The summer doldrums of hockey. Propose an NHL rule change.

[JohnC]

For those who are enamored with fighting in the NHL ask yourself why is it not allowed in college or Olympic hockey? Fighting currently is very limited. It should be completely banned. Player safety is also a reason as to why it should be banned. Hockey is both a tough and beautiful sport. Assaultive behavior shouldn't be a part of it. I hate fighting almost as much as I hate Metal music. I would rather listen to train wheels screeching when braking than listen to that devil music. 

[Doohicksie]

6 hours ago, shrader said:

On 9/23/2023 at 2:57 PM, Doohickie said:

Institute a chaser in the shootout. 

I’d just use a polar bear. 

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

Ban fighting altogether.

[Doohicksie]

30 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I hate fighting almost as much as I hate Metal music.

[shrader]

35 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

That’s really not the best person to post a picture of when you’re talking about metal. 

[JohnC]

3 hours ago, Doohickie said:

Did you use those GIFs before when I previously railed against hooliganism and thuggery in the game? Fighting in hockey is mostly contrived between the combatants. It's really stupid and needlessly can get players hurt. 

[nucci]

I like these......

The following three innovative rule changes will apply to CHL games, which will change the game and add an extra layer of excitement but not undermine credibility.

- A team that caused a minor penalty will remain shorthanded even if the opposing team scores a goal, ensuring a full two minutes of power-play time.
- A minor penalty will be served even if a goal is scored while a delayed penalty is pending.
- If a shorthanded team scores, the minor penalty against will end.

[SwampD]

15 hours ago, JohnC said:

Ban fighting altogether. Anyone who starts a fight should be thrown out of the game and automatically be given a 25 game suspension. The instigator should also be criminally charged for assault and immediately sent to the central jail cell for processing. If you like fighting I recommend that you go to an MMA, wrestling or boxing event. Hooliganism should not be tolerated at an NHL hockey game. 

No thanks. Then you would get all that stick work after the whistle, that you see in the Euro leagues.

 

Even though I really like the current OT, what if when you take the puck out of the offensive zone to regroup, you can only go to your blue line? If you take it all the way back into your zone, it’s a face off there? Sort of like an over and back violation in basketball. I think that would create a lot more turnovers.

[Taro T]

12 minutes ago, SwampD said:

No thanks. Then you would get all that stick work after the whistle, that you see in the Euro leagues.

 

Even though I really like the current OT, what if when you take the puck out of the offensive zone to regroup, you can only go to your blue line? If you take it all the way back into your zone, it’s a face off there? Sort of like an over and back violation in basketball. I think that would create a lot more turnovers.

That is a big part of what an outright fighting ban would likely bring.  The game is too fast with too many potential ways to REALLY mess somebody up to not allow the occassional spontaneous fight.  My 2 cents; clearly not everyone agrees.

Actually believe they're at a pretty good spot wrt fighting.  It still happens occassionally but it is far from an every game thing and the staged "we need to change the momentum" fight is almost a thing of the past.  (Haven't watched much non-Sabres NHL hockey the past few years; just started back on that last year.  So, that last observation might not be accurate leaguewide.)

[shrader]

2 hours ago, nucci said:

- A minor penalty will be served even if a goal is scored while a delayed penalty is pending.

 

That is one I have never understood.  Do they cancel out the penalty because they somehow thing you've been given a huge advantage in being able to pull the goalie?  You are able to pull the goalie because the other team cannot touch the puck, not because there's a penalty.  I'd be ok with voiding the penalty if there was a rule stating that the team with the delayed penalty cannot be awarded a goal under any circumstances (ie. the team with the pulled goalie screwed up and put it in their own net).

[JohnC]

2 hours ago, SwampD said:

No thanks. Then you would get all that stick work after the whistle, that you see in the Euro leagues.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Taro T said:

That is a big part of what an outright fighting ban would likely bring.  The game is too fast with too many potential ways to REALLY mess somebody up to not allow the occassional spontaneous fight.  My 2 cents; clearly not everyone agrees.

Actually believe they're at a pretty good spot wrt fighting.  It still happens occassionally but it is far from an every game thing and the staged "we need to change the momentum" fight is almost a thing of the past.  (Haven't watched much non-Sabres NHL hockey the past few years; just started back on that last year.  So, that last observation might not be accurate leaguewide.)

Most fights are staged where one combatant asked the other potential combatant if he is willing to go at it. For the most part, it is contrived.  

As far as stick work while the action is going or after the whistle there is a simple solution: Enforce the rules. Call penalties even after the whistle if necessary. 

There are no fights in the college or Olympics because they are not tolerated by the officials. And there are usually no fights in the world tournaments. Fighting does nothing to enhance the game. What it does is create added health risks when it is now such a small and anachronistic part of the game. For me, hooligan behavior is not entertaining. It belongs in the prison yard where criminals have their own code of conduct. 

[Taro T]

3 minutes ago, JohnC said:

 

Most fights are staged where one combatant asked the other potential combatant if he is willing to go at it. For the most part, it is contrived.  

As far as stick work while the action is going or after the whistle there is a simple solution: Enforce the rules. Call penalties even after the whistle if necessary. 

There are no fights in the college or Olympics because they are not tolerated by the officials. And there are usually no fights in the world tournaments. Fighting does nothing to enhance the game. What it does is create added health risks when it is now such a small and anachronistic part of the game. For me, hooligan behavior is not entertaining. It belongs in the prison yard where criminals have their own code of conduct. 

Again, primarily only watch Sabres games, but how many staged fights do you see?  The Sabres had about 6 fights the entire year and Krebs was in at least 2 if not 3 of them.  The Stillman fight (which ended very poorly for him) could probably be put in that category.  But what other one gets there?

[JohnC]

8 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Again, primarily only watch Sabres games, but how many staged fights do you see?  The Sabres had about 6 fights the entire year and Krebs was in at least 2 if not 3 of them.  The Stillman fight (which ended very poorly for him) could probably be put in that category.  But what other one gets there?

Again, most fights are staged where the combatants agree to go at before the gloves come off. Stillman getting hurt in his first game after a fight is an example of that. (As you cited. He could have had a concussion that jeopardized his season, and even career. For what?) I'm aware that fights are no longer as prevalent as they were a number of years ago. Fighting has been for the most part is limited. I'm arguing that it should completely be eliminated. It serves no purpose other than to create unnecessary health and safety risks. I'm all for physical play. That can be done by checking. Fighting in the NHL is an anachronistic part of the old era. In my opinion, it shouldn't be part of today's game which is faster, more skilled and better flow.

[Archie Lee]

My proposal would not be a rule change but would be to eliminate the offside challenge and to try and change the culture with regards to how offsides are viewed. In my new world, Linesmen continue to call offside as they see it; if they see the play as being offside by even the slimmest of margins they blow the play dead. However, the culture change would be to accept that a Linesman declaring a play as onside means that the play is onside and the defending team simply needs to accept this and defend accordingly. Much like teams just accept when an icing is waived off (they might complain if they end up being scored on, but it is generally accepted that sometimes an icing call is close and can go one way or another; offsides should be the same).

The one thing the offside challenge has proven is that it is impossible for a human being to sort through multiple players crossing the blueline at high speed and at near the same moment, and clearly identify if the puck crossed the line first. This is so impossible that it is actually pretty clear that when the rule was created it was almost certainly not intended to be something that would be fretted over to any great degree.  The intent of the rule is to prevent teams from being egregiously offside and not to have instances where we go to replay and zoom in back and forth in high definition to ascertain if the puck or the skate was over first, in some instances by less than a centimeter. 

The offside coaches challenge goes against the spirit of the rule in my opinion and doesn't enhance my enjoyment of the game.

[Rasmus_]

Teams in Toronto should disband, just for the simple sake of "common sense". 

Edited September 25, 2023 by Rasmus_

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

Again, most fights are staged where the combatants agree to go at before the gloves come off. Stillman getting hurt in his first game after a fight is an example of that. (As you cited. He could have had a concussion that jeopardized his season, and even career. For what?) I'm aware that fights are no longer as prevalent as they were a number of years ago. Fighting has been for the most part is limited. I'm arguing that it should completely be eliminated. It serves no purpose other than to create unnecessary health and safety risks. I'm all for physical play. That can be done by checking. Fighting in the NHL is an anachronistic part of the old era. In my opinion, it shouldn't be part of today's game which is faster, more skilled and better flow.

You can continue to state that, but without any evidence to back the statement up, it doesn't really mean much.

You were provided ONE example of a staged fight and then state that most all of them are because of that one example.  That isn't convincing.  

10 years ago, sure, most all fights were staged.  But with fighting as rare as it has become, personally haven't seen that to be the case at present.  (And again, the Sabres games may be aberations but that's the data set am going by.  You haven't provided anything in this conversation to cause one to believe their games are the aberation.)  And if you have evidence, will readily chance the stance on this issue.  

And if the fights ARE heat of the moment events to any reasonably significant degree, find your stance that players that fight should be in jail to be more than a bit excessive.  Also, doubt it would do anything at all (and might actually exacerabate a presently relatively infrequent issue) to alleviate @SwampD's concerns that viscious stick swinging incidents would become more prevalent.

[shrader]

12 minutes ago, Rasmus_ said:

Teams in Toronto should disban, just for the simple sake of "common sense". 

“Disban”… that that mean they’re required to stay in the league forever?

[Rasmus_]

11 minutes ago, shrader said:

“Disban”… that that mean they’re required to stay in the league forever?

[JohnC]

32 minutes ago, Taro T said:

You can continue to state that, but without any evidence to back the statement up, it doesn't really mean much.

You were provided ONE example of a staged fight and then state that most all of them are because of that one example.  That isn't convincing.  

10 years ago, sure, most all fights were staged.  But with fighting as rare as it has become, personally haven't seen that to be the case at present.  (And again, the Sabres games may be aberations but that's the data set am going by.  You haven't provided anything in this conversation to cause one to believe their games are the aberation.)  And if you have evidence, will readily chance the stance on this issue.  

And if the fights ARE heat of the moment events to any reasonably significant degree, find your stance that players that fight should be in jail to be more than a bit excessive.  Also, doubt it would do anything at all (and might actually exacerabate a presently relatively infrequent issue) to alleviate @SwampD's concerns that viscious stick swinging incidents would become more prevalent.

Why is there a need to be fights at all? Football is a much more physical game and it is not allowed. How has no fighting in college, Olympic and world tournaments (I believe) hurt the game? It hasn't as much as it has enhanced it. College hockey played by the upper tier level is very physical. Just explain to me why fighting should be allowed? What's the point? 

The notion that vicious stick swinging would be more prevalent doesn't resonate with me at all. Anyone who gets involved in that type of behavior would be thrown out of the game and the league office would suspend that player for a number of games. Stick swinging is severely dealt with by the referees and the league office. 

With respect to my comment about hockey players who get involved in a fight should be thrown in jail is not an excessive comment. Fighting in any public setting such as a bar, on the street, at a football game etc. would get one arrested for assault. Fighting in hockey is an ugly remnant of a past era. That era, thankfully, for the most part is long-gone. And because of that hockey is a much more entertaining game to watch. There's no justification and need for it. 

[thewookie1]

7 hours ago, nucci said:

I like these......

The following three innovative rule changes will apply to CHL games, which will change the game and add an extra layer of excitement but not undermine credibility.

- A team that caused a minor penalty will remain shorthanded even if the opposing team scores a goal, ensuring a full two minutes of power-play time.
- A minor penalty will be served even if a goal is scored while a delayed penalty is pending.
- If a shorthanded team scores, the minor penalty against will end.

Frankly I think the first and third are rather stupid honestly and/or gimmicky.

I don't hate the 2nd one but really not a fan of tweaking NHL rules

[shrader]

38 minutes ago, Rasmus_ said:

Yeah, you missed the d so I had to make a dumb joke. 

[Taro T]

14 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Why is there a need to be fights at all? Football is a much more physical game and it is not allowed. How has no fighting in college, Olympic and world tournaments (I believe) hurt the game? It hasn't as much as it has enhanced it. College hockey played by the upper tier level is very physical. Just explain to me why fighting should be allowed? What's the point? 

The notion that vicious stick swinging would be more prevalent doesn't resonate with me at all. Anyone who gets involved in that type of behavior would be thrown out of the game and the league office would suspend that player for a number of games. Stick swinging is severely dealt with by the referees and the league office. 

With respect to my comment about hockey players who get involved in a fight should be thrown in jail is not an excessive comment. Fighting in any public setting such as a bar, on the street, at a football game etc. would get one arrested for assault. Fighting in hockey is an ugly remnant of a past era. That era, thankfully, for the most part is long-gone. And because of that hockey is a much more entertaining game to watch. There's no justification and need for it. 

So, you don't have any evidence to support your claim that most fighting in today's game is gratuitous staged fighting.  No biggie.  But when your base presumption isn't supported, you aren't going to win many converts to your emotional based position.  My 2 cents.  Clearly, ymmv.

[JohnC]

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

So, you don't have any evidence to support your claim that most fighting in today's game is gratuitous staged fighting.  No biggie.  But when your base presumption isn't supported, you aren't going to win many converts to your emotional based position.  My 2 cents.  Clearly, ymmv.

You go to a lot of games. I watch a lot of games on TV. No, I don't have official stats on whether fights are staged or not. But just from a viewer perspective I'm confident in my position. But that's not the main issue and central reason why I'm adamantly against fighting. It is a health and safety issue. You saw the Stillman fight last year. Whether it was an agreement to fight or not, it could have caused a season ending injury or even worse. What was gained by the fight? It's not necessary at all. 

[Taro T]

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

You go to a lot of games. I watch a lot of games on TV. No, I don't have official stats on whether fights are staged or not. But just from a viewer perspective I'm confident in my position. But that's not the main issue and central reason why I'm adamantly against fighting. It is a health and safety issue. You saw the Stillman fight last year. Whether it was an agreement to fight or not, it could have caused a season ending injury or even worse. What was gained by the fight? It's not necessary at all. 

And you keep harping on the ONE staged fight the Sabres had last year.  If it isn't Stillman's 1st game as a Sabre it probably doesn't happen.  

But, suppose in addition to preventing that one staged fight, your fighting ban finds both (all 3? (ottomh, not sure if he had 2 or 3 last year)) of Krebs fights as the stick swinging incidents that got Mike Ramsey a suspension so many years ago?  You hand wave away that possibility.  Not so sure that is valid expectation.

[steveoath]

Rather than ban fighting, can we not just have competent and fair refereeing?

[thewookie1]

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

Again, most fights are staged where the combatants agree to go at before the gloves come off. Stillman getting hurt in his first game after a fight is an example of that. (As you cited. He could have had a concussion that jeopardized his season, and even career. For what?) I'm aware that fights are no longer as prevalent as they were a number of years ago. Fighting has been for the most part is limited. I'm arguing that it should completely be eliminated. It serves no purpose other than to create unnecessary health and safety risks. I'm all for physical play. That can be done by checking. Fighting in the NHL is an anachronistic part of the old era. In my opinion, it shouldn't be part of today's game which is faster, more skilled and better flow.

The only "staged" fights nowadays is when a more gritty player targets a guy who drilled a less physical or now injured teammate. To me that is merely an extension of the heat of the moment. Additionally the occasional fight can energize a team to turn things around.

 

For me the health factor is irrelevant; if you take out fighting due to injury risks then checking isn't far behind and don't tell me I'm using a slippery slope fallacy. Players can literally get hurt from a soft check into the boards. Essentially as soon as you open up the injury box, anything can be made considered problematic.