Hockey Season
For the first time in ages, I'm starting to show some interest in the NHL. It is starting to sound like the owners and players are close to a resolution. Time will tell whether the agreement is a good one. (Unless it involves contracting the league by about ten teams, then it will have ignored the root problem.)
What interests me more than collective bargaining, however, is the apparent sincerity with which the recent experiments with new rules and equipment were conducted. Do we finally have a champion or two interested in improving the current sad state of NHL play? Eklund at Hockey Rumors has some dirt on what is going on (scroll down to June 7). I like most of what is being played with. My take,
1. Tag-up rule for offsides - I want this back. Someone once observed that after they got rid of the tag-up rule, a whole generation of defencemen came into the league that couldn't skate backwards and puck handle at the same time.
2. No-touch icings - Good idea and the NHL is about the last of dodos that doesn't already have this adopted. Safer for the players and there really weren't that many plays were a delayed icing was waved off anyway.
3. 3-on-3 Overtime for 5 minutes after the 4-on-4 - The only thing more exciting than 4-on-4 might be 3-0n-3. Also, I'm in favour of anything that keeps penalty shots from determining winners. Sure it is exciting, but it would be like having a football game determined by field goal kicking.
4. Shootouts - see above.
5. Smaller goalie equipment - this is a must and is my bet for most likely rule to be adopted. In the last fifteen years the advent of ultra-light equipment has seen outrageously big equipment being worn by goalies. At least in the old day a goalie that had big equipment was carrying an extra twenty or thirty pounds around. Smaller pads would place the emphasis on reflexes and positioning instead of goalies sitting on the goal line waiting for the puck to hit them.
6. No tolerance on obstruction - I'm a firm believer that most of the existing rules would be sufficient if the league only enforced them as written.
7. Hurry-up face-offs - anything to keep the game moving is fine with me.
8. No line changes for team icing the puck - I like the sound of this. It is multi-purpose in that the disincentive to ice the puck will i) down on stoppages in play; ii) provide for more scoring opportunities; and 3) complement the hurry-up face offs.
9. No icing on the power play - this would most likely increase the number of goals scored on the power play, which is not a bad thing in itself. The traditionalist in me likes the ability to dump the puck when a man down, but this seems at odds with the whole punitive aspect of calling penalties: Why should the penalized team be given the right to ice the puck when a rule-abiding team cannot? This may raise the hackles of some traditionalists, but the no-icing concept is starting to grow on me. In fact, I like it more now than when I starting writing this paragraph.
10. Bigger nets - apparently they are testing larger nets that are similarly proportioned to the current size as well as ones that are the same width as today's nets at the bottom, but more circular in shape. This is where I draw my line. There should be no reason to enlarge the nets if the goalie equipment is shrunk and a handful of the rules that could better open up the game are adopted.
11. The Bowman line - this a neutral zone trap remedy, named after Hall of Fame coach, Scotty Bowman. As I understand it, this is a line at the top of the circle of your own (defensive) end. If the defensive team can carry the puck across their Bowman line, then the red line at centre ice is ignored for two-line passes. The intent is to open up the neutral zone and allow for more high-risk passes that could result in breakaways. I like this idea, especially since it allows for the red line to still play a role for icings.
In sum, it appears that I'm not as much of a traditionalist as I thought, but desperate times... etc., etc. I'm betting the league will be back in the fall. Let's hope some of these rule changes are enacted.
What interests me more than collective bargaining, however, is the apparent sincerity with which the recent experiments with new rules and equipment were conducted. Do we finally have a champion or two interested in improving the current sad state of NHL play? Eklund at Hockey Rumors has some dirt on what is going on (scroll down to June 7). I like most of what is being played with. My take,
1. Tag-up rule for offsides - I want this back. Someone once observed that after they got rid of the tag-up rule, a whole generation of defencemen came into the league that couldn't skate backwards and puck handle at the same time.
2. No-touch icings - Good idea and the NHL is about the last of dodos that doesn't already have this adopted. Safer for the players and there really weren't that many plays were a delayed icing was waved off anyway.
3. 3-on-3 Overtime for 5 minutes after the 4-on-4 - The only thing more exciting than 4-on-4 might be 3-0n-3. Also, I'm in favour of anything that keeps penalty shots from determining winners. Sure it is exciting, but it would be like having a football game determined by field goal kicking.
4. Shootouts - see above.
5. Smaller goalie equipment - this is a must and is my bet for most likely rule to be adopted. In the last fifteen years the advent of ultra-light equipment has seen outrageously big equipment being worn by goalies. At least in the old day a goalie that had big equipment was carrying an extra twenty or thirty pounds around. Smaller pads would place the emphasis on reflexes and positioning instead of goalies sitting on the goal line waiting for the puck to hit them.
6. No tolerance on obstruction - I'm a firm believer that most of the existing rules would be sufficient if the league only enforced them as written.
7. Hurry-up face-offs - anything to keep the game moving is fine with me.
8. No line changes for team icing the puck - I like the sound of this. It is multi-purpose in that the disincentive to ice the puck will i) down on stoppages in play; ii) provide for more scoring opportunities; and 3) complement the hurry-up face offs.
9. No icing on the power play - this would most likely increase the number of goals scored on the power play, which is not a bad thing in itself. The traditionalist in me likes the ability to dump the puck when a man down, but this seems at odds with the whole punitive aspect of calling penalties: Why should the penalized team be given the right to ice the puck when a rule-abiding team cannot? This may raise the hackles of some traditionalists, but the no-icing concept is starting to grow on me. In fact, I like it more now than when I starting writing this paragraph.
10. Bigger nets - apparently they are testing larger nets that are similarly proportioned to the current size as well as ones that are the same width as today's nets at the bottom, but more circular in shape. This is where I draw my line. There should be no reason to enlarge the nets if the goalie equipment is shrunk and a handful of the rules that could better open up the game are adopted.
11. The Bowman line - this a neutral zone trap remedy, named after Hall of Fame coach, Scotty Bowman. As I understand it, this is a line at the top of the circle of your own (defensive) end. If the defensive team can carry the puck across their Bowman line, then the red line at centre ice is ignored for two-line passes. The intent is to open up the neutral zone and allow for more high-risk passes that could result in breakaways. I like this idea, especially since it allows for the red line to still play a role for icings.
In sum, it appears that I'm not as much of a traditionalist as I thought, but desperate times... etc., etc. I'm betting the league will be back in the fall. Let's hope some of these rule changes are enacted.
posted by Tiberius at 1:27 PM
<< Home