| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Guest4178
( )
|
 Posted - 12/01/2010 : 09:37:15
|
In the USCHO, they have a new rule in place related to how they deal with delayed penalties.
The penalty still stands even if a goal is scored on the delayed call. The purpose of this rule change is to make penalties more consequential, so if you take a penalty, you could cost your team two goals.
There was a time in the NHL when teams could score an unlimited number of goals when a team took a penalty. (Because the penalized player would sit in the box for the whole two minutes, or five minutes in rare cases, regardless of how many goals were scored.) Things haven't changed with major penalties – players still serve their 5 minutes, regardless of the number of goals scored.
There's been some talk about the NHL going back to the "old way" of making penalized players stay in the box for the full two minutes, but I hope they don't make this change. (And I also hope that the NHL does not follow US college hockey in how they handle delayed penalty calls.)
There is already enough of an advantage when teams go on the power play, usually around 15-20% for the team with the power play. Not so with Florida though – right now, they're sitting at 6.4%, but you don't fix their dismal power play percentage rate by making a rule change. Vancouver, on the other hand, currently sits on top with a 25.3 power play percentage rate!
|
|
|
sahis34
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
591 Posts |
Posted - 12/01/2010 : 21:31:47
|
I think it's fine
Go OILERS Go!!! |
 |
|
|
MrBoogedy
Rookie
Canada
195 Posts |
Posted - 12/01/2010 : 22:54:51
|
| I agree, leave it the way it is. Certain rule changes need to be made over the course of time to accomadate bigger players, harder shots, goalie gear, etc., I understand that, but it seems to be good just the way it is ( with the exception of shoot-outs, I like the new format they are talking about.) I guess that just goes to show you can please some of the people some of the time, but... you know the rest. If it isn't broke then don't fix it, (unless it's wearing a maple leaf jersey - then break it! ) |
|
|
|
Guest1757
( )
|
Posted - 12/02/2010 : 04:43:33
|
I argee, leave it the way it is. The opportunity to score 2 goals is too much. Giving up 1 goal for the delayed penalty or on the actual penalty kill is enough; especially if it's a weak call or a 'make-up' call by the refs. 2 goals for 1 penalty could change a game too much and doesn't seem as impressive as a win despite the fact a team was able to cash in like that
MrBoogedy - anything wearing a Maple Leafs jersey is already broken |
|
|
|
ToXXiK1
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
696 Posts |
Posted - 12/02/2010 : 05:05:58
|
| This is a typical U.S. based ploy to increase the scoring in the games. For some reason, the thought is that the U.S. isn't interested in watching hockey due to the low scoring. When the fact is, they don't want to watch it period. Football and Basketball dominate in most U.S. markets, especially in the one's that don't recieve any snow. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Delayed Penalty Calls 
