Red & Black Hockey
Next entry: Carolina’s youth movement more like a sea change
Previous entry: Jeff Skinner drawing Crosby comparisons
Rule change propositions we can believe in
by David Lee on 08/17/10 at 09:13 PM ET
Comments (2)
The 2010 Research, Development and Orientation camp is about to start, and there are a number of potential rule changes that Brendan Shanahan et al will be looking at, using the 2011 draft eligible class as guinea pigs. Some of them are purely experimental and some are tweaks of the existing rules. Some don’t have a chance of ever seeing the light of day in real competition. Red mesh nets? One referee on-ice and one in the bleachers? Don’t think so.
Here, we’ll take a look at some of the proposals that RBH likes.
There are a few proposed overhauls of the overtime situation, and most of them involve switching ends for the start of the extra period. This would have the same “long change” that the second period has. Frankly, I don’t care one way or the other about the long change. One of the other overtime proposals really caught my eye, and it’s quite a bit outside the box. It calls for a three minute session of 4-on-4, which would be followed (if necessary) by a three minute session of 3-on-3 and finally (if necessary) a three minute session of 2-on-2. Sure, it’s sort of skills competition-y, but it’s still hockey, and I think it would be much more entertaining than going from the five minute 4-on4 OT to shootout.
I’ve never really been a huge fan of the shootout, and I’m with Brian Burke, who said it’s “the same thing as if the National Football League decided its games by having guys throw footballs through a tire”. It’s not very organic and it’s too much about the individual. I really like the idea of having a team of skaters decide the game, and I’m enthralled by the idea of so much open ice in a 2-on-2 scenario. At that point, defense is still very much a part of the game, and offensive creativity even more so.
There are actually two different versions of this proposal. The first calls for no change of end, while the second calls for alternating ends between overtime sessions, just as with the 5-on-5 overtimes in the playoffs. Again, the “long change” doesn’t really matter to me, but it’s nice for the fans in the arena to get the different looks
As I’ve said, I’m not a big fan of the shootout, but I like one of the proposals concerning it. One calls for a three shooter format like we currently have, but the wrinkle is that after the first three shooters, the coach can send out whomever he pleases as often as he pleases without having to send every skater out there first . This is very much like the formal the AHL uses.
I’ve been vocal in my support of no-touch icing, and that hasn’t changed. There are a couple of different proposals related to this, and the only one I like is the IIHF-style automatic call. I don’t like the “hybrid” proposal, which sounds to me like it isn’t a whole lot different from the current system.
The “Crease Reset Rule” is pointed directly at Sean Avery, and I thought that it was already incorporated within the goaltender interference rules, but this simply calls for a stoppage of play and a neutral zone face-off. I like the intent of the rule, but I don’t like the idea of moving the face-off to the neutral zone. I’d rather see it moved to the offending team’s defensive zone. Or at the very least, center ice.
Some of the proposals call for additional unnecessary markings on the ice, and I don’t stand for any of them. A “line change zone” in front of the benches? No thanks. Yellow “verification line” behind the goal line? Nope. “Face-off penalty line”? Outrageous.
That last one really has me laughing. It’s one of many proposals concerning face-offs. It would mean that a player who would in today’s game be tossed from the face-off circle would instead be moved one foot back. This is extremely silly in my book. One of the other face-off proposals is equally silly. It would allow a non-offending team after a face-off violation to select the offending team’s next participant. Another proposal is less silly, but still not good in my opinion. It calls for lacrosse-style face-offs initiated not by the drop of the puck, but by placing the puck on the dot and blowing the whistle. I don’t see any reason to change the way face-offs are run.
Anyway, to get back to the proposals that I do like… And this is one that I like quite a bit. They’re suggesting that in a delayed penalty situation, the offending team would not only have to gain possession of the puck, but they would also have to clear their defensive zone. I’m a big fan of that extra attacker scenario, and I like the fact that this proposal would give us more of that.
One thing that’s not on the menu is one that a lot of fans have been dreaming about for years. I wish, in penalty shot scenario, the non-offending team could take its choice of the penalty shot or a two minute power play.
Out of the many proposals, I think that the no-touch icing will eventually find its way into the NHL rulebook, but not any of the others. I hope the overtime goes to the 4-3-2 scenario, but I doubt that it will.
The NHL Network will be providing coverage of the camp, so we’ll find out soon enough how those experiments work out.
Filed in: | Red and Black Hockey | Permalink
Tags: rule+changes,
Comments
I remember the red nets thing being raised a couple of years ago. Somebody had researched it and discovered that red light is the easiest color for the eye to see. So they incorporated a red net and changed the post color to gray. I saw a picture of the goal with a goalie standing in front of it. The eyes are immediately drawn to all the holes around the goalie. I certainly think it would help in scoring goals as it would make it that much easier for the players to find the holes in the goalie armor.
I have been unable to find that picture again. I wish I could because I think it would really demonstrate how much of a difference the net being red makes. I am certain it was on KK that I originally read the article and saw the picture. Maybe Paul can dig it up out of the archives or at least have better luck finding it.
Posted by tjkac on 08/18/10 at 10:47 AM 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.
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
Most Recent Blog Posts
Canes use special teams to beat Sabres
The ride is over for Ryan Murphy
Carolina to carry nine defenseman to start the season—Nash cut
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.
When learning from experts it’s best to learn personally from them, or from their blog. We can provide that with poker lessons blog, your home to learn poker personally.
Do you get shocked from the luck in the game of poker? Stop getting shocked and start being a Poker Shoker
I like the hybrid icing rule: I do enjoy watching two players race for the puck, but when there is no foot race, time is ticking off of the clock, and its very anti-climatic. I believe the hybrid rule brings the best of both worlds.
Posted by wingsnut25 from Cheboygan, MI on 08/18/10 at 09:23 AM ET