HARD disagree with icing on the penalty kill. That removed a large bit of counterplay for the penalty killing team, and it would force the defending team to try to break through the zone with a man down, which is really risky. It would make the power play so stupid.
@@Jake_Broerthere has to be some kind of counterplay for the powerplay. You shouldn’t be given a free goal because a guy accidentally hit a player in the nose with a stick or flipped the puck over the ice
@@Jake_Broer First sometimes penalties aren't an intentional play. Second it's not the enter team's fault if one person throws a bad hit or sends the puck at a bad angle. Third it doesn't even the field completely, just makes it more of a play and less of an auto-goal. Fourth, line changes for the defending team would become an issue especially for less good teams if they don't have any way of leaving their defensive zone besides puck carrying.
@@Jake_Broer Your argument is essentially just that the team deserves the penalty therefore they deserve any punishment. But if that’s the case, why isn’t a penalty just an automatic goal? Clearly there’s a desire to still give the offending team the chance to redeem themselves. So simply claiming that the penalty kill team deserves any punishment therefore they deserve to not ice the puck isn’t a good argument.
One thing I've been seeing a lot this year is the refs having to sort out who is supposed to be on the ice after an icing. It wastes time and completely defeats the purpose of an icing. These guys are professional players, and they know whether they were on the ice or not when the puck was iced. They should have a max amount of time to get the right guys on the ice before getting a delay of game. Otherwise these situations where guys are sitting on the bench waiting for the ref to come get them means the team that iced the puck doesn't have to deal with the lack of a cool down period between shifts.
I don't like the idea of changing the Sean Avery rule as a blanket. If you allow the player to face the goalie and lift his arms, but you have to keep your stick down, that would be fine. But you shouldn't be allowed to swing your stick like he was doing. Defending players should be able to move through the ice in front of the crease without having to worry that some jackass is gonna bash them in the face. Sure, you might say that you'd call the high sticking then, but then you run the risk of players intentionally skating through to try and fish for a high sticking call. Just make the player who is doing their best Avery impression keep their stick down to head that off before it starts.
Get rid of the trapezoid. Pointless, most of the time goalies puck handling are their own worst enemies and it adds entertainment to the game when done well or especially when not.
That was mostly the Patrick Roy and Marty Turco rule, as those goalies were so good and aggressive at handling the puck that the teams in front of them could play the neutral zone trap to a T, force the dump and chase, and the goalie would be a 3rd defenseman clearing the puck out instantly, also neutralizing the only effective counter to the trap, essentially making those teams unbeatable not due to talent, but a quirk of the rules they were taking advantage of. Now that the rule's there, the current crop of goalies are not as good with the puck, and the neutral zone trap's not as prominent a strategy, so that rule's probably not really relevant to the present day NHL as it was in the height of the Dead Puck Era.
@@Seriously_Unserious Martin Brodeur was the reason this rule was created. Patrick Roy? thats a old choice, Turco I agree with but yeah, Brodeur was 1000% the reason for it.
@@Seriously_Unserious I know, I remember those days. It just doesn’t seem like a real problem. It just puts more legal nonsense to it I’d allow them to play it, but they could get checked in the corners.
@@FacelessHockey Brodeur was a master at it and it was part of the Devil's strategy, no argument there. However all the teams had adopted that practice as well. The so-called dead puck era, IMO, was precipitated by the obstruction era, and the reason I stopped watching the NHL for a few decades. Hooking a holding were accepted as part of normal play and destroyed the best parts of the game. Everyone hung out between the blue line and centre ice (offside pass still in play) then grabbed a guy on the way by and hung on. It was beyond bad for the game.
Could definitely see a team picking the powerplay in overtime during the regular season. It's the most common time for a defenseman to get a penalty shot and the opportunity to go 4 on 3 is massive with the extra ice.
Im shocked. Im with you on 14 of 15 plus the bonus. The only one I disagreed on was the EBUG rule. But I expected a bunch of terrible suggestions, and this ended up awesome. Solid work.
@@andrewrundle6896 My view on it is that if you need to dig so deep into your system to pull goalies out your ass that most likely won't perform to the same standard as your starter and backups, is it really going to hurt you that much to have a temporary guy out there that has gone through multiple auditions? It also is simply legendary and another reason the league is so much fun to follow.
At work so commenting before watching, but 2 that came to mind immediately: when you have a power play carry over between periods, you start the next period in the offensive zone. Offside challenges are null and void if the defending team establishes possession at any time after the entry. I personally would get rid of the challenge altogether, but at least this would somewhat prevent get out of jail free moments.
For the flow of the game it makes so much sense to do something like that for offsides. Plus how does it make sense to be able to challenge something that close, but not be able to challenge your best defensive forward getting elbowed to face, going down with a broken nose, while the other team scores because it's essentially 5 on 4 with a coverage mix up.
Couple of changes I'd do: 1) allow teams to schedule whatever uniform they want for their home games ahead of the season, and away teams get to wear whatever uniform they want in a color that contrasts enough. Bring back red Habs vs blue Leafs. Have black Kings against yellow preds, etc. 2) All-star game in september. You're more likely to know in advance who can play to make the rosters accordingly, players won't be looking to skip it to rest (you'd still be giving each team a bye week at different spots in late January or early February), it can be a great first showcase for the first overall picks and people are so desperate for hockey in september they'll actually watch it. 3) controversial one maybe, but the jailbreak goal in the PWHL is such an exciting feature. Basically, teams that are shorthanded that score a goal can free their teammate, granted that it's on a minor penalty. 4) Another PWHL special: teams that get called a penalty can't make a change before the next faceoff, like on an icing call. 5) not a rule per say, but each call that is made with video review should have an explanation sent to media. People are always confused about decisions and this could help understand why a certain goal was or wasn't called back for goalie interference
Unable to change on a penalty is a terrible rule. The point of a penalty is to punish the team by being down a player for X minutes. It adds extra punishment for no reason.
Potential rule change: Goalies must go to the bench and swap with a bk up goalie if they commit a penalty. They can then return to the net after the next stoppage of play after the penalty expires or is scored on. A substitute will still sit in the box to avoid two goalies on the ice at the same time at the expiring of said penalty time when the box opens.
Agree with most except for disrespect to e-bugs! Not random "anybody's" season ticket holders watching the team with hockey vision. Of course they still play.. stay in shape Teams should have the choice perhaps. But that's just more lawyers sticking their fat noses in pissing on people's dreams Is some guy keels over or dies tending net for the Chicago blackhawks? They're going out at the best time in their life! NHL allows an awful lot of things going on in that back locker room that's far more dangerous than bringing out an e bug 🙄
People also forget that Ebugs know what theyre getting themselves into and usually sign contracts (even if it’s only a one day/one game contract). I can understand a couple of this guy’s takes but I don’t really get the whole Ebug thing. Especially when the solution is to bring in old retired vets? What’s the difference in a team bringing on a willing 40 something year old David Ares (who is aware that he can potentially be harmed playing) and putting in say a Post retirement 40+ years old MAF in net, who can also be harmed or face life threatening action.
OH and also it’s not even like EBUG situations are common enough to warrant a whole new spot on the roster. Let the guys live their dreams out considering the only EBUG situations I can think of they still won the damn game!
@kingpebble1035 yeah, I'm betting they need to have a current health certificate on file. I'm guessing Marc Andre Fleury might be behind this lol! He never wants to leave NHL ice! (One of my favorite all-time goalies)
Specifically fucking with the goalie, rather than just jockeying for position around the net, isn't hockey. Yeah, I goaltend, maybe I'm biased, but if you fully allow skaters to fuck around with the goalie like that then you're going to end up with a lot of guys getting a blocker or stick in the face for being dipshits. If we want respect and skill to flourish in the game, then specifically targeting the goalie like that should continue to be Unsportsmanlike Conduct.
There is exactly one thing I agree with here: The Offside tweak. If the offside entry didn't lead to an immediate goal, then it evidently didn't impact play significantly. If you can't clear the puck in 20 seconds, then it isn't because one guy had a skate over the line a third of a minute ago.
I love all of these. I'd like to suggest my own, when goalie's take a penalty, they have to serve it! If the team has another on the bench they can put them in while the one the takes the PIM goes to the box. They can be swapped back at the end of the period or during a TO.
Cool video. Very insightful! I have 2 ideas. 1) Only a certain amount of icing calls per period / game for either team. Any icing above set limit results in a penalty. 2) Higher glass...with tops curved inward toward ice surface. Not quite "bubble hockey" though. May decrease stoppages / delays of overall game flow.
I think the biggest change the NHL needs to make for the penalty shot rule is implement the IIHF rule where any player is eligible to take the penalty shot not just person who was awarded it all penalties also should not end when you score a power-play goal. Every penalty should be two minutes or four minutes or five if it’s a major.
I'd also add that a shorthanded goal should end the powerplay. Also I'd modify #13 slightly with the added exception that if the defending team gains and losses possession within those 20 seconds then the goal can't be challenged as well.
I like the idea of short handed goals ending a PP. I think the PWHL is doing this, and from what I know it doesn’t change the game too much but it’s a nice addition.
It’s the jailbreak rule. I’m not a fan as it seems quite gimmicky and punishing. Plus you’d miss out on the rare but remarkable 2 shorties on the same PK
All of these are very solid, but I think the icings on powerplays present some unique situations in games, and allowing for both the offensive and defensive teams to ice the puck could radically benefit the faster offensive players and lead to some unfortunate boarding incidents. My favourite is hands down the dressing of healthy scratches mid-game. It honestly shocks me that it hasn't been implemented already. Imagine all of the cool stories that could happen with a scratched player coming in for overtime and scoring a huge playoff goal. That would unreal.
one rule that would have to be carried over from sports like Baseball and Soccer that have similar substitutions if that were a rule is once a player who leaves the game with an injury is substituted, they're done for the night and can't return, just like in those other sports that allow that.
Speaking from the context of a 30 plus year amateur ref: Hockey is a game of endurance and flow, less stoppages of play are better, less penalties etc. Like the premise of this discussion. All the rules enacted have a basis in game situations at that time. Avery's antics are a prime example, it was so against the grain of play at that time and he was truly hated by so many, they just wanted to shut him down. It is no longer a relevant rule. Play has changed in front of the net so much since that era, that is literally what everyone is doing all the time now anyway. Shooting the puck out by a defending D has to stay for good reason. D men shoot it over the glass when under pressure to stop play. It happened constantly, it was called the Jacques Laperriere (sp sorry) because he was so good at it. Heading the puck is a non-starter. Tinting the visor cannot be allowed, speaking from a player's perspective on this one and yes, you do watch the opposing player's eyes constantly when your back is to the play. Can we anoint this one the Ovi Rule? Feels right, he certainly deserves the credit. Clear visors only IMO. You raise a valid point on emergency goalies from a safety standpoint. There are always local pros around and a team could have one on standby, he dresses when the backup goes in. I would like that job for the free ticket. Goalies should not serve penalties, another unnecessary long stoppage. The blood rule I agree high sticks are double a minor period. It is a very dangerous play, as kids growing up playing 'The Game' it was pounded into our heads that no matter what happened we were responsible for our sticks, no excuses ever. This attitude came from the no helmet era. A 'Stick Man' was disliked by both opponents and your own team, you waved your stick around you got tuned immediately, no weight class rule on that tilt. Helmets and masks brought the sticks up unfortunately, as a ref when the sticks came up my arm went up. Running the goalie goes against my feel for the game. Not sure how to deal with that , almost no one did it when there were steel posts. that is for sure. The first move away form steel posts were magnets before the current rubber ones. For those of you new to the game all these rule changes came about to try and keep the game moving, I truly dislike all the stoppages. In the past there were no commercials during play, you hit the bathroom at intermission, beer drinking had a more strategic approach. That was many moons ago. A prime example of a positive rule change was the 'Kevin Lowe' rule: A hand pass in your own zone was a stoppage, as soon as he was under pressure and did not see an outlet pass as he could no longer shout it over the glass (see what I did there) he would reach down and touch the puck with his glove, instant face-off. My personal favourite was the 'Tony Esposito' rule: He was one of the first floppers and he invited the shooter to aim for the five hole. Turns he had some black mesh in the crotch of his black pants. New rule, no mesh. Another one was no open palms in your gloves. There was a line brawl during a game in the six team NHL with TO. Carl Brewer had been cutting the palms out of his gloves and holding guys but the ref could not spot it because the glove looked open. While cleaning up all the gloves the ref (Vern Buffy) noted a brand new pair of gloves had the palms cutout, Busted. That was fun, new subscriber here.
As an IIHF hockey fan, here are some things about the international game that might interest you... #1 - if a team is awarded a penalty shot, anyone from the team can be elected to take the shot; it does not have to be the fouled player. #7 - the only thing I don't like about this is that it sounds like a team can just keep taking penalties to extend a game. #11 - in IIHF play, you can have 3 goalies on your roster. However, whoever you list as the third one for a given game, can only dress and come into the game if your starter and backup are both injured. #12 - this is legal as long as you didn't use your head to propel the puck into the net. Based on 8:54, the first goal shown wouldn't count, but it looks like the second one would.
If there's one thing I know about IT there's about a 99% chance that whatever issue their database had with 0 and 00 probably still persists to this day since it's probably the same system that's just been updated the bare minimum.
Good call on the power play to start a period-- that just helps the PK with the period opening face-off being at center. Also, I like what college and junior teams do with rosters where they have the extra skater allowed-- so maybe just add the extra skater rather than having one on standby.
I dont see anyone talking about the visors. Encouraging unique styles is what the game needs. When i was a kid i loved Subban's aviator style visor, thought it was the coolest thing ever. Could help engage the younger audience a ton
On fights after "clean hits", hard disagree. The main purpose of fighting in hockey is that if the referees miss calls, the players can take justice into their own hands. The rule you propose would kill that, and then you might as well remove fighting completely. What I would change: 1. Teams should be able to challenge a missed minor penalty call if it led to a goal being scored. 2. The first failed coach challenge in a game should spend a timeout, further ones result in a delay of game penalty. 3. A player can only be called offside when he receives a pass. When a player skates in or out of the zone with the puck, there is no offside no matter what. 4. Abolish the trapezoid. 5. Probably the most controversial: after the puck is dumped, if the defending team's player gets the puck first, he can ice it without penalty (passing it to a teammate waives that right). 6. The rule that if a team starts a period shorthanded, the starting faceoff should be in its zone is used in the KHL and it's great. Totally bring it in. 7. Agree about an option of a PP over a penalty shot, I think that's also a thing in the KHL rulebook though I've never seen it used. 8. On puck over glass, I think a penalty everywhere is too harsh, but the faceoff should be in a zone behind where you've done it (in the neutral zone if the puck was shot from the opponent's zone, and in the team's own zone if it was shot from the neutral zone). 9. For rosters, the KHL allows teams to dress 20 skaters, who are usually used for an extra forward and defenceman that don't fit into the line structure. Also, teams are allowed to have a third goalie who can only be dressed if the other two are injured. You could do that. Bonus (as it's league structure and not the game itself): if a team drafts first overall, it should not be able to draft in the top three for three next drafts. For second overall, two drafts. For third overall, the next draft. That would disincentivize tanking, especially multi-year tanking campaigns hiding under the euphemism of "rebuilding".
Regarding fights after hits, I agree, the main issue is there's too many hits in that grey area where it's a question as to who instigated the fight? Was it the goon attacking after a borderline clean hit? Or a goon doing a borderline dirty hit and getting roughed up for his goonery? Sometimes it's hard to tell. A play like what happened with Derek Forbort in a recent game vs the Red Wings is another matter, there a player was roughing Forbort up, and holding Forbort and his stick so the d-man couldn't play his position, eventually forcing him to fight just to force a stoppage so he'd not get caught out of position and risk allowing a goal. That's blatant instigating, and blatant roughing, holding, interference and several other possible extra 2 minutes the ref could have his pick among for plays like that.
For goal diversity I think the Sean Avery rule might be good. Seems like nowdays deflections, screens, and backdoors are the most common type of goal. If we 'buff' screening it, offense might converge on a winning strategy.
I hate the offside challenge too, but it's really hard to fix. The "20 seconds" limit would just add the clock as another element to be reviewed in frame-by-frame replays.
Agreed, and any fan of a team that's lost a playoff game to an offside goal would agree those goals should not count. My own Canucks have definitely lost playoff games and series to offside goals.
its a crowd pleaser, but the devils (?) playing the mario one-up sound after the PK is an advantage. They don't do it for the other team. And in a loud game, is a clear advantage
With rule change 7, i would include 3rd periods as well (if the game is tied or the team taking a penalty is leading by 1). No stupid penalties with 10 seconds left that stop a good scoring chance because who cares.
About a week ago(ish) the Blue Jackets took a penalty in OT on a breakaway. I don't know the PP in OT stats, but I feel like that would have to be stronger than a penalty shot.
Honestly great video, highsticks piss me off more than anything, and the other ones make sense too. Also appreciate its not just league format bs. Maybe another recent one from the Oilers/Leafs game this week was that the leafs took a full timeout, before challenging the play. Delayed the game a bunch. If part of the challenge is having to challenge in time, you shouldn't be allowed a full minute to decide if you want to challenge, or maybe im just salty as an oilers fan and everyone should use it more.
I forgot who or when it was but I remember some player purposely hooking and restraining Johnny Gaudreau because there was 3 seconds left in OT, so I think that’d be a great rule
For your suggestion regarding offside challenges, 20 seconds of zone time seems more like an arbitrary cutoff than any sort of happy anything. Make it so if the defending team gains possession of the puck any challenges are nullified -- much more black and white.
The offside challenge is my main gripe with the league right now. I think they should set a 2 minute timer, and if they don’t have a definitive call, the call made on the ice should stand. I’ve also heard people suggest that slowing down replays should not happen during the regular season, if you can’t decide without slowing it down, maybe the call on the ice should stand.
I agree 1000% that retro-offside is the worst. Offside that is only called AFTER a goal is scored because of a challenge violates causality and is completely bogus. Either live with the call in real time, or (if they must) have a camera crew monitoring EVERY zone entry and blow the whistle within x number of seconds if deemed offside. The outcome of an entry - a goal - should never determine the legality of what transpired earlier in the game, especially when minutes of subsequent play renders the exact circumstances of the entry irrelevant.
Agree with no slow-mo replays for offside reviews. If it is so close that you need to go frame-by-frame to see if there is a pixel of white between the skate blade and the line, it was clearly too close to have affected the play.
A missed penalty shot should turn into a minor power play. It doesn’t make sense that we give a penalty shot for the most egregious (in terms of scoring opportunity) penalties but then the momentum is gone in seconds after the goalie saves the shootout (which happens a majority of the time).
Excellent video: 1. I would keep the penalty shot attempt mandatory but if the attempt were to fail, I would just award the power play anyways. Obviously if the penalty shot is successful, the power play goes away. 2. Agree. People forget that until the mid 1990s, a high stick drawing blood was a 5 minute major and game misconduct. The rule is still stupid as is but better than that. I would keep the default penalty at 2 minutes. I wouldn’t impose a major for diving but I would increase postgame fines 3. Agree in spirit but not totally. At the end of the day regardless of if we want to admit it or not, literal milliseconds and millimeters separate legal hits from illegal hits. If the hit is unquestionably legal with the puck on the victim’s stick with no head contact whatsoever, then I would impose retaliatory penalties. I would go beyond the minors for delay of game and instigating by adding 4 minutes for roughing and a game misconduct to the retaliator to create an 8 minute power play that can result in unlimited goals for the opponent. If there is head contact on a legal hit or the hit otherwise could look illegal to a reasonable player, I would just impose the standard instigator. Sounds complicated but it needs to be. 4. 1,000% agree. If you don’t like getting distracted, too bad so sad. Ridiculous that the NHL stopped players from replacing Avery’s genius. 5. This seems like common sense. Special teams are special for a reason. Doesn’t make sense that you can ice the puck on the PK but not on the PP. 6. I wish this wasn’t a hot take because it sounds so basic. Doesn’t make sense to move the face-off to center ice to start a power play just because you had the miraculous fortune of taking the penalty at the end of the period. 7. 1,000% yes. Such a stupid loophole that you can literally mug a guy to stop a game winning goal but you don’t have to pay the price just because the overtime period ended. I would extend this rule to the 3rd period as well. That way if the refs correctly called Garland mugging McDavid 2 weeks ago, the Oilers would get a full 2 minutes including the time after regulation to tie the game. McDavid still deserved every bit of the suspension but still, he wouldn’t have resorted to a crosscheck to the head had the refs not done their job. 8. Common sense. A high stick is a high stick. 9. Also common sense. If the puck goes over the glass while not touching anything, the puck goes over the glass without touching anything. It’s stupid to have a zone distinction. Raising the height of the glass is also common sense 10. Only for major penalties resulting in an injury that forces a player from the game. You are correct that this makes no sense to extend to the offending team. If you do something dirty, both you and your team’s roster construction should be punished as it currently is. Teams shouldn’t have to make line adjustments because they lost a player to a dirty hit. 11. Absolutely. EBUG’s don’t make sense. I like the idea of semi-retired goalies being the 3rd option. 12. Rule of cool for the win. Andrew Shaw would agree with this. 13. Get rid of coaches challenges all together and do what the NFL does with scoring plays. No reason in 2025 to not have every goal scored reviewed in Toronto at the situation room. Also, shorten the zone entry threshold to 10 seconds. 14. Number restrictions other than triple digits and above in sports make no sense. 15. If the goalie is the leader of his team, he’s the leader of his team. What the NHL did to Luongo and the Canucks was horrible. Bonus: Agree. Apparently Brodeur was a whiner 😂 My ideas related to player safety: 1. Crosscheck to the head or neck area is an automatic major penalty and game misconduct. Inconceivable that this isn’t already a thing. Bare minimum fine from player safety too 2. Get rid of “distance traveled” for charging and instead keep the rule to leaving your feet prior to contact. This current standard artificially reduces physicality in the game today. I thing you should be able to skate as hard as you want and how far you want to be able to crush people as long as you don’t do something else illegal like jump, throw an elbow, hit the player into the boards, or hit him long after the puck is gone. Suck it, Habs fans: Scheifele blowing up Evans is by far my favorite hit in NHL history that should have been deemed a clean hit. I smiled ear to ear seeing that. Shame Evans got hurt but that’s life. 3. Add a minor penalty for checking from behind in the open ice. Sometimes a player will see numbers in the open ice and still throw a hit. The refs won’t call it because they don’t want to give game misconducts for an open ice hit that is just from behind and not otherwise illegal. A minor penalty bridges these sneaky plays. 4. Go back to 2010 when the default penalty for an illegal check to the head was a major and game misconduct. It of course gets reviewed on ice like all major penalties do. Keep the option to reduce to a minor penalty or rescind all together as well. You can even upgrade to a match penalty if in the eyes of the ref, the hit cannot be partially defended as either reckless, negligent, careless, or irresponsible but instead is unambiguously an intent to injure. Gallagher on Pelech and McAvoy on OEL last year are the two rare examples of a headshot with clear intent to injure. 5. 7 minutes of power play time for match penalties. Match penalties are intent to injure and go beyond just a major penalty. As such, they should result in slightly more power play time.
I've always believed that if you score during a delayed penalty with your goalie pulled you should still get the power play after. It never made sense to me that it gets cancelled out, 6 on 5 is very different than a 2 minute standard power play.
4:12 If the goalie’s in the crease, the rule should be that you can’t touch the goalie, full stop. Bumps, sticks to the mask, slashes, and jamming the pads should be a face off in the same d-zone. The crease needs to mean something
Hot take: Laying a huge hit on someoneone warrants needing to fight. If you're going to run around and lay hits that have a lilelihood of injuring someone, you should have to answer the bell. Don't just hit someone and then turtle when someone gets rough with you
Love your point there. Fighting is also one of the most notable things for non-hockey fans. More frequent fighting could lead to casual fans tuning in more often. Also, allowing fighting without the instigator penalty does slow the game down but increases the games intensity if anything.
I've said it before that I think that 7 should also count if the game is within 1 within 2 minutes of the end of the game. I.e. the penalty has to be killed off before the game ends.
That's actually a rule in football, both CFL and NFL. The game can't end on a penalty call, so even if there's no time on the click, if a penalty was called on the final play, and is not declined, they have to run another last play. My fav team, the BC Lions, once won a game because of that. They were down, and pressing late, time expired, but the other team took a penalty, which the Lions obviously accepted. Even though there was no time on the clock, because there was a penalty on the play, they got to run the play again, even on the expired clock, and that also ended up in the other team taking another penalty, and again, 3 times in total, they had the no clock plays end in penalties, then finally the Lions got to run a play clean with no penalties and scored a touchdown to win the game! Was a crazy finish.
HOT TAKE: linesmans primary job is still icing, offside, faceoffs. BUT can call penalties behind the play. Let the refs keep up with the play, were the majority of offenses happen.
12:43 in addition to getting rid of the trapezoid, when a goaltender has both skates below the icing line, he's nothing more than a defenseman and shouldn't be given ANY special protections! The Hextals and Brodures in the League are going to figure it out quick! The rest of them can just stay in their crease and let the offense continue.
I like how I have an opposite opinion on the Delay Of Game by shooting the puck over the glass rule. I personally think it should be reworked so that it's exclusively on repeat offences, because one weird shot in your zone to get the puck away and getting a penalty because of a misfire is dumb, but if it happens twice, then it's obvious that they're delaying the game. On another note, I honestly think that icing the puck multiple times in quick succession needs to qualify as DoG. I don't know exactly how this rule would be implemented, but a team icing the puck 5 times in a minute are clearly trying to delay the game
I have had the same opinion on most of these suggestions. Namely the Michigan rule. While I dont particularly like the Michigan play in general, I think it has a place where no contact is made with the goalies head while doing so. My rule suggestion would be adding a "chaser" during the shootout to simulate game action shootout plays. Puck carrier starts at the red line with the puck, defender starts at the far blue line. When the whistle blows the chaser is allowed to chase the attacker down and disrupt the play if they are able to catch up. This discourages the "allstar shoootout challenge" type goals that are usually slow and not very exciting to watch. If the player is interfered with, then they are awarded a defender-free shot with a shot clock, as if to simulate a breakaway in the dying seconds of a period.
I'd love the excitement of the healthy scratch rushing down from the box to get dressed and in the game as fast as possible for the unexpected opportunity... like a WWE run in omg it's Matthews! And we thought that he was still injured or something!
with 13, I would go further and suggest judging it by the spirit over the law, if a player is offside and it's not called, and they never actually got involved with the play, it shouldn't count as offside. like if they were to skate in offside but just sit at the point and the goal is scored 5 seconds later, they shouldn't be counted as part of the play. Same with players getting off the ice in the second period when they can technically put the play offside if they still have a skate on the ice.
There should be less neutral zone face-offs. Treat every offside like it was done intentionally, and bring the face-off back to the offending teams' defensive zone
Came here to say we need a statute of limitations on uncalled offsides; I was going to say 30 seconds but honestly 20 is better. It's not a rule that's possible to exploit, and when ancient history can affect current plays it's a huge waste of time and is completely unfair to the team who scored a goal on what really shouldn't even be considered the same play most of the time.
I think for the penalty shot they should award the penalty shot but if the shot is missed the team is still awarded a power play. That way there is no down side to awarding the penalty shot.
Hard disagree for #4, if that was allowed we would see it multiple times every game. What's stopping the opposing player from sticking their glove right in front of the goalie's mask while outside of the crease? There are players whose sole objective every play is to screen the goalie. Instead of doing that, why not just have the guy wave both gloves in front of the goalie's eyes every play? Imagine a player like Matt Rempe doing that every time he's on the ice. I think it would ruin the game if that was allowed.
They need to fix the goalie interference. Seems that the video reviews always gets it wrong. Players let themselves pushed into goalies, push defenceman into goalies, crash the net and argue they ran out of room. The instigator rule is not used except to get the call wrong. So many players get jumped now for clean hits. Should make one of the team roster player dress up for emergency goalie.
Adopt the PWHL jailbreak rule (a shorthanded goal terminates the penalty), and "no escape rule" (when a penalty is called against a team their players on the ice must stay on the ice at the puck drop, similar to an icing)
seem like mostly good changes. I do think its fair to not allow visors that make it impossible for a goalie to see someones eyes tho, that seems like itd be very important for goalies
As a goalie, it's not. You're supposed to be watching the puck, to make sure you can track it from release. If you're watching a players eyes you're going to get lit up.
@nollidgestm1238 I guarantee you he was not and just said it because he didn't like the visor. It's goaltending 101, the best goalies always have elite puck tracking. On top of that any player with even halfway decent shooting skills isn't going to be looking where they shoot anyway. He was just posturing.
Stick on stick slashes only really get called when the one stick breaks. Doesn't seem fair that a flimsy or previously damaged stick affects penalties so much
I'm not fully on board with doing away with the Avery Rule, though maybe move it it to the 10 minute misconduct rule instead to punish the player and not the entire team. The fighting after a hit one is a bit of a grey area as what's a clean hit and what's a dirty hit does have a grey area on the borderlines between the 2, so was the fight instigated by a dirty hit, or a goon attacking a guy after a clean hit? That's hard to say. However if a play like what happened in a recent Canucks game where Derek Forbort was basically forced to fight a Wing's player when the guy grabbed a hold of Forbort's stick and kept mugging the d-man until he had no choice but to drop the gloves just to force a stoppage in play since he couldn't play defense with a good up in his grill, that's pretty obvious case of instigating a fight, along with holding, roughing and several other infractions the refs could have also called as an extra 2 minutes for that crap. And 100% on calling the rules in the books consistently and by the books. If it's a rule, call it. That's the REAL "let them play the game" is the NHL game as defined in the NHL rulebook. Play the game does not and should not mean the refs call no penalties even one is committed, as an uncalled penalty can and often does decide the outcome and when the refs are either calling phantom penalties or refusing to call blatant penalties, they are absolutely deciding the outcome of the game and NOT letting them play the game. Last I checked, punching, elbowing, kneeing, hitting from behind, charging, hitting with the stick, grabbing a hold of players or any piece of their equipment, tripping, hooking, and hitting players away from the puck are all clearly defined as not being a legal part of the game, so should be called when they occur. If that were a consistent policy, and each ref called it consistently, we'd have a lot fewer games devolve into brawls as the players get increasingly frustrated with inconsistent officiating as the same action is a penalty one play, and not another play, or is a penalty if Player/Team A does it, but not if Player/Team B does it. You would likely see fewer penalties being committed during the course of a game after an adjustment period as players get to know each ref's habits and what the threshold is between what is and is not a penalty for each ref in that grey area. Personalities will play a factor as some refs may be a bit more lenient then others, but as long as they're consistently calling it a certain way, players can adjust for it and play accordingly.
SHGs should end a power play. Penalty Kills would be more aggressive and more fun to watch and the way I see it. Also like you said earlier, teams should choose between a PP or Penalty Shot and if a coach knew that allowing a SHG would end his PP.......
idk how to fix it. But a player getting hit, and keeping their head down to draw a major, only to then be back on the ice a couple minutes later has to stop. Its a mockery of the game
The penalty shot should be select the player. Problem with the high stick no blood proposal. Every high stick being 4 minutes would destroy the pace of the game. A lot high stick calls are results of; stick lift miss, sticks rebounding off of other equipment or the boards in to the player, another player moves their head just at the wrong time, both players collide and the stick just collides. With your proposal, the Michigan high stick call would turn into 4 minutes, thus adding significant risk to the play. Hard disagree with the "Sean Avery" since it puts the player at risk for the puck smacking them in the back of the head. Hard disagree with the Power Play Icing. The attacking team could ice it by choice to do set ups without any worry. The delay of game over the boards SHOULD be shooting into the bench on purpose should be a penalty. The EBUG is so rare that it's not worth worrying over. It also makes for great stories and draws in far more attention to the sport. The League should be able to review offside plays as play goes on, thus negating the whole wait 20+ seconds.
You missed the best one! If a team scores during a delayed penalty call the penalty is still incurred. It is not a power play yet since the team pulls the goalie for an extra attacker. They should not be punished for scoring
Yeah, number 4 has to stay. Anyone who has tried to play goalie would agree. Having a player block vision is on thing. But to stand and wave your stick in the eyes of the goalie is insane and can never be allowed. A big part of tracking the puck on a play is tracking movement, having a stick or hand waved 2 inches from your face would make that literally impossible. There is a reason it was instantly banned
Isnt screening the conventional way the exact same though? Also the whole purpose of screening is to stop the goalie from seeing I'm asking genuinely I'm not a goalie
@bruce4139 It's the difference between someone standing a foot away from you and being able to move you head to look around them vs someone standing a foot away from you holding thier hand 1 inch from your face. There is just no physical way to move your head fast enough to get out from behind thier hands. I don't even have a problem with them facing you when they screen if they want. It's just the waving stick and hands in the face that take it way to far and make it impossible to see/stop the puck
@bencurren7190 can you step back in your crease then? Because as far as I understand if a goal goes in while a player of the offending team is in the crease it's a no goal
Disagree on the michigan one. If a goalie blocks the net with his face then why would that be a penalty? If a goalie tries to freeze the puck by laying on it with his head you arent gonna penalize the player for hitting his helmet trying to dislodge the puck
I hate watching powerplays in overtime - I think all penalties in OT should be an automatic penalty shot. Double-minors and majors could be 2 or 3 shots if necessary.
I think the delayed offside review should only be able to be called for a short ammount of time like 10 seconds. After 10 seconds you cannot use it to call back a goal. I hate them going back 2 minutes and calling off goals its no longer part of the play.
Reviewed offsides drive me nuts with the multiple angle, super slow mo, mega zoom, continuous replay. How about the refs get two angles. One down each end of the blue line, get full speed, 2 or 3 looks. If you cant tell at full speed, the call stands. Another reason I hate it, team enters offsides, forces defending team into an icing, why not review that offsides as the icing shouldn't have happened then.
Hadn't thought of that PP in OT rule change. I like it. Want it. Maybe don't need it. I do need time limited offsides review. To be clear, the reviewing should be limited not the time before scoring. Last but of interest, I am fully in favor of abolishing the Avery rule. Even though, as a goalie, I found that display unsettling, we want more scoring. Goalies just gotta smarten up and deal with it. I also think such an offender might have to answer for it.
HARD disagree with icing on the penalty kill. That removed a large bit of counterplay for the penalty killing team, and it would force the defending team to try to break through the zone with a man down, which is really risky. It would make the power play so stupid.
The team broke the rules and has to play without a player. Why do they get an even playing field when they broke the rules?
@@Jake_Broerthere has to be some kind of counterplay for the powerplay. You shouldn’t be given a free goal because a guy accidentally hit a player in the nose with a stick or flipped the puck over the ice
@@Jake_Broer First sometimes penalties aren't an intentional play. Second it's not the enter team's fault if one person throws a bad hit or sends the puck at a bad angle. Third it doesn't even the field completely, just makes it more of a play and less of an auto-goal. Fourth, line changes for the defending team would become an issue especially for less good teams if they don't have any way of leaving their defensive zone besides puck carrying.
@@Jake_Broer Your argument is essentially just that the team deserves the penalty therefore they deserve any punishment. But if that’s the case, why isn’t a penalty just an automatic goal? Clearly there’s a desire to still give the offending team the chance to redeem themselves. So simply claiming that the penalty kill team deserves any punishment therefore they deserve to not ice the puck isn’t a good argument.
One thing I've been seeing a lot this year is the refs having to sort out who is supposed to be on the ice after an icing. It wastes time and completely defeats the purpose of an icing. These guys are professional players, and they know whether they were on the ice or not when the puck was iced. They should have a max amount of time to get the right guys on the ice before getting a delay of game. Otherwise these situations where guys are sitting on the bench waiting for the ref to come get them means the team that iced the puck doesn't have to deal with the lack of a cool down period between shifts.
I don't like the idea of changing the Sean Avery rule as a blanket. If you allow the player to face the goalie and lift his arms, but you have to keep your stick down, that would be fine. But you shouldn't be allowed to swing your stick like he was doing. Defending players should be able to move through the ice in front of the crease without having to worry that some jackass is gonna bash them in the face.
Sure, you might say that you'd call the high sticking then, but then you run the risk of players intentionally skating through to try and fish for a high sticking call. Just make the player who is doing their best Avery impression keep their stick down to head that off before it starts.
The player should show some awareness of where the puck is.
3 goalies but only during playoffs.
Usually there is a 3rd goaltender apart of the black aces during the playoffs. Just allow them to get dressed if necessary.
Get rid of the trapezoid. Pointless, most of the time goalies puck handling are their own worst enemies and it adds entertainment to the game when done well or especially when not.
That was mostly the Patrick Roy and Marty Turco rule, as those goalies were so good and aggressive at handling the puck that the teams in front of them could play the neutral zone trap to a T, force the dump and chase, and the goalie would be a 3rd defenseman clearing the puck out instantly, also neutralizing the only effective counter to the trap, essentially making those teams unbeatable not due to talent, but a quirk of the rules they were taking advantage of. Now that the rule's there, the current crop of goalies are not as good with the puck, and the neutral zone trap's not as prominent a strategy, so that rule's probably not really relevant to the present day NHL as it was in the height of the Dead Puck Era.
@@Seriously_Unserious Martin Brodeur was the reason this rule was created. Patrick Roy? thats a old choice, Turco I agree with but yeah, Brodeur was 1000% the reason for it.
@@Seriously_Unserious I know, I remember those days. It just doesn’t seem like a real problem. It just puts more legal nonsense to it
I’d allow them to play it, but they could get checked in the corners.
@@FacelessHockey Brodeur was a master at it and it was part of the Devil's strategy, no argument there. However all the teams had adopted that practice as well. The so-called dead puck era, IMO, was precipitated by the obstruction era, and the reason I stopped watching the NHL for a few decades. Hooking a holding were accepted as part of normal play and destroyed the best parts of the game. Everyone hung out between the blue line and centre ice (offside pass still in play) then grabbed a guy on the way by and hung on. It was beyond bad for the game.
Could definitely see a team picking the powerplay in overtime during the regular season. It's the most common time for a defenseman to get a penalty shot and the opportunity to go 4 on 3 is massive with the extra ice.
you know what else is massive?
Im shocked. Im with you on 14 of 15 plus the bonus. The only one I disagreed on was the EBUG rule. But I expected a bunch of terrible suggestions, and this ended up awesome. Solid work.
The EBUG from a professional view is silly but that's what makes the game that much better. I never ever ever want to see EBUGs go.
I felt the same way except that I agree with the EBUG proposal.
@@andrewrundle6896 My view on it is that if you need to dig so deep into your system to pull goalies out your ass that most likely won't perform to the same standard as your starter and backups, is it really going to hurt you that much to have a temporary guy out there that has gone through multiple auditions? It also is simply legendary and another reason the league is so much fun to follow.
At work so commenting before watching, but 2 that came to mind immediately:
when you have a power play carry over between periods, you start the next period in the offensive zone.
Offside challenges are null and void if the defending team establishes possession at any time after the entry. I personally would get rid of the challenge altogether, but at least this would somewhat prevent get out of jail free moments.
Great ideas! The power play carry over is a thing in the KHL and it's great.
1- Nope.
You start in whatever zone you were in when the previous period ended.
2- Lol, no. You were offside.
For the flow of the game it makes so much sense to do something like that for offsides. Plus how does it make sense to be able to challenge something that close, but not be able to challenge your best defensive forward getting elbowed to face, going down with a broken nose, while the other team scores because it's essentially 5 on 4 with a coverage mix up.
Couple of changes I'd do:
1) allow teams to schedule whatever uniform they want for their home games ahead of the season, and away teams get to wear whatever uniform they want in a color that contrasts enough. Bring back red Habs vs blue Leafs. Have black Kings against yellow preds, etc.
2) All-star game in september. You're more likely to know in advance who can play to make the rosters accordingly, players won't be looking to skip it to rest (you'd still be giving each team a bye week at different spots in late January or early February), it can be a great first showcase for the first overall picks and people are so desperate for hockey in september they'll actually watch it.
3) controversial one maybe, but the jailbreak goal in the PWHL is such an exciting feature. Basically, teams that are shorthanded that score a goal can free their teammate, granted that it's on a minor penalty.
4) Another PWHL special: teams that get called a penalty can't make a change before the next faceoff, like on an icing call.
5) not a rule per say, but each call that is made with video review should have an explanation sent to media. People are always confused about decisions and this could help understand why a certain goal was or wasn't called back for goalie interference
Those PWHL rules actually make a ton of sense.
Unable to change on a penalty is a terrible rule.
The point of a penalty is to punish the team by being down a player for X minutes.
It adds extra punishment for no reason.
12:09 When someone thinks they're being funny and you just smile until they leave.
Potential rule change:
Goalies must go to the bench and swap with a bk up goalie if they commit a penalty. They can then return to the net after the next stoppage of play after the penalty expires or is scored on. A substitute will still sit in the box to avoid two goalies on the ice at the same time at the expiring of said penalty time when the box opens.
Agree with most except for disrespect to e-bugs! Not random "anybody's"
season ticket holders watching the team with hockey vision.
Of course they still play.. stay in shape
Teams should have the choice perhaps. But that's just more lawyers sticking their fat noses in pissing on people's dreams
Is some guy keels over or dies tending net for the Chicago blackhawks?
They're going out at the best time in their life!
NHL allows an awful lot of things going on in that back locker room that's far more dangerous than bringing out an e bug
🙄
People also forget that Ebugs know what theyre getting themselves into and usually sign contracts (even if it’s only a one day/one game contract). I can understand a couple of this guy’s takes but I don’t really get the whole Ebug thing. Especially when the solution is to bring in old retired vets? What’s the difference in a team bringing on a willing 40 something year old David Ares (who is aware that he can potentially be harmed playing) and putting in say a Post retirement 40+ years old MAF in net, who can also be harmed or face life threatening action.
OH and also it’s not even like EBUG situations are common enough to warrant a whole new spot on the roster. Let the guys live their dreams out considering the only EBUG situations I can think of they still won the damn game!
@kingpebble1035 yeah, I'm betting they need to have a current health certificate on file.
I'm guessing Marc Andre Fleury might be behind this lol!
He never wants to leave NHL ice!
(One of my favorite all-time goalies)
Specifically fucking with the goalie, rather than just jockeying for position around the net, isn't hockey. Yeah, I goaltend, maybe I'm biased, but if you fully allow skaters to fuck around with the goalie like that then you're going to end up with a lot of guys getting a blocker or stick in the face for being dipshits.
If we want respect and skill to flourish in the game, then specifically targeting the goalie like that should continue to be Unsportsmanlike Conduct.
git gud
Its a bad look on the sport as well, you dont see shenanigans like that go on in any of the other major sports
Ive been saying number 13! The zone entry hasn't given you an advantage after that amount of time
There is exactly one thing I agree with here: The Offside tweak. If the offside entry didn't lead to an immediate goal, then it evidently didn't impact play significantly. If you can't clear the puck in 20 seconds, then it isn't because one guy had a skate over the line a third of a minute ago.
I love all of these. I'd like to suggest my own, when goalie's take a penalty, they have to serve it! If the team has another on the bench they can put them in while the one the takes the PIM goes to the box. They can be swapped back at the end of the period or during a TO.
No just have your team be empty netted for the 2 minutes if the goalie gets a penalty with him in the box
This would force a goalie to share their stats with the other goalie and is an awful idea.
@@James_Bee how so?
Cool video. Very insightful! I have 2 ideas. 1) Only a certain amount of icing calls per period / game for either team. Any icing above set limit results in a penalty. 2) Higher glass...with tops curved inward toward ice surface. Not quite "bubble hockey" though. May decrease stoppages / delays of overall game flow.
I think the biggest change the NHL needs to make for the penalty shot rule is implement the IIHF rule where any player is eligible to take the penalty shot not just person who was awarded it all penalties also should not end when you score a power-play goal. Every penalty should be two minutes or four minutes or five if it’s a major.
No way I started binging this channel this week and a new vid releases
I'd also add that a shorthanded goal should end the powerplay.
Also I'd modify #13 slightly with the added exception that if the defending team gains and losses possession within those 20 seconds then the goal can't be challenged as well.
I like the idea of short handed goals ending a PP. I think the PWHL is doing this, and from what I know it doesn’t change the game too much but it’s a nice addition.
It’s the jailbreak rule. I’m not a fan as it seems quite gimmicky and punishing. Plus you’d miss out on the rare but remarkable 2 shorties on the same PK
So excited for another banger video from the most underrated channel on UA-cam.
Best hockey content on the tube
The coach's option of penalty shot or power play is so brilliant, I'm disappointed it isn't already a thing
I saw Sheehy wearing the zero playing against the Oilers in Edmonton back in the 80s. The crowd started chanting "Zer-o Zer-o". T was pretty good.
All of these are very solid, but I think the icings on powerplays present some unique situations in games, and allowing for both the offensive and defensive teams to ice the puck could radically benefit the faster offensive players and lead to some unfortunate boarding incidents. My favourite is hands down the dressing of healthy scratches mid-game. It honestly shocks me that it hasn't been implemented already. Imagine all of the cool stories that could happen with a scratched player coming in for overtime and scoring a huge playoff goal. That would unreal.
one rule that would have to be carried over from sports like Baseball and Soccer that have similar substitutions if that were a rule is once a player who leaves the game with an injury is substituted, they're done for the night and can't return, just like in those other sports that allow that.
Speaking from the context of a 30 plus year amateur ref: Hockey is a game of endurance and flow, less stoppages of play are better, less penalties etc. Like the premise of this discussion. All the rules enacted have a basis in game situations at that time. Avery's antics are a prime example, it was so against the grain of play at that time and he was truly hated by so many, they just wanted to shut him down. It is no longer a relevant rule. Play has changed in front of the net so much since that era, that is literally what everyone is doing all the time now anyway. Shooting the puck out by a defending D has to stay for good reason. D men shoot it over the glass when under pressure to stop play. It happened constantly, it was called the Jacques Laperriere (sp sorry) because he was so good at it. Heading the puck is a non-starter. Tinting the visor cannot be allowed, speaking from a player's perspective on this one and yes, you do watch the opposing player's eyes constantly when your back is to the play. Can we anoint this one the Ovi Rule? Feels right, he certainly deserves the credit. Clear visors only IMO. You raise a valid point on emergency goalies from a safety standpoint. There are always local pros around and a team could have one on standby, he dresses when the backup goes in. I would like that job for the free ticket. Goalies should not serve penalties, another unnecessary long stoppage. The blood rule I agree high sticks are double a minor period. It is a very dangerous play, as kids growing up playing 'The Game' it was pounded into our heads that no matter what happened we were responsible for our sticks, no excuses ever. This attitude came from the no helmet era. A 'Stick Man' was disliked by both opponents and your own team, you waved your stick around you got tuned immediately, no weight class rule on that tilt. Helmets and masks brought the sticks up unfortunately, as a ref when the sticks came up my arm went up. Running the goalie goes against my feel for the game. Not sure how to deal with that , almost no one did it when there were steel posts. that is for sure. The first move away form steel posts were magnets before the current rubber ones.
For those of you new to the game all these rule changes came about to try and keep the game moving, I truly dislike all the stoppages. In the past there were no commercials during play, you hit the bathroom at intermission, beer drinking had a more strategic approach. That was many moons ago. A prime example of a positive rule change was the 'Kevin Lowe' rule: A hand pass in your own zone was a stoppage, as soon as he was under pressure and did not see an outlet pass as he could no longer shout it over the glass (see what I did there) he would reach down and touch the puck with his glove, instant face-off. My personal favourite was the 'Tony Esposito' rule: He was one of the first floppers and he invited the shooter to aim for the five hole. Turns he had some black mesh in the crotch of his black pants. New rule, no mesh. Another one was no open palms in your gloves. There was a line brawl during a game in the six team NHL with TO. Carl Brewer had been cutting the palms out of his gloves and holding guys but the ref could not spot it because the glove looked open. While cleaning up all the gloves the ref (Vern Buffy) noted a brand new pair of gloves had the palms cutout, Busted. That was fun, new subscriber here.
As an IIHF hockey fan, here are some things about the international game that might interest you...
#1 - if a team is awarded a penalty shot, anyone from the team can be elected to take the shot; it does not have to be the fouled player.
#7 - the only thing I don't like about this is that it sounds like a team can just keep taking penalties to extend a game.
#11 - in IIHF play, you can have 3 goalies on your roster. However, whoever you list as the third one for a given game, can only dress and come into the game if your starter and backup are both injured.
#12 - this is legal as long as you didn't use your head to propel the puck into the net. Based on 8:54, the first goal shown wouldn't count, but it looks like the second one would.
If there's one thing I know about IT there's about a 99% chance that whatever issue their database had with 0 and 00 probably still persists to this day since it's probably the same system that's just been updated the bare minimum.
So you think they are still recording the numbers as integers instead of strings/varchars?
@plaidchuck probably. There's often very little motivation to change something as long as it 'works'.
Good call on the power play to start a period-- that just helps the PK with the period opening face-off being at center.
Also, I like what college and junior teams do with rosters where they have the extra skater allowed-- so maybe just add the extra skater rather than having one on standby.
Lmao I was watching a past video and jumped when I saw this new one
I dont see anyone talking about the visors. Encouraging unique styles is what the game needs. When i was a kid i loved Subban's aviator style visor, thought it was the coolest thing ever. Could help engage the younger audience a ton
On fights after "clean hits", hard disagree. The main purpose of fighting in hockey is that if the referees miss calls, the players can take justice into their own hands. The rule you propose would kill that, and then you might as well remove fighting completely. What I would change:
1. Teams should be able to challenge a missed minor penalty call if it led to a goal being scored.
2. The first failed coach challenge in a game should spend a timeout, further ones result in a delay of game penalty.
3. A player can only be called offside when he receives a pass. When a player skates in or out of the zone with the puck, there is no offside no matter what.
4. Abolish the trapezoid.
5. Probably the most controversial: after the puck is dumped, if the defending team's player gets the puck first, he can ice it without penalty (passing it to a teammate waives that right).
6. The rule that if a team starts a period shorthanded, the starting faceoff should be in its zone is used in the KHL and it's great. Totally bring it in.
7. Agree about an option of a PP over a penalty shot, I think that's also a thing in the KHL rulebook though I've never seen it used.
8. On puck over glass, I think a penalty everywhere is too harsh, but the faceoff should be in a zone behind where you've done it (in the neutral zone if the puck was shot from the opponent's zone, and in the team's own zone if it was shot from the neutral zone).
9. For rosters, the KHL allows teams to dress 20 skaters, who are usually used for an extra forward and defenceman that don't fit into the line structure. Also, teams are allowed to have a third goalie who can only be dressed if the other two are injured. You could do that.
Bonus (as it's league structure and not the game itself): if a team drafts first overall, it should not be able to draft in the top three for three next drafts. For second overall, two drafts. For third overall, the next draft. That would disincentivize tanking, especially multi-year tanking campaigns hiding under the euphemism of "rebuilding".
Regarding fights after hits, I agree, the main issue is there's too many hits in that grey area where it's a question as to who instigated the fight? Was it the goon attacking after a borderline clean hit? Or a goon doing a borderline dirty hit and getting roughed up for his goonery? Sometimes it's hard to tell. A play like what happened with Derek Forbort in a recent game vs the Red Wings is another matter, there a player was roughing Forbort up, and holding Forbort and his stick so the d-man couldn't play his position, eventually forcing him to fight just to force a stoppage so he'd not get caught out of position and risk allowing a goal. That's blatant instigating, and blatant roughing, holding, interference and several other possible extra 2 minutes the ref could have his pick among for plays like that.
For goal diversity I think the Sean Avery rule might be good. Seems like nowdays deflections, screens, and backdoors are the most common type of goal. If we 'buff' screening it, offense might converge on a winning strategy.
Pls upload more I love this content
Your statement on EBUGS showcase a fair amount of ignorance. EBUGS are sought out and signed by the home team. It is not a random selection.
I hate the offside challenge too, but it's really hard to fix. The "20 seconds" limit would just add the clock as another element to be reviewed in frame-by-frame replays.
Agreed, and any fan of a team that's lost a playoff game to an offside goal would agree those goals should not count. My own Canucks have definitely lost playoff games and series to offside goals.
its a crowd pleaser, but the devils (?) playing the mario one-up sound after the PK is an advantage. They don't do it for the other team. And in a loud game, is a clear advantage
Yeah that shouldnt be allowed. Thats why traditionally the goalie slaps the stick on the ice at the end of a pp
With rule change 7, i would include 3rd periods as well (if the game is tied or the team taking a penalty is leading by 1). No stupid penalties with 10 seconds left that stop a good scoring chance because who cares.
Full face visor mandatory and applying all the rules evenly mo matter what
About a week ago(ish) the Blue Jackets took a penalty in OT on a breakaway. I don't know the PP in OT stats, but I feel like that would have to be stronger than a penalty shot.
I think almost every one of those is a great idea and should be implemented.
Honestly great video, highsticks piss me off more than anything, and the other ones make sense too. Also appreciate its not just league format bs.
Maybe another recent one from the Oilers/Leafs game this week was that the leafs took a full timeout, before challenging the play. Delayed the game a bunch. If part of the challenge is having to challenge in time, you shouldn't be allowed a full minute to decide if you want to challenge, or maybe im just salty as an oilers fan and everyone should use it more.
I forgot who or when it was but I remember some player purposely hooking and restraining Johnny Gaudreau because there was 3 seconds left in OT, so I think that’d be a great rule
For your suggestion regarding offside challenges, 20 seconds of zone time seems more like an arbitrary cutoff than any sort of happy anything. Make it so if the defending team gains possession of the puck any challenges are nullified -- much more black and white.
Brodeur’s objection to tinted visors likely had more to do with the skaters telegraphing their shots than personality.
The offside challenge is my main gripe with the league right now. I think they should set a 2 minute timer, and if they don’t have a definitive call, the call made on the ice should stand. I’ve also heard people suggest that slowing down replays should not happen during the regular season, if you can’t decide without slowing it down, maybe the call on the ice should stand.
No. Offside is offside
I agree 1000% that retro-offside is the worst. Offside that is only called AFTER a goal is scored because of a challenge violates causality and is completely bogus. Either live with the call in real time, or (if they must) have a camera crew monitoring EVERY zone entry and blow the whistle within x number of seconds if deemed offside. The outcome of an entry - a goal - should never determine the legality of what transpired earlier in the game, especially when minutes of subsequent play renders the exact circumstances of the entry irrelevant.
Agree with no slow-mo replays for offside reviews. If it is so close that you need to go frame-by-frame to see if there is a pixel of white between the skate blade and the line, it was clearly too close to have affected the play.
@@DanOCan Exactly. The truth of your point should be obvious to all, but apparently it is not.
A missed penalty shot should turn into a minor power play.
It doesn’t make sense that we give a penalty shot for the most egregious (in terms of scoring opportunity) penalties but then the momentum is gone in seconds after the goalie saves the shootout (which happens a majority of the time).
I would like to see nhl add the jailbreak rule from pwhl. More incentive for shorthand goals
Horrible rule.
Bring back the Blackout Ovi visor. A total blackout fit (visor, helmet, screaming eagles) night would be menacing and insane
Excellent video:
1. I would keep the penalty shot attempt mandatory but if the attempt were to fail, I would just award the power play anyways. Obviously if the penalty shot is successful, the power play goes away.
2. Agree. People forget that until the mid 1990s, a high stick drawing blood was a 5 minute major and game misconduct. The rule is still stupid as is but better than that. I would keep the default penalty at 2 minutes. I wouldn’t impose a major for diving but I would increase postgame fines
3. Agree in spirit but not totally. At the end of the day regardless of if we want to admit it or not, literal milliseconds and millimeters separate legal hits from illegal hits. If the hit is unquestionably legal with the puck on the victim’s stick with no head contact whatsoever, then I would impose retaliatory penalties. I would go beyond the minors for delay of game and instigating by adding 4 minutes for roughing and a game misconduct to the retaliator to create an 8 minute power play that can result in unlimited goals for the opponent. If there is head contact on a legal hit or the hit otherwise could look illegal to a reasonable player, I would just impose the standard instigator. Sounds complicated but it needs to be.
4. 1,000% agree. If you don’t like getting distracted, too bad so sad. Ridiculous that the NHL stopped players from replacing Avery’s genius.
5. This seems like common sense. Special teams are special for a reason. Doesn’t make sense that you can ice the puck on the PK but not on the PP.
6. I wish this wasn’t a hot take because it sounds so basic. Doesn’t make sense to move the face-off to center ice to start a power play just because you had the miraculous fortune of taking the penalty at the end of the period.
7. 1,000% yes. Such a stupid loophole that you can literally mug a guy to stop a game winning goal but you don’t have to pay the price just because the overtime period ended. I would extend this rule to the 3rd period as well. That way if the refs correctly called Garland mugging McDavid 2 weeks ago, the Oilers would get a full 2 minutes including the time after regulation to tie the game. McDavid still deserved every bit of the suspension but still, he wouldn’t have resorted to a crosscheck to the head had the refs not done their job.
8. Common sense. A high stick is a high stick.
9. Also common sense. If the puck goes over the glass while not touching anything, the puck goes over the glass without touching anything. It’s stupid to have a zone distinction. Raising the height of the glass is also common sense
10. Only for major penalties resulting in an injury that forces a player from the game. You are correct that this makes no sense to extend to the offending team. If you do something dirty, both you and your team’s roster construction should be punished as it currently is. Teams shouldn’t have to make line adjustments because they lost a player to a dirty hit.
11. Absolutely. EBUG’s don’t make sense. I like the idea of semi-retired goalies being the 3rd option.
12. Rule of cool for the win. Andrew Shaw would agree with this.
13. Get rid of coaches challenges all together and do what the NFL does with scoring plays. No reason in 2025 to not have every goal scored reviewed in Toronto at the situation room. Also, shorten the zone entry threshold to 10 seconds.
14. Number restrictions other than triple digits and above in sports make no sense.
15. If the goalie is the leader of his team, he’s the leader of his team. What the NHL did to Luongo and the Canucks was horrible.
Bonus: Agree. Apparently Brodeur was a whiner 😂
My ideas related to player safety:
1. Crosscheck to the head or neck area is an automatic major penalty and game misconduct. Inconceivable that this isn’t already a thing. Bare minimum fine from player safety too
2. Get rid of “distance traveled” for charging and instead keep the rule to leaving your feet prior to contact. This current standard artificially reduces physicality in the game today. I thing you should be able to skate as hard as you want and how far you want to be able to crush people as long as you don’t do something else illegal like jump, throw an elbow, hit the player into the boards, or hit him long after the puck is gone. Suck it, Habs fans: Scheifele blowing up Evans is by far my favorite hit in NHL history that should have been deemed a clean hit. I smiled ear to ear seeing that. Shame Evans got hurt but that’s life.
3. Add a minor penalty for checking from behind in the open ice. Sometimes a player will see numbers in the open ice and still throw a hit. The refs won’t call it because they don’t want to give game misconducts for an open ice hit that is just from behind and not otherwise illegal. A minor penalty bridges these sneaky plays.
4. Go back to 2010 when the default penalty for an illegal check to the head was a major and game misconduct. It of course gets reviewed on ice like all major penalties do. Keep the option to reduce to a minor penalty or rescind all together as well. You can even upgrade to a match penalty if in the eyes of the ref, the hit cannot be partially defended as either reckless, negligent, careless, or irresponsible but instead is unambiguously an intent to injure. Gallagher on Pelech and McAvoy on OEL last year are the two rare examples of a headshot with clear intent to injure.
5. 7 minutes of power play time for match penalties. Match penalties are intent to injure and go beyond just a major penalty. As such, they should result in slightly more power play time.
I've always believed that if you score during a delayed penalty with your goalie pulled you should still get the power play after. It never made sense to me that it gets cancelled out, 6 on 5 is very different than a 2 minute standard power play.
4:12 If the goalie’s in the crease, the rule should be that you can’t touch the goalie, full stop. Bumps, sticks to the mask, slashes, and jamming the pads should be a face off in the same d-zone. The crease needs to mean something
Hot take:
Laying a huge hit on someoneone warrants needing to fight.
If you're going to run around and lay hits that have a lilelihood of injuring someone, you should have to answer the bell. Don't just hit someone and then turtle when someone gets rough with you
Love your point there. Fighting is also one of the most notable things for non-hockey fans. More frequent fighting could lead to casual fans tuning in more often. Also, allowing fighting without the instigator penalty does slow the game down but increases the games intensity if anything.
The same people that complain about fights after a clean hit are the same people that complain there are no more fighting in the league.
I've said it before that I think that 7 should also count if the game is within 1 within 2 minutes of the end of the game. I.e. the penalty has to be killed off before the game ends.
That's actually a rule in football, both CFL and NFL. The game can't end on a penalty call, so even if there's no time on the click, if a penalty was called on the final play, and is not declined, they have to run another last play. My fav team, the BC Lions, once won a game because of that. They were down, and pressing late, time expired, but the other team took a penalty, which the Lions obviously accepted. Even though there was no time on the clock, because there was a penalty on the play, they got to run the play again, even on the expired clock, and that also ended up in the other team taking another penalty, and again, 3 times in total, they had the no clock plays end in penalties, then finally the Lions got to run a play clean with no penalties and scored a touchdown to win the game! Was a crazy finish.
HOT TAKE: linesmans primary job is still icing, offside, faceoffs. BUT can call penalties behind the play. Let the refs keep up with the play, were the majority of offenses happen.
The trapazoid is stupid and you shouldnt be able to change on a highstick or hand pass
12:43 in addition to getting rid of the trapezoid, when a goaltender has both skates below the icing line, he's nothing more than a defenseman and shouldn't be given ANY special protections! The Hextals and Brodures in the League are going to figure it out quick! The rest of them can just stay in their crease and let the offense continue.
I like how I have an opposite opinion on the Delay Of Game by shooting the puck over the glass rule.
I personally think it should be reworked so that it's exclusively on repeat offences, because one weird shot in your zone to get the puck away and getting a penalty because of a misfire is dumb, but if it happens twice, then it's obvious that they're delaying the game.
On another note, I honestly think that icing the puck multiple times in quick succession needs to qualify as DoG. I don't know exactly how this rule would be implemented, but a team icing the puck 5 times in a minute are clearly trying to delay the game
Embellishment on high sticks should just be a auto 2 and 10 not a mojor penalty, so it just hurts the player and not the team as badly
I have had the same opinion on most of these suggestions. Namely the Michigan rule. While I dont particularly like the Michigan play in general, I think it has a place where no contact is made with the goalies head while doing so.
My rule suggestion would be adding a "chaser" during the shootout to simulate game action shootout plays. Puck carrier starts at the red line with the puck, defender starts at the far blue line. When the whistle blows the chaser is allowed to chase the attacker down and disrupt the play if they are able to catch up. This discourages the "allstar shoootout challenge" type goals that are usually slow and not very exciting to watch. If the player is interfered with, then they are awarded a defender-free shot with a shot clock, as if to simulate a breakaway in the dying seconds of a period.
an iced puck that rebounds/rims back passed the blue line is no longer icing.
I'd love the excitement of the healthy scratch rushing down from the box to get dressed and in the game as fast as possible for the unexpected opportunity... like a WWE run in omg it's Matthews! And we thought that he was still injured or something!
with 13, I would go further and suggest judging it by the spirit over the law, if a player is offside and it's not called, and they never actually got involved with the play, it shouldn't count as offside. like if they were to skate in offside but just sit at the point and the goal is scored 5 seconds later, they shouldn't be counted as part of the play. Same with players getting off the ice in the second period when they can technically put the play offside if they still have a skate on the ice.
There should be less neutral zone face-offs. Treat every offside like it was done intentionally, and bring the face-off back to the offending teams' defensive zone
Came here to say we need a statute of limitations on uncalled offsides; I was going to say 30 seconds but honestly 20 is better. It's not a rule that's possible to exploit, and when ancient history can affect current plays it's a huge waste of time and is completely unfair to the team who scored a goal on what really shouldn't even be considered the same play most of the time.
I think for the penalty shot they should award the penalty shot but if the shot is missed the team is still awarded a power play. That way there is no down side to awarding the penalty shot.
The Avery Rule needs to stay the way it is.
Hard disagree for #4, if that was allowed we would see it multiple times every game. What's stopping the opposing player from sticking their glove right in front of the goalie's mask while outside of the crease? There are players whose sole objective every play is to screen the goalie. Instead of doing that, why not just have the guy wave both gloves in front of the goalie's eyes every play? Imagine a player like Matt Rempe doing that every time he's on the ice. I think it would ruin the game if that was allowed.
Weird, it took 80 years without a rule before someone did it.
Issue with the Avery rule is that we know how well it works so it just has to be there now
They need to fix the goalie interference. Seems that the video reviews always gets it wrong. Players let themselves pushed into goalies, push defenceman into goalies, crash the net and argue they ran out of room. The instigator rule is not used except to get the call wrong. So many players get jumped now for clean hits. Should make one of the team roster player dress up for emergency goalie.
I could see teams decline the penalty shot if already on a powerplay, so they get a 2 man advantage.
Adopt the PWHL jailbreak rule (a shorthanded goal terminates the penalty), and "no escape rule" (when a penalty is called against a team their players on the ice must stay on the ice at the puck drop, similar to an icing)
seem like mostly good changes. I do think its fair to not allow visors that make it impossible for a goalie to see someones eyes tho, that seems like itd be very important for goalies
As a goalie, it's not. You're supposed to be watching the puck, to make sure you can track it from release. If you're watching a players eyes you're going to get lit up.
@@dreadlockgoalie Brodeur did ok watching the eyes apparently
@nollidgestm1238 I guarantee you he was not and just said it because he didn't like the visor. It's goaltending 101, the best goalies always have elite puck tracking. On top of that any player with even halfway decent shooting skills isn't going to be looking where they shoot anyway. He was just posturing.
To my complete surprise there isn't a stupid suggestion in this whole video
Bring back the 20 minute OT!! Have 1 20 minute OT period 5 on 5 and then go to a shootout
Glad you’re not running the show. Sounds like you got these ideas from play NHL 24
Stick on stick slashes only really get called when the one stick breaks. Doesn't seem fair that a flimsy or previously damaged stick affects penalties so much
I'm not fully on board with doing away with the Avery Rule, though maybe move it it to the 10 minute misconduct rule instead to punish the player and not the entire team. The fighting after a hit one is a bit of a grey area as what's a clean hit and what's a dirty hit does have a grey area on the borderlines between the 2, so was the fight instigated by a dirty hit, or a goon attacking a guy after a clean hit? That's hard to say. However if a play like what happened in a recent Canucks game where Derek Forbort was basically forced to fight a Wing's player when the guy grabbed a hold of Forbort's stick and kept mugging the d-man until he had no choice but to drop the gloves just to force a stoppage in play since he couldn't play defense with a good up in his grill, that's pretty obvious case of instigating a fight, along with holding, roughing and several other infractions the refs could have also called as an extra 2 minutes for that crap.
And 100% on calling the rules in the books consistently and by the books. If it's a rule, call it. That's the REAL "let them play the game" is the NHL game as defined in the NHL rulebook. Play the game does not and should not mean the refs call no penalties even one is committed, as an uncalled penalty can and often does decide the outcome and when the refs are either calling phantom penalties or refusing to call blatant penalties, they are absolutely deciding the outcome of the game and NOT letting them play the game. Last I checked, punching, elbowing, kneeing, hitting from behind, charging, hitting with the stick, grabbing a hold of players or any piece of their equipment, tripping, hooking, and hitting players away from the puck are all clearly defined as not being a legal part of the game, so should be called when they occur. If that were a consistent policy, and each ref called it consistently, we'd have a lot fewer games devolve into brawls as the players get increasingly frustrated with inconsistent officiating as the same action is a penalty one play, and not another play, or is a penalty if Player/Team A does it, but not if Player/Team B does it. You would likely see fewer penalties being committed during the course of a game after an adjustment period as players get to know each ref's habits and what the threshold is between what is and is not a penalty for each ref in that grey area. Personalities will play a factor as some refs may be a bit more lenient then others, but as long as they're consistently calling it a certain way, players can adjust for it and play accordingly.
Get rid of the Marty Brodeur rule. There is no need for the trapizoid. Let the goalies roam.
Boarding should be a 5 minute major minimum
SHGs should end a power play. Penalty Kills would be more aggressive and more fun to watch and the way I see it. Also like you said earlier, teams should choose between a PP or Penalty Shot and if a coach knew that allowing a SHG would end his PP.......
Rule 13: AGREE 100%!!!!!!!!! It is the most annoying rule rn, imo.
idk how to fix it. But a player getting hit, and keeping their head down to draw a major, only to then be back on the ice a couple minutes later has to stop. Its a mockery of the game
3:45 if penalties extended regulation as well it would sure change the landscape of the league. Garland wouldn't have been tackling McDavid
The penalty shot should be select the player.
Problem with the high stick no blood proposal. Every high stick being 4 minutes would destroy the pace of the game. A lot high stick calls are results of; stick lift miss, sticks rebounding off of other equipment or the boards in to the player, another player moves their head just at the wrong time, both players collide and the stick just collides.
With your proposal, the Michigan high stick call would turn into 4 minutes, thus adding significant risk to the play.
Hard disagree with the "Sean Avery" since it puts the player at risk for the puck smacking them in the back of the head.
Hard disagree with the Power Play Icing. The attacking team could ice it by choice to do set ups without any worry.
The delay of game over the boards SHOULD be shooting into the bench on purpose should be a penalty.
The EBUG is so rare that it's not worth worrying over. It also makes for great stories and draws in far more attention to the sport.
The League should be able to review offside plays as play goes on, thus negating the whole wait 20+ seconds.
Rule 1 i would do like if you miss the penalty shot you get the powerplay so it's kind of a dubble whammy.
NHL should also learn from the PWHL new rules
16. All teams must use Brass Bonanza as their goal song.
You missed the best one!
If a team scores during a delayed penalty call the penalty is still incurred. It is not a power play yet since the team pulls the goalie for an extra attacker. They should not be punished for scoring
You missed the point of it being delayed.
Allowing a team to gain a power play after scoring 6 on 5, gives far more advantage to that team.
Yeah, number 4 has to stay. Anyone who has tried to play goalie would agree. Having a player block vision is on thing. But to stand and wave your stick in the eyes of the goalie is insane and can never be allowed.
A big part of tracking the puck on a play is tracking movement, having a stick or hand waved 2 inches from your face would make that literally impossible. There is a reason it was instantly banned
Isnt screening the conventional way the exact same though? Also the whole purpose of screening is to stop the goalie from seeing
I'm asking genuinely I'm not a goalie
@bruce4139 It's the difference between someone standing a foot away from you and being able to move you head to look around them vs someone standing a foot away from you holding thier hand 1 inch from your face.
There is just no physical way to move your head fast enough to get out from behind thier hands.
I don't even have a problem with them facing you when they screen if they want. It's just the waving stick and hands in the face that take it way to far and make it impossible to see/stop the puck
@bencurren7190 can you step back in your crease then? Because as far as I understand if a goal goes in while a player of the offending team is in the crease it's a no goal
Disagree on the michigan one. If a goalie blocks the net with his face then why would that be a penalty? If a goalie tries to freeze the puck by laying on it with his head you arent gonna penalize the player for hitting his helmet trying to dislodge the puck
I hate watching powerplays in overtime - I think all penalties in OT should be an automatic penalty shot. Double-minors and majors could be 2 or 3 shots if necessary.
No shootouts; 10m 3v3 period; draws allowed; 3/2/1/0 pts system
Being so hated by the league that when you do something unique they ban it 🤣 nobody like Avery
I think the delayed offside review should only be able to be called for a short ammount of time like 10 seconds. After 10 seconds you cannot use it to call back a goal. I hate them going back 2 minutes and calling off goals its no longer part of the play.
Lol you agree i see just had to keep watching.
Mmm absolutely header goals. BUT only if they let you wave your stick around like a madman in front of tendy too.
rule 3 needs to happen yesterday
Reviewed offsides drive me nuts with the multiple angle, super slow mo, mega zoom, continuous replay. How about the refs get two angles. One down each end of the blue line, get full speed, 2 or 3 looks. If you cant tell at full speed, the call stands. Another reason I hate it, team enters offsides, forces defending team into an icing, why not review that offsides as the icing shouldn't have happened then.
Offside review subsequent to G's being scored is the worst by far. It's actually ruining the game.
# 10 and 11 I’m okay with. Those 2 are worst comes to worst
Hadn't thought of that PP in OT rule change. I like it. Want it. Maybe don't need it.
I do need time limited offsides review. To be clear, the reviewing should be limited not the time before scoring.
Last but of interest, I am fully in favor of abolishing the Avery rule. Even though, as a goalie, I found that display unsettling, we want more scoring. Goalies just gotta smarten up and deal with it. I also think such an offender might have to answer for it.