Rule changes for 2005-06

[ethanm]

http://www.uscho.com/news/2005/07/02_010652.php

Among the new proposals (they still need final apporoval), goals will now count if an offensive player's skate is in the crease but doesn't affect the goalie (a couple years too late for Maine fans). The penalty for checking into the boards has been increased.

Now, anytime a player is hit from behind into the boards, regardless of the result of the play, a major penalty and a game misconduct or disqualification must be assessed.

I'm sure Bina's injury was a factor in this. Other proposals include restricting the size of goalie equipment, enforcing the rule that goalies can only freeze the puck outside the crease (unless it prevents a goal), and spraying the goalie is now a minor (but what about drinking from the goalie's water bottle).

The experimental rule that Michigan proposed and was approved for any school to use in exhibitions sounds interesting.

The proposal would change the attacking zone boundary from the blue line to the center ice red line after the traditional zone is gained legally. So, if the attacking team gains the traditional attacking zone legally under current rules on side, the attacking zone expands to include the space between the blue line and the center ice red line.

I would think the additional space would be a bigger advantage on Olympic size rinks as a team could really spread out the defense.

[redwing77]

Something that bothers me is that a lot of the rule changes depends upon the discretion of the referee. Knowing the refs in this league, they only see it as "on" and "off" or in other words "It's a definite penalty" and "It's not a penalty"

The worst rule change I heard will forever now be known as the Chucko rule. With the new rule, any puck deflected off of the skate and into the net will count provided there is no clear kicking motion to send the puck into the net. No way can a ref decide that it was kicked in when the players are going that fast unless it is blatently obvious (and even then, some of the refs wouldn't recognize it). The only way to save this rule from becoming horendous is to install instant replay on any deflection goal. And that will prolong the game.

Goalie rules aren't really that bad.

The Michigan rule suggest just blows if you are a defensively minded team. But, it will make Michigan even more dominant looking in those exhibition games. Oh well.

A question on the hitting from behind rule change, does this mean every time a defenseman or forward pins a player along the boards and then pushes his mask into the glass going to be a major penalty?

[Wilbur]

I don't like the Michigan rule. Not only will it get confusing on the ice at times, but I know that it will confuse the hell out of the fans. Leave the standard off sides/icing rules alone damnit!!

I can see it now....

And Notre Dame clears the zone, WAIT, they didn't clear the zone, pass from the red line to the front of the net and a GOAL by Porter!!!!!!!!!! Well the Michigan rule helps out the Maize and Blue once again as a 50 foot pass turns into a goal for the Wolverines.

[MafiaMan]

I don't like the Michigan rule.  Not only will it get confusing on the ice at times, but I know that it will confuse the hell out of the fans.  Leave the standard off sides/icing rules alone damnit!!

I can see it now....

And Notre Dame clears the zone, WAIT, they didn't clear the zone, pass from the red line to the front of the net and a GOAL by Porter!!!!!!!!!!  Well the Michigan rule helps out the Maize and Blue once again as a 50 foot pass turns into a goal for the Wolverines.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

While I realize there is a big difference in the games, broomball is played with the blue/line then red line "in the zone" rule and it's actually quite simple. Teams will carry or dump the puck into the zone past the blue line and the defensive team must get it past the red line to get it back "out" of the zone as opposed to just pushing the puck past the blue line. I suppose one could argue in hockey, however, is that all this does is push two defensemen back to the red line. While that creates a three on three atmosphere inside the zone closer to the net, scoring chances may actually decrease since your D-men have no hope of scoring on a slap shot from the red line.

[Goon]

The checking from behind rule is going to suck. Here is why every game there are a lot of calls that could be called checking from behind, however they are seldom called correctly. Don Adam's non call in the final five was a perfect example of this. However, I feel that UND even before this rule came to fruition always gets the short end of calls, and now are going to suffer even more. Especially if they keep up with the stiffling defensive style of play, the refs are going to make up calls to keep it close.

It would have been easier just to fire of fine bad officials like Don Adam.

[MafiaMan]

The checking from behind rule is going to suck. Here is why every game there are a lot of calls that could be called checking from behind, however they are seldom called correctly. Don Adam's non call in the final five was a perfect example of this. However, I feel that UND even before this rule came to fruition always gets the short end of calls, and now are going to suffer even more.  Especially if they keep up with the stiffling defensive style of play, the refs are going to make up calls to keep it close.

It would have been easier just to fire of fine bad officials like Don Adam.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't know if I agree with fines being levied against officials who make bad calls, but I agree that the problem isn't necessarily new rules, it's the enforcement of existing rules.

[HockeyMom]

While I realize there is a big difference in the games, broomball is played with the blue/line then red line "in the zone" rule and it's actually quite simple.

[MafiaMan]

[HockeyMom]

How proud your kid(s) must be, HockeyMom. 

That being said, I could use a good female goon on my broomball team's 4 line.  You know...to shake things up a bit. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're 4 line would be a person short because I'd be sitting in the penalty box.

I'm retired, I'll stick to hockey.

[MafiaMan]

[Jackson]

I wholeheartedly agree with the skate in the crease rule. Too many goals have been waved off by this, a classic case of the officiating helping to determine the outcome of a game.

As far as the "Michigan rule", on the surface I don't like it. A team should be rewarded/penalized for their ability to hold the zone. I will reserve final judgement until I can see the rule in action.

[HockeyMom]

Retired?  Retired?  What is this, the National Wussy League? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Maaaaaaaaaybe

It's just easier to get around on the ice wearing skates.

[PCM]

I wholeheartedly agree with the skate in the crease rule. Too many goals have been waved off by this, a classic case of the officiating helping to determine the outcome of a game.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not really. When the old rule was correctly applied, it was a case of the officials calling the game by the rules, something I wholeheartedly endorse. When officials fail to call penalties or selectively call the game depending on the time and situation, then you can say that officiating is "helping to determine the outcome of a game."

[Blackheart]

so the checking from behind rule will be called the Pauko-bich rule?

[Jackson]

Not really. When the old rule was correctly applied, it was a case of the officials calling the game by the rules, something I wholeheartedly endorse. When officials fail to call penalties or selectively call the game depending on the time and situation, then you can say that officiating is "helping to determine the outcome of a game."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Agreed refs should call the game by the rules. I was thinking more of those situations where a skate in the crease has absolutely no bearing on the play. Kind of like in the NFL when they can choose not to call pass interference when the ball is deemed not catchable.

[PCM]

Agreed refs should call the game by the rules. I was thinking more of those situations where a skate in the crease has absolutely no bearing on the play. Kind of like in the NFL when they can choose not to call pass interference when the ball is deemed not catchable.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with the rule change. The ref should have some discretion to determine whether the player in the crease had any bearing on whether the goal was scored. However, I can also see it creating even more controversey, especially when there's no replay available to the officials.

For example, in UND's east regional playoff game against BU when the Terriers had a goal taken away because of a player in the crease, would this rule have allowed that goal to stand or not? I'd have to look at the replay, but as I recall, the BU player in the crease did make some contact with Jordan Parise before the goal was scored.

Was it enough to wave off the goal? I think it could be argued both ways. No matter what the ref decided, someone's wasn't going to be happy. In this case, the replay showed there was no question that a Terrier player was in the crease, giving the ref no choice but to wave off the goal.

Hockey fans tend to think that giving officials more discretion is a good thing until one of those discretionary calls goes against their team.

[Fedorov]

I don't know if I agree with fines being levied against officials who make bad calls, but I agree that the problem isn't necessarily new rules, it's the enforcement of existing rules.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

They don't make enough money to be fined. The question is, what kind of supply of people is there for being a low-paid WCHA ref? If there are enough people that want to do it, which I am guessing there are, I think they need to start firing people that don't do their job correctly. That is impossible to enforce in the WCHA now because of the head of officials.

[Fedorov]

Hockey fans tend to think that giving officials more discretion is a good thing until one of those discretionary calls goes against their team.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The problem is that the refs are not accountable for mistakes. Until they are given rope that they could actually hang themselves with, I'm for as much objective rule enforcement as possible.

[PCM]

The question is, what kind of supply of people is there for being a low-paid WCHA ref?  If there are enough people that want to do it, which I am guessing there are, I think they need to start firing people that don't do their job correctly.  That is impossible to enforce in the WCHA now because of the head of officials.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I recall Dean Blais saying that one of the biggest problems with WCHA officiating is that there's not enough turnover among officials. He thought the league needed to set up a system that constantly introduced new blood. That's because the longer someone officiates, the more he tends to develop likes and dislikes for certain teams, coaches, fans and players.

[Doc Holliday]

Gopher fan here.....

What about going back to the old days of the crease not being a blue semi circle, but where there is the smaller rectangle right around the net, in which case a skate in the crease would negate any goal? You could keep the half circle which would maintain any safety for the goaltender, but with the rectangle crease being smaller and closer to the goal, it would eliminate some controversy. If a skate was in the crease, it would definitely have interfered with the play because it's so close to the goalie and the net, eliminating any of the guess work.

Also, I know I'm in the direct minority, but I've always felt that any puck off of a skate should be a goal, whether it's directed or not. I don't think it would change the dynamics of the game that much, it's not like people would start intentionally kicking the puck when presented with a scoring opportunity. Also, it would get rid of any controversy....the puck went in. Of course, I know I'm in the direct minority on this opinion and it will never happen, so no need to tell me I'm an idiot!

[jk]

Gopher fan here.....

so no need to tell me I'm an idiot!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Your skate point is interesting. We used to play foosball "clean goals only," so anything cheap didn't count. The funny thing about hockey is that only about 50% of the goals are "clean." The rest seem to be garbage bounces and deflections (especially goals by Denver against UND in important games). My point is that while a goal off a skate is definitely garbage, so are plenty of other hockey goals. Which is worse, a soccer goal or one that falls in off Paul Stastny's butt?

So maybe you're not an idiot, except for the Gopher fan thing (just kidding; thanks for posting).

[Doc Holliday]

Hey, you completly rearranged my quote, and I have proof!

I guess my opinion is that I just don't think it would change the dynamic of the game that much....it's not like guys are going to start trying to be Pele when close in.

Negative I see is, if a player's stick is tied up in close, you now have guys (and girls) doing a kicking motion with steel blades on their feet, hence the fault in my opinion.

[Old Barn Guy at Home]

The problem with allowing players to kick the puck into the net is mainly safety, as I see it. Along the boards or elsewhere, the chances of kicking someone in the neck or upper body are pretty slim. Around the goal area, players are often sprawled out on the ice, especially the goalie. I would not like to see the goal-mouth scrambles turn into "soccer" scrums, with blades flashing (and blood gushing).

The rule allowing goals if a player is in the crease, but not interferring with the goalie, should have been in the book from the very beginning.

[redwing77]

Gopher fan here.....

Also, I know I'm in the direct minority, but I've always felt that any puck off of a skate should be a goal, whether it's directed or not.

[CoteauRinkRat]

The problem with allowing players to kick the puck into the net is mainly safety, as I see it.  Along the boards or elsewhere, the chances of kicking someone in the neck or upper body are pretty slim.  Around the goal area, players are often sprawled out on the ice, especially the goalie.  I would not like to see the goal-mouth scrambles turn into "soccer" scrums, with blades flashing (and blood gushing). 

I remember watching CBC's coverage of the All-Star weekend in 2004 and they did a segment on proposed rule changes and interviewed a bunch of different players, coaches, GMs and almost all of them said that they felt the chances of getting cut by a skate blade were the same no matter where you were on the ice and they wanted to see that goals off of skates should be allowed, intentional or unintentional.