bottlecap Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 About two months ago I reported to you all that HNIC's Dave Hodge had an opinion that the NHL's worst nightmare would be in a game 7 in where someone would accidentally clear it over the glass, get penalized and they'd score the game winning goal on the power play. That statement proved prophetic. The Sabs were burned by the new (soon-to-be-abolished) in the crease rule too, at the most critical time. We're always victim to these new, hard-to-interpret rules and the ref's new tight fisted role. Hockey under this regime is turning into a sissy sport, reflecting the head man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 About two months ago I reported to you all that HNIC's Dave Hodge had an opinion that the NHL's worst nightmare would be in a game 7 in where someone would accidentally clear it over the glass, get penalized and they'd score the game winning goal on the power play. That statement proved prophetic. The Sabs were burned by the new (soon-to-be-abolished) in the crease rule too, at the most critical time. We're always victim to these new, hard-to-interpret rules and the ref's new tight fisted role. Hockey under this regime is turning into a sissy sport, reflecting the head man. There has to be a distinction between shooting the puck out, and "oh #%^$#!, I am getting hit behind my net and I'm trying to clear the puck." Soupy said he wasn't even trying to hit the glass, he was just trying to round the boards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristian Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 I can see what you're getting at, and the situation is far from perfect. However IMHO, The Sabres didn't lose due to a call, they lost cause they couldn't hold on to a 3-1 lead in game 5, and due to injuries which made them sit back on D instead of playing their trademark transition game. The glass is half full. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Done Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 I like the rule. Tony Lydman used to backhand the puck out of his zone, 35' in the air about 8 times a game until he got 3 of those calls in a week. They are trying to speed the game up with less play stoppages, and I give them credit for trying it. We have no excuses.....we tried hard and lost. No shame or anger in that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottnc Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 I don't have a problem with the rule if you cleanly shoot it out of play with no one molesting you. However, when you're trying to clear it around the boards and a guy hitting your stick causes this to happen, I don't like it so much... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 I don't have a problem with the rule if you cleanly shoot it out of play with no one molesting you. However, when you're trying to clear it around the boards and a guy hitting your stick causes this to happen, I don't like it so much... Thats the problem with the rule, If it is an intentional move, yes it should be a penalty, If the puck just happens to get hit out by accident, how can you penalize a player. It would not work though if you had the refs make the decision if it was intentional or not. The only solution would be to do like Don Cherry suggested and make it like icing where a face off takes place in their own zone and they can't change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRH Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 We liked the rule in the first game of the season when Zhitnik went to the box for it. I don't see how we can complain in the last game. Just a tough break. Think about it. You can't say "that's a stupid rule and shouldn't decide a game" while still maintaining that Hull's goal shouldn't have counted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichFan Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 It was a freak play that doesn't happen often enough to warrant any changes. I've seen more freak high sticking calls where one players stick rides up another players stick and catches them in the face -- don't hear any talk about changing this rule. Players have to take responsibility for what they do with their stick, with the new delay of game rule they also have to take responsibility for how they clear the puck. Flukes will happen, it's a part of the game that never will be perfected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 I think that the call should be equivilent to icing. Faceoff in the zone, but the team that shot it out does not get a line change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 I think that the call should be equivilent to icing. Faceoff in the zone, but the team that shot it out does not get a line change. Exactly what I was saying, not 2 minutes in the box Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 2, 2006 Report Share Posted June 2, 2006 Exactly what I was saying, not 2 minutes in the box Yeah. What you said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.