in front of the goaltender’s face, for the purpose of improperly interfering with and/or distracting the goaltender as opposed to trying to make a play”

a) So, can one wave one’s arms or stick for the purpose of PROPERLY interfering with the goaltenders view?

b) As OPPOSED to trying to make a play? This IS trying to make a play. The play of blocking hte view of the goaltender.

Pathetic. The NHL is punishing creativity. How the rules change so easily is part of the reason the league has trouble being popular. Can you not attempt to block (without touching) someone’s view in the NBA while they try to take a shot?

Essentially, what the NHL is saying is that there is a spot on the ice where one cannot stand if facing a certain way and making certain gestures (which are NOT making contact with anybody). Lame.

@ Dale: I’d argue winning is not trumping sportsmanship here. (Not that hockey adheres to this policy, especially in Canada. The whole problem of the double standard: Downey can run russians while wearing the maple leaf overseas and he’s applauded for it, but do it in the NHL, against the Sens, and it is ‘unsportsmanlike’). However, winning is not trumping sportsmanship here because there was nothing unsportsmanlike about Avery’s actions. He was (WAS, not since the amendment of interpretation) within the rules, did not touch anybody, and did not insult anyone.

What he did do was be creative. He wasn’t gloving Brodeur’s face, just blocking his view with stick and body from a good distance away. What did I exect though? In this league the Brodeur gets what it wants. If Ovechkin can’t wear a tinted visor (as goalie pads expand by 200%) then what are the odds AVERY will be tolerated in bringing a unique style to the slot man on the PP.

Drury’s shove may or may not have been about Avery’s play. But importantly, if it was about Drury wanting Avery to face the play, that’s just not his call. IF Tom Renney wants avery facing the goalie, he ought to be allowed to do so.

Though the last part of your comments are funny, that’s not real agrument, just attacking his character.

why is it that everybody fails to mention that Avery scored on that same powerplay.  He scored a goal within a few seconds of the play in question.
Anybody who has ever played hockey has done something similar - standing in front of a goalie to screen him.  So please, get over yourselves.

I’m guessing that the people who have no problem with what Avery did are Ranger fans.  I’ve been watching the NHL for 30 years and have never seen anything like it, though I’m willing to admit that I may have missed something.  That was absolutely pathetic and it’s hard to understand how it would be seen as creative.  Do you think no one has thought of it before and brilliant Sean Avery enlightens the world with this new technique?  It should be a penalty - otherwise, do you want to constantly see one player planted in front of the net taunting the goalie like that with their arms and stick each and every play of every game?  It’s like tiring the pitcher out by bunting a million foul balls.  Get back to playing hockey Avery.

Because I sure would like to see a few of those “hand wavers” get tossed too!

Only if they are also talking on a cell phone to someone watching on TV to make sure they get noticed!

get over yourselves.  it was a smart move by Avery, and the NHL thought that was more important then an intent to injure stomp on a leg.

I think what he did was silly, and about as creative as some of the “edgy” touchdown celebrations in the NFL (which strike me as lame more than anything else), but sometimes the point is to distract an opponent to get him off his game - hence yapping at opponents, scrums after the whistle to get him annoyed, etc.  I think it’s as stupid to not face the play as to walk around backwards, but if he catches a puck in the back of his head because he wasn’t paying attention it’s his own fault.  Maybe it would knock some sense into him.

I can see it now. Everybody facing the goalie in the crease, talking s#it. It will be like the movie BASEketball.

That is total bullshit.  Avery’s a pest, but the league shouldnt be issuing rules like this if they want to increase scoring!!!

Weak.

It’s the same thing as NFL’s rule that CBs can’t just try to block the receiver without making a play on the ball.

Anybody who’s every played hockey at any level knows that this is bush league behavior and shouldn’t be tolerated by the league, the other teams or his own team.  I haven’t talked to one person who plays the game and thinks that Avery was in the right for his actions.  Even Drury said something to him.  Drury is a class act and had the character to say something to Avery and it’s clear Avery changed his tactics and looked less sure of himself after Drury said something.  I’m glad that the league took notice and did something about it.

They sure got that ruling backwards.

They should have made a goalstick to the groin or a blocker chop across the throat a legal response to that tactic.

chestnut: He was NOT within the rules as they WERE written:  Rule 75.4 (iii) Any player or goalkeeper who, after warning by the Referee, persists in any course of conduct (including threatening or abusive language or gestures or similar actions) designed to incite an opponent into incurring a penalty.
60.1 High-sticking - A “high stick” is one which is carried above the height of the opponent’s shoulders. Players and goalkeepers must be in control and responsible for their stick.

(btw, I don’t blame the refs for not calling anything since I’m sure they were dumbfounded) 75.4 has had to be altered, obviously.  If I were to lick the opponent during a game, would I be penalized?  There’s no rule against it, I didn’t hurt anyone, I was just trying to throw someone off their game.  I’m sure if I did, they’d pull out an existing rule and alter that so that no licking occurred on the ice.  Sound ridiculous?  So was what Avery did.

I’m not a Ranger or a Devils fan, and I’m sure that if Avery were on my team I’d love him.  This is not a Brodeur/Avery issue.  It’s about safety and boundaries.  Avery put a ton of people at risk, mostly himself since he wasn’t paying any attention to the play.  And what about that, huh?  I watch hockey to watch the players PLAY hockey, not jump and down like a kindergartner begging for the teacher’s attention.

For those ranger fans who think it is about Brodeur getting his own way ‘cause he’s a whiner, read this carefully:  “I’ve been watching games for 33 years and I have .never seen anything like that in my life,” Brodeur said. ”If it’s within the rules, it’s within the rules....  Nobody should have to play hockey with a stick an inch from your face,” Brodeur said. ”But it wasn’t a bad play.”

Gee, what a whiner.

Properly interfering with a goaltender’s view is usually referred to as screening or body positioning.  It is done with the stick down and the player watching where the play is happening.

This was creative, but I never want to see it again.  If there wasn’t an ammendment (not new rule, not change of rule - ammendment) made, the next 5 on 3 any team had, 3 player could join hands and stand directly in front of the opposing goalie creating a wall while singing kumbaya and swaying back and forth.  All of this would be legal and very off-putting for the team killing the penalty and, since they’re down 2 players already, they can’t do anything unless they want to go down another man.  It would be creative, funny and interesting to watch, but would it be hockey?  Do want it to become hockey?  Is that how you want the game winner of the Stanley Cup Final scored?

Now Brodeur is saying Avery did nothing illegal

He didn’t do anything illegal,” Brodeur said yesterday regarding Avery’s attempt at distracting the goalie by standing directly in front of him and waving his stick in his face “totally disregarding the play”