PENALTIES

[rickshaw]

I believe it's time the NHL made changes to the rules when it comes to penalties. 

 

The league says it's trying to change the game for the better, so it's time to adjust penalties. 

 

How can a simple hook on the hands equal a 2 hand cross check to the chops?

 

I think the rules need to change and certain penalties need certain rules. Some examples.....

 

A hook or a trip = 2 minutes. Team scores, penalty ends. A cross check to the face, 4 minutes, penalty served in full.

 

I believe that dangerous penalties, ones that hurt people physically should be more than a simple trip or hook. I think it's time that any contact with the stick to the face is automatically 4 minutes, penalty doesn't end if a goal is scored. If someone is cut, then it's 5 minutes and up to the ref if it's deemed on purpose whether a guy is thrown out.

 

I just think that maybe if teams who are too aggressive or dangerous will be penalized more harshly for their infractions. If a team is a tricky tack team then nothing changes but teams with players who make dangerous plays will pay more. 

 

Feel free to add your two cents. I just think it's time to adjust penalties. In the NFL a facemark is deemed more dangerous a penalty than offside! Why not in the NHL?

 

 

[qwksndmonster]

I agree that changes need to be made, but I don't view high sticking as a particularly egregious offense.  Most of the time it's a guy missing his stick lift or just losing control of his stick while he tries to skate away.  I'd like to see interference actually enforced and maybe come up with a rule about collapsing X amount of players into the slot on defense.  Maybe maximum 3 players in center ice of the D zone at a time?

[deluca67]

Make certain penalties like high sticking, elbowing, boarding and slashing reviewable. 

[Brawndo]

If a penalty shot is called and the team awarded the shot does not score, a power play should be given.

[Neo]

 

I have a problem with some of the automatic calls, specifically high sticking and blood. Careless use of stick, no blood, two minutes. Purely accidental use of stick, blood, four minutes.

 

I'd rather a referee have discretion. Bring your stick up, four minutes, blood or not. Have your stick ride up someone else's in the course of play, two minutes, blood or not. Same concept in evaluating suspensions. The outcome (injury or not) should not (IMHO) be a consideration in the punishment. Run a guy from behind gets the same treatment, whether or not his shoulder separates.

Edited April 24, 2015 by Neo

[rickshaw]

I too think that the refs need to get together at centre ice and discuss what they saw. If a high stick is reckless then blood or not, it's always 4 and pp never ends with a goal. I really think the harsher (dirtier) penalties should warrant full minutes on the pp like a 5 min major. 

 

But for the life of me I can't understand why now, in this day and age where the game is so fast and players are so big, that they haven't adjusted penalties. Sam Bennett gave a Canuck a full on 2 hand cross check right in the mug last night and it's 2? That's crazy. It's a very dirty play and should be penalized differently than a guy running interference or a puck over the glass?? 

 

The puck over glass should also be amended back to the ref using his judgement, like on all other calls. If he deems it intentional, penalty. 

 

I agree that a penalty shot miss should = 2 min pp. 

[dEnnis the Menace]

I too think that the refs need to get together at centre ice and discuss what they saw. If a high stick is reckless then blood or not, it's always 4 and pp never ends with a goal. I really think the harsher (dirtier) penalties should warrant full minutes on the pp like a 5 min major. 

 

But for the life of me I can't understand why now, in this day and age where the game is so fast and players are so big, that they haven't adjusted penalties. Sam Bennett gave a Canuck a full on 2 hand cross check right in the mug last night and it's 2? That's crazy. It's a very dirty play and should be penalized differently than a guy running interference or a puck over the glass?? 

 

The puck over glass should also be amended back to the ref using his judgement, like on all other calls. If he deems it intentional, penalty. 

 

I agree that a penalty shot miss should = 2 min pp. 

 

Wasn't it previously a judgement call?  I like it the way it is now.  Make the players be more aware of what their doing.

 

In regards to other penalties, the only major change I really want to see is refs actually calling interference.  

[spndnchz]

I too think that the refs need to get together at centre ice and discuss what they saw. If a high stick is reckless then blood or not, it's always 4 and pp never ends with a goal. I really think the harsher (dirtier) penalties should warrant full minutes on the pp like a 5 min major. 

 

But for the life of me I can't understand why now, in this day and age where the game is so fast and players are so big, that they haven't adjusted penalties. Sam Bennett gave a Canuck a full on 2 hand cross check right in the mug last night and it's 2? That's crazy. It's a very dirty play and should be penalized differently than a guy running interference or a puck over the glass?? 

 

The puck over glass should also be amended back to the ref using his judgement, like on all other calls. If he deems it intentional, penalty. 

 

I agree that a penalty shot miss should = 2 min pp. 

 

If that call was made it would be 5 - and a game right? Don't think they would like the game part so have to give just the 2.

[mjd1001]

I think the league need more penalties...at first it will give more powerplays and afterwards when the 'players adjust' it will lead to more open play.

 

Just as big of an issue is the dirty stuff that the league just doesn't fine or suspend for.  I'm sure in the NFL, there is a lot of dirty stuff that goes on that we don't see, but we see VERY LITTLE in the NFL that we see in the NHL.  VERY FEW intentional knee to knee hits. Very few fights.  Very few punches to the back of the head. WHY?  In the NHL we hear it is a rough and physical sport so that stuff will happen and you need fighting to sort it out?  The reason is the NFL won't put up with it.  If you fight, you WILL be thrown out of the game and probably heavily fined and suspended. What to get rid of the dirty stuff in the NHL, let NOTHING go. ANY punch to the back of the head should be a suspension and a fine...then guess what? you won't have it anymore.

[pi2000]

They need to eliminate the instigator rule.   That's all.

 

Anything changes to more severely punish an penalty is only going to make the sport less agressive... less fun to watch.    It's already boring enough since fighting has been almost removed from the game.    The instigator penalty removed the goons (on ice poilce), which has led to more injuries to star players... ie head shots, etc.    If you had to answer to a McSorely or Probert for being reckless and giving a head shot to star player, then you'd think twice about it.

[Iron Crotch]

The only penalties I'm seeing regularly called in the playoffs are the mandatory ones: (1) accidentally flipping the puck over the glass from your own zone, (2) chopping a guy's stick in half when trying to prevent him from playing the puck.

 

[mjd1001]

They need to eliminate the instigator rule.   That's all.

 

Anything changes to more severely punish an penalty is only going to make the sport less agressive... less fun to watch.    It's already boring enough since fighting has been almost removed from the game.    The instigator penalty removed the goons (on ice poilce), which has led to more injuries to star players... ie head shots, etc.    If you had to answer to a McSorely or Probert for being reckless and giving a head shot to star player, then you'd think twice about it.

I know that is a pretty good argument and a lot of people subscribe to it, but I would rather take the NFL route and call everything...get rid of fighting totally (It can be done, just treat it like the NFL does.)  I have more fun at a high scoring, end to end game than I do at a fight filled game.  The only time fights add to the game for me is when the game is boring to begin with.

[SDS]

They need to eliminate the instigator rule. That's all.

 

Anything changes to more severely punish an penalty is only going to make the sport less agressive... less fun to watch. It's already boring enough since fighting has been almost removed from the game. The instigator penalty removed the goons (on ice poilce), which has led to more injuries to star players... ie head shots, etc. If you had to answer to a McSorely or Probert for being reckless and giving a head shot to star player, then you'd think twice about it.

Just watch MMA then. Problem solved.

[Taro T]

They need to eliminate the instigator rule.   That's all.

 

Anything changes to more severely punish an penalty is only going to make the sport less agressive... less fun to watch.    It's already boring enough since fighting has been almost removed from the game.    The instigator penalty removed the goons (on ice poilce), which has led to more injuries to star players... ie head shots, etc.    If you had to answer to a McSorely or Probert for being reckless and giving a head shot to star player, then you'd think twice about it.

Nope. That's a popular fallacy perpetuated by Mike Milbury, Don Cherry, & their ilk. Star players got f'ed up prior to the instigator. Ever see a photo of Patty LaFontaine with a big cage on? There was a reason he was wearing it and if wasn't impacted wisdom teeth.

 

Those guys calling for the removal of the instigator want more fights period. It isn't about 'justice,' no matter how much they kid themselves that it is.

[Doohicksie]

Careless use of stick, no blood, two minutes. Purely accidental use of stick, blood, four minutes.

 

What's the difference between "careless" and "accidental"?  If a stick "accidentally" hits another player in the head, that to me is "careless."

[Taro T]

What's the difference between "careless" and "accidental"?  If a stick "accidentally" hits another player in the head, that to me is "careless."

Careless is swinging w/ no regard to your surroundings.

 

Accidental includes stuff like having the stick ride up the opponent's or catching a guy as either he's falling or you got checked into him.

 

IMHO, there is a difference (though their definitions can overlap).

[rickshaw]

I don't believe longer penalty minutes for dirtier plays will make the game less exciting. I still think guys will still board guys, that's more prevalent than ever. 

Clearly guys know that cross checking a player in the chops to avoid a hit, isn't supposed to happen, but it does. Penalties should never happen but they do, cuz that's sport. 

I just can't understand why changes haven't been made. A boarding call should not equal a broken stick call? A 2 hand slash should not equal a hook? The penalties still get called, but the dirtier ones need harsher consequences. 

[TrueBlueGED]

Change the definitions and amend penalty length...then watch the refs proceed to not call anything and make all the changes a moot point. Sounds like Bettman's perfect offseason change.

[Eleven]

Wasn't it previously a judgement call?  I like it the way it is now.  Make the players be more aware of what their doing.

 

In regards to other penalties, the only major change I really want to see is refs actually calling interference.  

 

It was and it was an absolute mess.

[LastPommerFan]

Wasn't it previously a judgement call?  I like it the way it is now.  Make the players be more aware of what their doing.

 

In regards to other penalties, the only major change I really want to see is refs actually calling interference.  

 

I've been using the way puck over glass and high sticking are called as an excellent life skills teaching tool for my kids.

 

Sometimes, even if it's an accident, it's still a penalty.

[dEnnis the Menace]

I've been using the way puck over glass and high sticking are called as an excellent life skills teaching tool for my kids.

 

Sometimes, even if it's an accident, it's still a penalty.

 

nice!

[Knightrider]

Wasn't it previously a judgement call?  I like it the way it is now.  Make the players be more aware of what their doing.

 

In regards to other penalties, the only major change I really want to see is refs actually calling interference.  

 

 

This. 

 

At first glance, I was thinking there is no need to change the rules...  just enforce them.  By swallowing the whistles. they are still influencing the game...  and it isn't in a good way. 

 

Maybe I've been watching too many squirt and peewee playoff games, but I find the them a whole lot more entertaining than the NHL playoffs this year.

[Eleven]

I can't look at the title of this thread without thinking "gin rummy, for penalties."

 

They really do need to enforce the damned rules.