Red & Black Hockey
Next entry: Canes drop preseason opener
Previous entry: Drayson Bowman at camp, and brother brawls
NHL to implement another rule change for icing
by David Lee on 09/23/08 at 09:13 PM ET
Comments (11)
A few years ago, the NHL made a change to the way icing infractions are handled. It had always been the case that after the stoppage of play, the ensuing faceoff took place in the offending team’s defensive zone. The post-lockout change was that the offending team could not make a line change. This summer, the NHL has made an additional change to icing, but it isn’t the one we all wanted to see. Instead of going with no-touch icing, the league is going with no TV timeout icing.
For years now, most serious fans, players, coaches, commentators, mascots, cheerleaders, PA announcers, hot dog vendors, goal judges, and zamboni drivers have been hoping that the NHL would institute no-touch icing. Most other leagues use it, and the reasoning is that there is a serious risk of stupid injuries to players trying to “beat out” an icing call. Loads of other bloggers have argued the point articulately with loads of data to support the claim that nothing good ever happens even when a player does beat out an icing call. Conversely, loads of players suffer high-ankle sprains and deep contusions and broken legs by crashing into the end wall at top speed chasing down an iced puck. This is senseless.
I was watching the preseason game between the Sabres and the Canadiens, when the commentators talked about the following subtle, but brilliant change.
There have always been TV timeouts at stoppages of play closest to 6:00, 10:00 and 14:00 of every period. This season, they will not allow a TV timeout to occur after a stoppage of play brought about by icing.
This is simple, obvious, and brilliant. I love it. Teams have heretofore been able to “cheat the system” by getting a free time out for their exhausted players by committing icing at those critical points. No more. Don’t get me wrong. I love this change, but it kind of irritates me that the league will go to extreme lengths to criminalize icing, but it refuses to take a stance against blows to the head and neck. Almost every league at every level has strict rules about contacting a player above the shoulder which are completely separate from cross-checking or high-sticking or interference or the like. Again, this is an area where a rule change could reduce the number of severe injuries, but the league would rather penalize goalies for playing the puck.
This is another post for another day, but I’d also love to see the league take a different approach to the delay of game - puck in crowd penalty. In my opinion, this is an infraction that is no more heinous than icing, but instead of a defensive zone faceoff with no line change, the penalty is a man in the box. It’s a silly, stupid rule that I’ve complained about dozens of times on the post game call-in shows. Yes, I even complain about this silly, stupid rule when it benefits the Canes.
Filed in: | Red and Black Hockey | Permalink
Tags: icing, rulebook,
Comments
Agreed totally wrt no-touch icing and head-high blows. These are 2 issues the NHLPA should be going to war over.
Posted by caneshockeyfan on 09/23/08 at 09:25 PM ET
I know a lot more people who don’t want the icing rule changed the chase is part of the game its a part of the intensity and cheerleaders don’t belong in hockey so scratch them off your list of people who talk about wanting the rule changed to no touch icing. And about the no commerical icing i was complaining about that the day they made the rule and i was at a game and there was an icing late in the game and that stupid red commericial light came on and everyone was leaning on the boards drinking water high fiving the coach it was pointless until now, are you just realizing this now that Tv Time Outs are not only bad for resting players but also takes out any momentum there was and flushes it down the toilet with a Chev truck commericial
Posted by Mitchell Dunphy from Calgary on 09/23/08 at 09:27 PM ET
I don’t want no touch icing. It’s much less exciting.
Posted by moore00 from the Ohio State University on 09/23/08 at 09:39 PM ET
Wow. I didn’t mean for that list of people wanting no-touch icing to be taken so seriously. Yes, cheerleaders don’t matter. And neither do hot dog vendors or mascots or half of the things on that list.
Relax. That was meant to be whimsical. I sure am glad I edited “my dead grandmother” out of that sentence.
The point is only that a lot of people would prefer to see no-touch icing.
Posted by David Lee from Greensboro, NC on 09/23/08 at 09:48 PM ET
The league should bring in no-touch icing to prevent injuries, but I’d be interested to see any kind of evidence that shows goals and scoring chances aren’t generated when offensive players beat out the icing because, well, I don’t think there is any. I’ve seen goals and scoring chances caused by touch icing; they’re just not all that much more common than injuries from touch icing.
Good rule change, though, and one I wanted after watching last season. Commercials should, in as far as possible, not happen after goals, icings, or offsides. Just upsets the flow of the game.
Posted by Ryan from Toronto on 09/23/08 at 09:59 PM ET
I just would disagree with your statement of saying most fans want it. My dead grandmother is for racing back to the puck.
And if you can’t take criticism, then I wouldn’t recommend blogging. Especially on this site.
Posted by moore00 from the Ohio State University on 09/24/08 at 09:54 AM ET
The no commercial icing is a change I’ve been wanting since the initial icing rule change. Sure, you still can get stuck with a poor matchup or mixed lines, but it was silly to allow the breather. The rest is generally far more important.
Posted by Nate A from Dark side of the moon on 09/24/08 at 10:23 AM ET
@moore00 Where did you get the impression that David can’t take criticism? His response just points out the (obvious) sarcasm in one sentence, but his main point is still valid: there are a lot of hockey folks who would prefer no-touch icing. There are also a lot of people who agree with the rule as it stands. Maybe we need a poll or something.
Posted by caneshockeyfan on 09/24/08 at 10:33 AM ET
Well as you can see, people that know about the sport want no touch icing , while basic fans like the excitement. of touch icing. Mr Bettman will go with the fans you can be sure. I wrote an article back in the spring on this topic. I had suggested a no contact zone from the red line in on an icing call and I think what they came up with is something along that line. It may be a bit harder for the ref though the way they have it as it could bring in a grey area where what I suggested has the lines drawn so to speak. I think it has to be given a chance to see if it does what it was intended.
“No Guts No Glory”
Walt Webb
All Sports on the Web
Posted by Walt Webb from Brampton, Ontario on 09/24/08 at 02:58 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.
Most Recent Blog Posts
another ugly loss for Carolina
Nightmarish October continues for Canes
Yelle waived, Sutter likely to be moved to wing
Canes keep losing, Rats keep winning
Road trip starts badly for Canes
About Red & Black Hockey
David Lee is a restaurant manager with an unused degree in political science. He can be found at Carolina Hurricanes games, Scrabble tournaments and indie-rock shows. Sometimes, all in the same day.
David has contributed to CBC.ca for their Stanley Cup playoff coverage in 2006 and to the New York Times Slapshot blog for theirs in 2008. Red and Black Hockey was founded in July of 2005.
The problem with changing the “puck into the stands” into a defensive zone faceoff without line changes is that it becomes a viable tactic. Given extreme pressure, a guy would gladly chip a puck out of play if it results in a faceoff.
As for this icing change, like you said, it’s definitely an improvement, just not the one many are clamoring for. Personally the change I’d make is to move the criteria for icing from the red line back to the blue; usually when it’s called on someone firing it from the neutral zone they’re not trying to escape pressure from the other team, they’re just dumping it in for a line change a step early. Not the hugest of problems, to be sure, but a minor tweak I’d like to see.
Posted by Forechecker from Nolensville, TN on 09/23/08 at 09:18 PM ET