|
Thoughts on New Rule Changes |
|
|
|
|
|
Yesterday was an interesting day - not only did the NHL release a slate of new rule changes, but I also picked up a new cd by the Counting Crows. Interestingly, these are two things that are universally considered uncool - but which I happen to love.
The minutia of the NHL rule book is no more universally loved than Adam Durtiz fake-dreaded earnestness, but you know, for those of us so inclined, what could be better than some rules to discuss and a great new record by an old favorite? Certainly with Bono degenerating into some kind of hypocritical corporate shill, it's nice to find an old friend from the 90's who hasn't turned into some kind of (expletive deleted) embarrassment.
Anyways, the NHL takes quite a bit of flak for being the one sport that constantly changes it's rules. It seems a year hardly goes by when we don't have some minor variation of a minor rule to get used to - and no doubt there are more than a few hockey fans who just can't be bothered to keep up anymore. Still, while I'll take an easy potshot or two once in a while at the constant rule changes, I think it is worth noting that they are done with the intention of fine-tuning, not revolutionizing, and that the NHL, in my opinion, deserves some credit for never being afraid to try something new or fix something that is broken.
So what went down yesterday?
I'm just gonna take these directly off NHL.Com and then offer my analysis.
Rule 1.8 - Trapezoid extended by 2 feet on both sides.
The much maligned trapezoid gets four feet bigger and I think this is a good thing. The trapezoid was meant to prevent goalies from slowing play and preventing offense by constantly playing the puck. The trapezoid didn't really seem to accomplish it's goals because it only removed the riskiest goalie attempts to play the puck, while occasionally giving out cheap penalties.
The new adjustment should allow a little more offense since the goalie can go a little farther and have a better chance to screw up, but I guess I just don't see the point of keeping it at all. if making it bigger will increase offense, why not just totally remove it?
What I would do is give goalies free reign to go wherever they want, and give players free reign to treat the goalie like any other player if he leaves is crease - but I doubt that's ever gonna happen!
Rule 23 - Increased game-misconduct penalties
Clipping, charging, elbowing, interference, kneeing, headbutting and butt-ending are now included with hitting from behind and boarding as penalties which will earn a player an automatic suspension if he get's two game-misconducts for any of these penalties.
Obviously this is a good move. Dangerous plays should be eliminated as much as possible.
Rule 24 - Spin O Rama
On penalty shots and shoot-outs a player can no longer do the spin-o-rama move. I think this is terrible. Why remove anything fun from the game? If you try this and don't score, you look like an idiot, so that should be penalty enough. Oh, well, it's not like it's a big deal.
Rule 38 - Video Goal Judge
The video goal judge, and the Toronto based Hockey Operations Judge now have more discretion to assist the on-ice official in instances like kicked in goals or whether the whistle was blown.
Can't complain about this one - the more information and the more correct you can make the call, the better the game will be. 100% a positive development.
One thing I wish they would address: Occasionally there is a situation where the goal clearly crossed the line, but there is no real video evidence of it because the goalie is blocking the camera or something. I think in this situation, common sense should prevail and a judgement call should be allowed. Strictly going by whether or not you can actually see it sometimes allows goals that should count to be disallowed on a technicality.
Rule 57 - Tripping
A player can no longer trip another player if he dives and hits the puck first. This is something players exploit and I agree with this change. More penalties equal more offense and that's a good thing.
Rule 64 - Diving
Players will now face harsher penalties, including public disgrace and a graduated fine system if they dive too much. I don't really like this rule because once a guy gets a reputation, confirmation bias is going to set in and this won't be called consistently or fairly. 10:1 they adjust this rule again in the future.
What I think they should do is nothing. Call diving penalties if they happen, but it's hockey and it's hard to tell sometimes. I don't feel like diving is an epidemic or anything - but really, this is a rule that's so subjective it's going to always be difficult to get right. Ultimately, who cares? It barely matters.
Rule 76 - Face-offs
This is the best rule they came up with, in my opinion. The coaches were heavily exploiting the fact that you can't change players on an icing by having their guys get thrown out of face-offs. Now, you won't get tossed, just warned, which will not give you any extra time to catch your breath, and if you do it twice, you get a penalty. Solid, solid move by the NHL here.
Rule 84 - Overtime
Teams will now switch ends, making for a long change, before overtime. Also, the ice will be scraped. This should lead to more goals and less shoot-outs, so again, excellent idea.
Rule 85 - Puck out of Bounds
This is a really good rule change that hasn't got a lot of attention. What will now happen is that if you shoot the puck on net, and your own player tips it out of bounds, or it hits the net and goes into the crowd, or in the rare case that the glass is shattered, instead of being penalized with a neutral zone face off, the puck will be dropped in the offensive zone.
This is good because when you shoot the puck, you're trying to score, and if the puck happens to go out of bounds, you now aren't penalized when all you were trying to do is create offense. This should increase scoring a little bit, at least.
Conclusion
Outside of the spin-o-rama rule, I agree with all of these. Of course there is nothing revolutionary here - just little details. But what I like is that most of them will work to slightly increase scoring without doing anything drastic. These are good little adjustments and a perfect example of why the NHL is a good league - they aren't afraid to tinker, but they respect tradition and don't usually go too crazy.
The only problem I have is that there are a couple things that I think should have been addressed but were not. First, the way standings are tracked remains absolutely idiotic. Games should be worth either 2 or 3 points - not a mixture.
Also, the way they seed teams is terrible. We should never see first round series like we did last year where two of the best teams in the league are facing off in the first round - Stl/Chi, LA/SJ - and seeding 1-16 could fix this rather easily and make a less luck dependent playoffs. Furthermore, there should be a rule that teams with more points don't miss the playoffs while worse teams make it just because they are in an easier division. This hardly ever happens, but it could, and it's not right.
Finally, I would have liked to see the NHL address hybrid icing. There is no reason I can see to have such a confusing rule when no-touch icing so clearly the way to go and - I predict - where the game is going eventually anyways.
That's my two sense. Thanks for reading.
Blogger • 
Join the Discussion:
»