Which ones would you like to see become reality?...
Which ones would you like to see become reality? http://www.freep.com/article/20100820/SPORTS05/8200394/1433/Possible-NHL-rule-changes-tested-in-Toronto Possible NHL rule changes tested in Toronto Former Red Wing Brendan Shanahan, the NHL's vice president of hockey and business affairs, was the driving force behind the league's first research camp this week. The NHL Research, Development and Orientation Camp ended Thursday in Toronto, where possible rule changes were played out by 33 top 2011 draft prospects at the Maple Leafs' practice facility. "We're here to really look at new rules, but the added attraction and added bonus to it is it's an opportunity to identify a bunch of the kids coming up for the draft," Wings assistant general manager Jim Nill told NHL. com. Here were some of the ideas tested, according to NHL.com: Starting regular-season overtime with 3 minutes of four-on-four play, followed by 3 minutes of three-on-three, then 3 minutes of two-on-two. Creating a yellow verification line. According to NHL.com's Dan Rosen, it was hard to find anyone who didn't like this. The line, situated in the crease behind the goal line, would be there to giving a clearer indication on video review to determine if a goal was scored. If officials see the puck touch the yellow line, they will know it is a goal. Stationing one referee off the ice to reduce traffic on the ice and possibly provide a better vantage point to spot infractions. On Thursday, Scott Ferguson stood on an elevated platform looking over the glass by one of the blue lines. Implementing a hybrid icing call where the official can blow the puck dead if the defender obviously is going to touch the puck first once players reach the face-off dot. Read more: Possible NHL rule changes tested in Toronto | freep.com | Detroit Free Press http://www.freep.com/article/20100820/SPORTS05/8200394/1433/Possible-NHL-rule-changes-tested-in-Toronto#ixzz0x9NpdDFq
I like the icing rule however I do not see why they wouldn't go with the international rule for icing. That is much more clear cut and will not be open to interpretation. The yellow verification line rule makes some sense and I would be in favor of that. I am not so much in favor of having a referee located off ice. I think referees need to be part of the game to call it fairly. If you have a guy off ice he could easily call a lot more penalties. Maybe he doesn't let anything go whereas an on ice referee maybe lets some things go because he sees both teams are doing it. I do not think the referring in hockey is bad relative to other sports. Sure there are mistakes made but overall I think they do a decent job. Video replay has helped too. I believe having an off ice official could lead to even more penalties being called and lead to a ton more time delays. The overtime changes seem fairly complicated and unnecessary. The current 4 on 4 system works and most fans enjoy the shootout if necessary.
+1 Question - Do all arenas now have a camera directly overhead the goal line? I noticed (last season?) the guys in the little boxes behind the goals with the lights on their heads are gone - Lots of unemployed goal-line judges? Indeed - The zebras are at least as good as in any other sport. Do they "crowd" up the ice? To a degree, but again, they do a pretty good job overall - Why mess with it? I agree the on-ice guys will (should?) have a better feel for the way the game is being played and can either cut 'em some slack or choose to get "hard" with the players. Having said that, having another pair of eyes somewhat removed from the action may not be a bad idea. I'll go with "they can try it" on this one..... Here I disagree! - Not just to the 4-4, 3-3, 2-2 stuff, which would at least avoid the shootout (which I concede fans do seem to enjoy), but more because of it's underlying "wrongness"! - SOME GAMES ARE WORTH 3 POINTS, OTHERS ONLY 2! - I'm certain it will happen (if it hasn't already) where both teams need a point and "agree" to tie the game in regulation - One of 'em goes on to get the bonus point, but they're both served by getting a single point - That's just wrong IMO! Make a regulation win count 3 points and I'd be a lot happier. Maybe 4 on 4, but let 'em at it for a period rather than 5 minutes? Personally, I have no problem with a tie, and both teams getting a point - But then I grew up on soccer, so can enjoy a tie game in ways that seem beyond most Americans! [No offense intended, but I don't understand the need for a winner everytime - If they play to a 0-0 or 4-4 tie, that's it, give 'em a point each and move on....] Cheers, Ian
