the new rule changes

[SteveA 0]

These are all great changes for the game!I particularly like allowing the 2 line passes. I think Olympic and International hockey is much more exciting because of this.The off side touch up rule is all good too.PS: Rmunro I'm in your hood - Mt. Seymour area.

[Flow73 0]

its 100% bertuzzi's fault but u have to question the judgement of the colorado coach and at least admit he contrubuted to the circumstances that lead to the sucker punch

Nope, not at all. You can't take a player off the ice just because people are trying to hit him, there is no way you could predict that sucker punch was going to happen. He has only missed 20 games, another 20 isn't all that harsh for what he did.

[Mr Monkey 0]

its 100% bertuzzi's fault but u have to question the judgement of the colorado coach and at least admit he contrubuted to the circumstances that lead to the sucker punch

Nope, not at all. You can't take a player off the ice just because people are trying to hit him, there is no way you could predict that sucker punch was going to happen. He has only missed 20 games, another 20 isn't all that harsh for what he did.

they wanted to fight him but he wouldnt fight. so if he wasnt going to fight why did the coach keep putting him on after steve moore asked not to? cause he was trying to get his team fired up because they were playing bad. he knew that they were trying to fight him and hit him so why didnt he just keep him off the ice in the 3rd period when they had a big lead. why not just keep him off the ice in that situation. wasnt the coach concerned that it was starting to get out of hand especially after moore told him that they were taking runs at him which any person who wasnt blind could see. everyone who watch could see it getting out of hand. the coach was encouraging this to continue every time he sent him back on the ice.

[Guest Anonymous]

Ask any player that played in europe last year if the no red line opens up the game. From what i heard it was more trapping, clutching and grabbing then the NHL has ever had.olympic and international tournaments look good and exciting because you have a bunch of north american players not use to playing without the red line getting caught uo ice, but give them a couple of months to get use to it and you'll end up with 2 guys standing at their own blue lines.

[vonteego3 0]

Ask any player that played in europe last year if the no red line opens up the game. From what i heard it was more trapping, clutching and grabbing then the NHL has ever had.olympic and international tournaments look good and exciting because you have a bunch of north american players not use to playing without the red line getting caught uo ice, but give them a couple of months to get use to it and you'll end up with 2 guys standing at their own blue lines.

Allowing the 2 line pass doesn't solve a thing on its own, you're right. The key to an opened up game is if the league can finally come through on its year in and year out promise to call all clutching and grabbing much more closely. Someone mentioned that they could lose as many fans as they gain with the rules changes... considering the NHL's current fan base is rivaled by that of professional shuffleboard, I don't think losing fans is much of a concern. The only people that want to watch a 1-0 game with 18 total shots on goal isn't a hockey, he (she) is a soccer fan.

[Flow73 0]

they wanted to fight him but he wouldnt fight. so if he wasnt going to fight why did the coach keep putting him on after steve moore asked not to? cause he was trying to get his team fired up because they were playing bad. he knew that they were trying to fight him and hit him so why didnt he just keep him off the ice in the 3rd period when they had a big lead. why not just keep him off the ice in that situation. wasnt the coach concerned that it was starting to get out of hand especially after moore told him that they were taking runs at him which any person who wasnt blind could see. everyone who watch could see it getting out of hand. the coach was encouraging this to continue every time he sent him back on the ice.

No no no, you think this was the first tome someone had it out for someone else on the ice? It is in no way shape or form anyone on Colorado's fault. It's hockey, you can't sit on the bench because someone on the other team doesn't like you. The score doesn't matter, Moore is a hockey player, he was doing his job.

[Mr Monkey 0]

Ask any player that played in europe last year if the no red line opens up the game. From what i heard it was more trapping, clutching and grabbing then the NHL has ever had.olympic and international tournaments look good and exciting because you have a bunch of north american players not use to playing without the red line getting caught uo ice, but give them a couple of months to get use to it and you'll end up with 2 guys standing at their own blue lines.

i agree. allowing the 2 line pass is stupid. the NHL is turning into european hockey. u will start to get players floating around center ice goal sucking. the breakout game and flow of the games will de disrupted by the long bomb pass. most of the time it will miss. the 2 defencemen will be sitting back so they dont let players sneak behind them.

[Mr Monkey 0]

they wanted to fight him but he wouldnt fight. so if he wasnt going to fight why did the coach keep putting him on after steve moore asked not to? cause he was trying to get his team fired up because they were playing bad. he knew that they were trying to fight him and hit him so why didnt he just keep him off the ice in the 3rd period when they had a big lead. why not just keep him off the ice in that situation. wasnt the coach concerned that it was starting to get out of hand especially after moore told him that they were taking runs at him which any person who wasnt blind could see. everyone who watch could see it getting out of hand. the coach was encouraging this to continue every time he sent him back on the ice.

No no no, you think this was the first tome someone had it out for someone else on the ice? It is in no way shape or form anyone on Colorado's fault. It's hockey, you can't sit on the bench because someone on the other team doesn't like you. The score doesn't matter, Moore is a hockey player, he was doing his job.

moore was a fringe player who played 5 mintues a night. why did the colorado coach keep putting him out. everyone could see what was going on. whats the reason for keep putting him out? steve moore almost broke a guys neck 2 weeks prior by hitting him from behind driving his head into the boards. fortunately the player wasnt hurt. u know the saying: Live By The Sword, Die By The Sword

[powerpoker 0]

eh im fine with shootouts after the 5 minute overtime. I guess the only time that i will be going nutz if when i have one team minus a half of puck and they go to the shootout...so now instead of me collecting my money i gotta hope my goaltender can stop more pucks one on one...oh well i guess it will be more exciting and thats what gambling is..haha

[Guest Anonymous]

2. Tag Up Rule, okay, if I am getting this right, before a player was considered off-side when they are skating before the puck, but now someone can skate before the puck crosses the blue line in event that they skate to return to the blue line. That might cause some bad calls by the linesman, since we saw some terribly referree-ing in the past years. (Remember, as Leafs fan, EVERY referee is against us, especially Kelly) This rule seems fair though, although I am not quite sure what will consequence play-wise, other than not having an offside every 2 minutes. If the puck comes out of the offensive zone into the neutral zone, it may be sent back into the zone, all the players must come outside of the zone before they can go back in. The past couple of years, the team couldn't send it back into the zone until everyone was out; it would most likely be an "intentional off-sides" call and the faceoff would be either from the spot it was sent in from or all the way down.I like the two line pass rule, it will definitely open things up.Goalie pads-who caresInstigator rule-no big deal as long as fights that naturally occur (i.e. not just going after someone who hit your star hard earlier) aren't penalized.Shootout- I don't think they're using it in the playoffs, I like it in the regular season but hate it in the playoffs.Icing- Not letting the defensive team change after an icing is pretty harsh, I don't like it.Dimensions- I don't like taking area away from behind the net.

[Mr Monkey 0]

I like the two line pass rule, it will definitely open things up

untill the defence sits back so that goal sucks dont sneak behind them. the defecemen wont want to take chances and they wont be so quick to jump up for offence. also their will be lots of missed long bomb passes that will destroy the beakout game.

[wingsfan 0]

Shootout- I don't think they're using it in the playoffs, I like it in the regular season but hate it in the playoffs.

They were adamant during the press conference that the playoffs will stay how they've always been, just keep playing until someone wins. I agree that touching the playoff games would be a terrible terrible idea.

[No_Neck 0]

I think making the goalie only be able to handle the puck is insane. But I am a goalie.

[Guest Anonymous]

2. Tag Up Rule, okay, if I am getting this right, before a player was considered off-side when they are skating before the puck, but now someone can skate before the puck crosses the blue line in event that they skate to return to the blue line. That might cause some bad calls by the linesman, since we saw some terribly referree-ing in the past years. (Remember, as Leafs fan, EVERY referee is against us, especially Kelly) This rule seems fair though, although I am not quite sure what will consequence play-wise, other than not having an offside every 2 minutes. If the puck comes out of the offensive zone into the neutral zone, it may be sent back into the zone, all the players must come outside of the zone before they can go back in. The past couple of years, the team couldn't send it back into the zone until everyone was out; it would most likely be an "intentional off-sides" call and the faceoff would be either from the spot it was sent in from or all the way down.

The offside rule is being changed back to how it was in 1996ish. If I remember right, it was changed to increase offense (the idea was defencemen couldn't just dump the puck into the other teams end if he had teammates still in there).As for the Bertuzzi incident, I was at the game. Bertuzzi did challenge Moore to a fight in the Colorado end, but that doesn't justify what he did. The replays clearly show that Moore didn't see Bertuzzi coming when he was attacked. I will agree that it was odd that Granato kept putting out a player who usually plays 5 minutes a game. His justification at the time was that he was more concerned with protecting Sakic, Tanguay etc.Also, Bertuzzi missed more than just 20 games. He missed the World Cup (which he was a lock to make), the World Championships, and all of last season. There may not have been NHL hockey last year, but a lot of players made some good money in Europe. The IIHF honours all NHL suspensions, so Bertuzzi wasn't able to play. I'm not saying the incident didn't warrant that size of a suspension, but he has clearly missed more than the 20 games most people think.

[WestcoastCanuck 0]

The above message was from me. And Steve A, always good to meet a fellow Vancouverite.

[kwinger42 0]

I think that the most unnoticed rule change is one of the best. Not letting teams who ice the puck get a line change is definitely going to up scoring. Right now, 90% of icing is of the, "we're tired and can't clear the zone" type. Well, that's not going to be an option anymore. You ice it and you don't get off the ice to get a rest AND then other team gets to put a fresh line on if they want. It'll make you think twice.This rule was the basis for two of the other changes. The letting a linesman waive off icing if it was determined to be a "missed pass" and the delay of game penalty for shooting the puck over the glass in the defensive zone. It never made sense to me why goalies got penalized for that, but defencemen didn't.I have season tickets to the UHL team, the Kalamazoo Wings. We have shootouts. I gotta say, I'm not a fan. They're exciting (read: absolutely nerve-wracking), but a SO win should count for less than an OT win. Our league doesn't even go to the 5 minute OT, just striaght to the SO. And fans at this level still point out that they lost in the "talent show after the real game".We also have the rule where anyone getting an instigation penalty in the last 5 minutes of a game gets an automatic suspension for the next game. We have a couple teams in the league (Flint, Danbury) who, ah... don't like to lose. So, if they're down significantly toward the end of the game, they send out the goons to exact revenge on the other team for having the temerity to score more goals than them. I like tacking on the fine for the coach. I mean, really, when there's 38 seconds left in the game and suddenly the guy who's has 364 PIMs and has had one other shift the whole game comes out for a face-off, what do you *think* is the plan there? I like fighting, but it should be for protecting the skill players and keeping the stickwork penalties down, not punishing the other team for winning.

[rbakken2504 0]

2. Tag Up Rule, okay, if I am getting this right, before a player was considered off-side when they are skating before the puck, but now someone can skate before the puck crosses the blue line in event that they skate to return to the blue line. That might cause some bad calls by the linesman, since we saw some terribly referree-ing in the past years. (Remember, as Leafs fan, EVERY referee is against us, especially Kelly) This rule seems fair though, although I am not quite sure what will consequence play-wise, other than not having an offside every 2 minutes. If the puck comes out of the offensive zone into the neutral zone, it may be sent back into the zone, all the players must come outside of the zone before they can go back in. The past couple of years, the team couldn't send it back into the zone until everyone was out; it would most likely be an "intentional off-sides" call and the faceoff would be either from the spot it was sent in from or all the way down.I like the two line pass rule, it will definitely open things up.Goalie pads-who caresInstigator rule-no big deal as long as fights that naturally occur (i.e. not just going after someone who hit your star hard earlier) aren't penalized.Shootout- I don't think they're using it in the playoffs, I like it in the regular season but hate it in the playoffs.Icing- Not letting the defensive team change after an icing is pretty harsh, I don't like it.Dimensions- I don't like taking area away from behind the net.

The goalie pad issue will actually have a big impact, I played goalie in high school and too full advantage of the vague equipment regulations. I only weighed 155 lbs, but with the equipment i had you would've thought I weighed 225. This won't affect goalies like Brodeur who uses small equipment, but you won't see goalies like Giguere being at the top of the league anymore when they take away his gigantic equipment.

[Uppie_ 0]

Well here is my take on the rule changesI think the no line change after you ice the puck is an interesting rule don't know if i like it or not because now instead of iceing it there just going to flip in into the stands to do the same thing when there exhausted, or ice it win the faceoff flip it to the stands or slide it on net so the goalie can freeze it.the no red line should open up the speed a little more but what they really should have done in 96 is said all new areas from now on have to be olympic ice size, because the no two line pass will not stop all the cluching and grabing that slows the game down there just simply isn't enough room for those guys to operate at the rates of speed that reach.The worst rule change is the shoot out at the end fo the game, your taking a great team game where everyone plays defense togather and works there butt off to be in position and keep the puck outof the net, or where on offense you make four tape to tape passes to set up a pretty goal, into an indivdual spot of one on one between the goalie and the best scores on the team. A team could have the best goalie in the league with defensman but may lose a ton of point because he is the worst breakaway goalie in the NHL. to me it is just pure stupid to take a great team game and let it be decided by solo the play of an indivdual void of any team concept.taging up well yeppie dump and chase hockey even more that is all that creates instead of going back and re grouping and makeing a charge through the neutral zone teams will now just dump it in one a guy is stuck offsides and go for a change, i guess i don't see the point to the automatic offsides rule change it is done in low levels of hockey to keep the game moving.And honestly the best thing that hockey could do is first boardcast all the games in HDTV cause hockey is the one sport i have seen that is 100% better in HDTV it makes it actually watchable on tv.

[kwinger42 0]

I think the no line change after you ice the puck is an interesting rule don't know if i like it or not because now instead of iceing it there just going to flip in into the stands to do the same thing when there exhausted, or ice it win the faceoff flip it to the stands or slide it on net so the goalie can freeze it.

Except if ANY player for the team in the defensive zone flips the puck into the stands now, it is a two minute delay of game penalty. You get your line change, but only get to send four guys back out. The only real recourse for a whistle will be to slide it to the goalie, like you said. But, that is a really risky proposition, if you ask me.

[wingsfan 0]

I think the no line change after you ice the puck is an interesting rule don't know if i like it or not because now instead of iceing it there just going to flip in into the stands to do the same thing when there exhausted, or ice it win the faceoff flip it to the stands or slide it on net so the goalie can freeze it.

Except if ANY player for the team in the defensive zone flips the puck into the stands now, it is a two minute delay of game penalty. You get your line change, but only get to send four guys back out. The only real recourse for a whistle will be to slide it to the goalie, like you said. But, that is a really risky proposition, if you ask me.

I'm not even sure if that will be an option. Supposedly they're going to start handing out delay of game penalties if the goalie is deemed to have unnecessarily frozen the puck. Granted, that's pretty open to interpretation by the ref, but even something like handing the goalie the puck to freeze might result in a penalty.

[MoLeafsMo 0]

Two things...I can't disagree more with the "purists" who are opposed to shootouts. Comparing a shoot out to a home run derby or 3-point contest is ridiculous. In a shootout, it's a team's best players pitted against their opponent's goaltender. It's the game stripped down to it's core. Can my guy score against your guy. It's still goals vs. saves. A home run is not the only way in which baseball teams score runs, and so yes, that would be ridiculous. A 3-point shot is not the only way a basketball team scores points, so yes, that would be ridiculous as well. In a shoot-out, they're trying to accomplish what they do during the game...score a goal.(In anticipation of those of you who will nitpick and say "but a breakaway is not the only way a team scores in hockey, I will point out the semantic difference. In hockey, a goal scored by slap shot, wrist shot, breakaway, one-timer, tipped point shot, Savardian Spinnerama, etc., are all just goals. They are not differentiated. But in baseball, all hits are not created equal, and all runs are not scored the same way. A home run is a specifically named hit, differentiated from singles, doubles, and triples. Not only that, but not all home runs are worth the same. It depends on how many are on base. The same is true of a 3-point shot in basketball. It is a specific shot with a specific value, but not the only shot or the only value in which a team accumulates points. But a goal is always worth one point.)I know that a shootout is not a perfect way to decide a game. We'd love for every game to be settled with five skaters aside, but the shootout is the best alternative, and I don't mean it's the best of a bad bunch. It's a reasonably accurate measure to determine the best team on a given night. Considering that we know if we allow ties both teams will play for the single point, and we know that the overtime loss thing was an abomination, this is the best way to settle a game.Now, as far as the Bertuzzi thing, I feel that both sides are polarized so much that they can't see the middle ground.The people who see what Bertuzzi did as being terrible and inexcusable, well, you're right. It was horrifying. But it can be rationalized. But the people rationalizing it, someone's "blaming the woman for being raped" analogy is apt to describe the falacy being made.Bertuzzi's act is not understandable simply because of Moore's hit on Naslund, or his refusing to fight Bertuzzi and all that. Moore's actions have nothing to do with it. What makes Bertuzzi's act understandable (not condoned, of course) is that NHL players have to operate at such a high level of emotion that it is entirely conceivable that someone could make the mistake of exceeding their emotional threshold and simply lose it. The argument that "if he did that on the other side of the boards it would be assault" is not entirely valid because people don't perform daily tasks at such a high level of emotion and testosterone. Think about a scenario where a fight breaks out at a bar, or even if one almost breaks out. A drink gets spilled, a girlfriend gets ogled, whatever. The people involved were generally in a fine mood and in control of themselves, but had to have lost complete control of their emotions for things to escalate, until cooler heads prevail. In hockey, though, they are already on edge, exerting themselves at maximum effort, battling opponents, giving and taking abuse, and at their emotional threshold. That distance between their current state and being over the edge is tiny compared to a civilian setting. And to top it off, there aren't any cooler heads on the ice to prevail.But though that may explain Bertuzzi's act, it definitely does not condone it. A reason is not the same as an excuse. And as far as his suspension goes, I think he should continue to be suspended. If last season existed, there's no way he would have started the season on time, and I don't think a work stoppage should benefit him and allow him to return to the ice. Give him twenty games. He and his team should still be feeling the consequences.

[mulhs82 2]

2. Tag Up Rule, okay, if I am getting this right, before a player was considered off-side when they are skating before the puck, but now someone can skate before the puck crosses the blue line in event that they skate to return to the blue line. That might cause some bad calls by the linesman, since we saw some terribly referree-ing in the past years. (Remember, as Leafs fan, EVERY referee is against us, especially Kelly) This rule seems fair though, although I am not quite sure what will consequence play-wise, other than not having an offside every 2 minutes.

This was the old rule I have been arguing should be back in the game since they took it out.Shootouts, I'm kinda indifferent. I'll give them a shot before I bash them.I love the new icing rule, if they would have made it non-touch icing I would have been furious.Five minute fighting. I like the fact that there has to be an instigator penalty attached. I think we will still see some fights towards the end of the game.

[Untilted 158]

I was hoping they would increase the OT from 5 to 10 minutes with the 4 on 4. I am willing to give the shootut a try, but i have a feeling that the novelty will eventually wear off.

[copernicus 0]

no red line will speed up the game. The rule was added (in the 40s I believe) to speed up the game, and, while things have changed since then they havent changed that much.There are several game cloggers that can result from no red line:endless icings from missed passesfrequent turnovers at the blue lines from intercepted passesa more clogged neutral zone as defenses drop back moreThe proponents of no red line point to the Olympics and how much it helps that game. Any benefit from no red line in the International game is enhanced by the wider ice. The narrower passing lanes of NHL ice have the potential to muck up the game horribly.As Ken Daneyko also pointed out, the Olympics teams are All-Star teams with great depth of talent. The NHL talent is too diluted to take full advantage of the rule change. The salary cap is going to exacerbate that problem, as talented stars (especially the assist guys who dont specialize in putting the puck in the net) are cut to make cap room. The lack of depth in the NFL is evidence of that.Shootouts are great..its no less hockey than 3 on 3 and 2 on 2 certainly. In fact one of the top goalie instructors in the US suggests going one step further...have a shootout at the BEGINNING of EVERY game. If the game and a 5 minute OT dont break a tie, then the winner is the winner of the pre-game shootout. That does two things..it gives the fans a breakaway exhibition every night, and imagine the intensity of the OT from the team that has already lost the shootout.The poster above appears to be a bit confused about the tag up offsides rule. It comes into play more often when the puck has been legally in the offensive zone and then comes out. The tag up rule allows the puck to be dumped back in while players are still in the offensive zone, giving them time to exit and reenter (as long as they are all outside the blue line at the same time). The theory behind the experiment in not allowing tag ups was that the game was turning into dump and chase, and defensemen didnt need puckhandling skills, since all they almost ever did was capture the puck at or outside the blue line and dump it back in. No tag ups would force defensemen to become more skilled. Unfortunately, the experiment wasnt in place long enough at the amateur level to really develop those skills in defensemen.Goalie pad and glove size will make little difference in scoring. Positioning and save techniques have developed to the point where even strength, first shot goals are rare, and an inch or two isnt going to make any difference. Youll still get the same goals from mis-matches in manpower and rebounds, but no improvement elsewhere. The oval shaped goal experimented with in Buffalo would increase scoring, but personally, a 25 shot shutout to me is more exciting than a 25 shot 6 goal game.

[grindzitout 0]

I don't have a lot of time to gripe right now but before this thread gets too long with nonscence, I must say....The only good changes in the rules are the tag up off side, and shortening the size of the goalie pads. All the rest of the rule changes deter the game and take away strenghts from certain types of players. ie. goalies playing the puck behind the goal line.All of the new changes are meant to promote and commericalize the game to for Americans simply for more money. They should just get rid of 10 teams, improve the skill and keep it the way it was.Also notice how majority of the people pro new rules are American. Discusting...