Standard of Play/New Rules

[Cargo]

For clarification of the new rules I am providing a link of video clips. Pretty clear on what the refs are being instructed to call.

http://www.odharefs.com/Video/ref_video.html

Brooky, one clip began with the backchecker lifting the stick to take the puck on the slashing video I got my back up but in watching the entire clip it was the retaliated two handed slash that was the penalty. whooo


Thoughts opinions discuss

[joecct77]

These are not new rules or enforcement standards for the NCAA. This will be the 3rd year of increased scrutiny of "impeding" the players in the NCAA.

[Hux]

USA Hockey's version is a little more stringent, in that they don't allow you to play the body at all on things like faceoffs. If you even lean into a player, according to Director of Officiating Matt Leaf, you are guilty of interference. And if a player is in front of the net, or even driving to the net, and you lift his/her stick before the puck touches their stick, that is considered interference as well.

Additionally, if a player is coming down the boards and dumps the puck by the D, and trys to go to the inside to get around, and the D rides the player off (as has been taught since the puck was leather) that is considered interference too. :rolleyes:

I think the dashers in front of the benches are going to have a whole lot of foot prints on them this year.

[Bystander]

So basically can we assume that the first few games of the season are going to be packed with ridiculous penalty calls, giving players penalties for simply being in the vicinity of an opponent....but then, as the season goes on, it will (hopefully) most likely taper off, and perhaps by then, we will get to see the ladies play some real hockey again....where you aren't being penalized for playing the game the way it is supposed to be played. with legitimate picks, poke-checks, and defensive play that is way too often being deemed illegal....when in reality, that is how a good player plays the game.

[Cargo]

the game the way it is supposed to be played. with legitimate picks, .

What do you define as a legitimate pick? A one on one case? or just any player in the offensive zone?

[taz91]

I get the feeling we are going to see a long first month of the season. I wonder when all the players will go out in red jerseys and there will be no contact period. How many times do you think we will see players turn towards the puck and run into each other and someone will get called? If they want to work on interference, how about offensive players getting knocked offsides by defenders?

[finalapprch]

USA Hockey's version is a little more stringent, in that they don't allow you to play the body at all on things like faceoffs. If you even lean into a player, according to Director of Officiating Matt Leaf, you are guilty of interference. And if a player is in front of the net, or even driving to the net, and you lift his/her stick before the puck touches their stick, that is considered interference as well.

Additionally, if a player is coming down the boards and dumps the puck by the D, and trys to go to the inside to get around, and the D rides the player off (as has been taught since the puck was leather) that is considered interference too. :rolleyes:

I think the dashers in front of the benches are going to have a whole lot of foot prints on them this year.

IMO these new rules will be bad in the long term for the game. Let's turn a great game into one that features the officals!

I would love to see the person who first came up with these revisions write in to one of these threads.

[ref11]

IMO these new rules will be bad in the long term for the game. Let's turn a great game into one that features the officals!

I would love to see the person who first came up with these revisions write in to one of these threads.

I'm not sure what the emphasis will be at the NCAA and NFS (national federation of high schools) rule books. Our first glimpse will be the NIHOA chapter meetings later this month.

As far as USA Hockey is concerned I will offer this analogy / insight. Each of the last few years USA Hockey has sent registered coachs a voluntary poll. Should coach's be required to wear helmet on the ice a practice? Each year the response was approximatey 1/3 in favor of wearing helmets, 2/3 against wearing helmets. At the late spring / early summer meeting (this year) when it came to a vote. Only the New England District voted against the helmet regulation for coachs. Reason cited by other districts were the fact that five coachs died on the ice in recent years. Only one was a head injury.

In the words of one USA Hockey official (their words not mine) "USA Hockey is being run by a bunch of soccer moms". :cool:

[taz91]

I'm not sure what the emphasis will be at the NCAA and NFS (national federation of high schools) rule books. Our first glimpse will be the NIHOA chapter meetings later this month.

As far as USA Hockey is concerned I will offer this analogy / insight. Each of the last few years USA Hockey has sent registered coachs a voluntary poll. Should coach's be required to wear helmet on the ice a practice? Each year the response was approximatey 1/3 in favor of wearing helmets, 2/3 against wearing helmets. At the late spring / early summer meeting (this year) when it came to a vote. Only the New England District voted against the helmet regulation for coachs. Reason cited by other districts were the fact that five coachs died on the ice in recent years. Only one was a head injury.

In the words of one USA Hockey official (their words not mine) "USA Hockey is being run by a bunch of soccer moms". :cool:

Very well put. Last time I checked, hockey was a contact sport. I love the women's game because you get the physical play without all the BS of the men's game. I had no problem with the emphasis last year on checking from behind other than the misconduct/dq decisions. Why do they need to have a new point of emphasis every year?

[Sweden]

I am glad to see the hooking taken out of the game. Not being able to hook and "hang on" will require defenders to move their feet at all times. Yes it is a contact game, but be allowed to drag down a player speeding up ice only removes speed and skill from the game. The rules are there they need to be enforced. If one doesn't like the rule, there are avenues to change it.

Very well put. Last time I checked, hockey was a contact sport. I love the women's game because you get the physical play without all the BS of the men's game. I had no problem with the emphasis last year on checking from behind other than the misconduct/dq decisions. Why do they need to have a new point of emphasis every year?

[finalapprch]

I am glad to see the hooking taken out of the game. Not being able to hook and "hang on" will require defenders to move their feet at all times. Yes it is a contact game, but be allowed to drag down a player speeding up ice only removes speed and skill from the game. The rules are there they need to be enforced. If one doesn't like the rule, there are avenues to change it.

IMO there is a big difference between having a stick on a body and hooking. The way they are going to call games now will do nothing to enhance the game we love in the long run.

One falllout of this will be the officials. They talk about how difficult it is to retain officials. We will see how many there are after this season!

[spike]

It seems in the last 10 years that every other year, when USA Hockey makes rule changes, that the U.S. game gets farther away from the game played in Canada.

The theory behind some of these changes sounds good, but I have to ask, why don't the Canadians do the same thing if its such a good idea? For example, eliminating the tag up in youth hockey was supposed to force players to be better handlers of the puck in the neutral zone. Most of the players currently playing at the junior national boys and U-22 girls have played this way most of their youth careers. I watched the U-22 games last month online and it seemed to me the Canadians were much better in the neutral zone than we were, so what have we accomplished?

Now, the tightening of the rules against using the stick to separate the opponent from the puck is supposed to force defenders to move their feet better? In reality its only going to encourage more puck carrying, and therefor will discourage passing.

Perhaps we should learn from the lessons of golf. Golf was invented in Europe, and they continue to play a "man against wilderness" style, while the U.S. version has become dainty to the point that we go through a meltdown every time a putt hits a spike mark. Notice that Europe consistently beats us in the Ryder Cup, even on our courses.

[taz91]

I am glad to see the hooking taken out of the game. Not being able to hook and "hang on" will require defenders to move their feet at all times. Yes it is a contact game, but be allowed to drag down a player speeding up ice only removes speed and skill from the game. The rules are there they need to be enforced. If one doesn't like the rule, there are avenues to change it.

I agree with taking the clutch and grab out of the game, but pretty soon all the games are going to be like the Salt Lake City gold medal game. I remember Stacy Livingston getting torn to shreads on this message board for calling every little bit of contact in the game. Like I said before, I love the women's game, but we are getting to the point that there will be no flow to the game. From the WCHA point of view, how much more ice time do the Gopher, Badger and Bulldog power plays need? This is going to make the better skilled teams better and kill some of the weaker programs.

[Sweden]

It is the hooking, hanging on through the neutral zone that drives me crazy, so as stated I look forward to those calls being made. I see your last point , but from a different view. I don't like to see "weaker teams" win by the clutch and grab. If all teams are on a level playing field as far as the rules, it will encourage all teams to lookk for skill first. Grit is an important part of hockey and I don't want to see that go. What nneds to go asap(IMHO) is a poor skater/weak player gaining an advantage by use of the stick to slash, hook or even impede
QUOTE=taz91]I agree with taking the clutch and grab out of the game, but pretty soon all the games are going to be like the Salt Lake City gold medal game. I remember Stacy Livingston getting torn to shreads on this message board for calling every little bit of contact in the game. Like I said before, I love the women's game, but we are getting to the point that there will be no flow to the game. From the WCHA point of view, how much more ice time do the Gopher, Badger and Bulldog power plays need? This is going to make the better skilled teams better and kill some of the weaker programs.[/QUOTE]

[finalapprch]

I agree with taking the clutch and grab out of the game, but pretty soon all the games are going to be like the Salt Lake City gold medal game. I remember Stacy Livingston getting torn to shreads on this message board for calling every little bit of contact in the game. Like I said before, I love the women's game, but we are getting to the point that there will be no flow to the game. From the WCHA point of view, how much more ice time do the Gopher, Badger and Bulldog power plays need? This is going to make the better skilled teams better and kill some of the weaker programs.


Agreed!! The game is fine now.

[Jonesy]

Canada has the same rules emphasis aimed at eliminating using the stick to impede the progress of another player. They are even going to call lifting a players stick with your stick interference inless the other player has the puck. They are saying "the stick is for playing the puck, period." This is all happening because everyone (except Ron McLean and Don CHerry) considers the new NHL rules a great success.

[brookyone]

Are we takin' a poll? I'm with Sweden on this one.

taz my friend...this is going to be especially tough on the Mavs I fear. ;)

Edit: The Mav comment is tongue in cheek. The Mavs are morphing into a formidable and speedy team up front in their own right.

[Sweden]

Thanks. I've seen a few games under new rules and there were too many whistles. However, if playters are coached to move feet instead of hook and hang on there will be less whistles. In the long run, I think it will be good for the game. Plenty of area's where you need grit and strentgh still, but the skill will show

Are we takin' a poll? I'm with Sweden on this one.

taz my friend...this is going to be especially tough on the Mavs I fear. ;)

[taz91]

Thanks. I've seen a few games under new rules and there were too many whistles. However, if playters are coached to move feet instead of hook and hang on there will be less whistles. In the long run, I think it will be good for the game. Plenty of area's where you need grit and strentgh still, but the skill will show

I agree that in the long run it probably will be good for the game. I will throw out that I think we need more consistency on the rules we have. Clutch and grab hockey is hooking and holding period. I do think most of the weaker programs are trying to get the more skilled players, but it's not that easy. Not always easy to recruit against the perennial Top 5 teams in the country. Why do we need to make it a point of emphasis? If we can get all the referees to be more consistent I don't think we would have these problems. I've seen WCHA referees make a call Friday that they let go on Saturday or that they let go in the first period and let go the remainder of the game.

Brooky, nice shot about my Mavericks. They are getting better up front but they need to stay healthy this year.

[brookyone]

Brooky, nice shot about my Mavericks. They are getting better up front but they need to stay healthy this year.
Hope you caught my edit taz. :) The Mavs have a very nice group up front this season...improved still more on the improved 2005-06 team. A bunch I'd take on my team any day. I hope they all stay healthy throughout the season 'cause they've got great potential.