IIHF considering rule changes(UPDATE: now approved)
- Thread starter Jussi
- Start date
Jussi
Registered User
Tv schedules are very strict, especially in the US and you know who pays most for the Olympic rights. The way they are set up now allows the games to be completed in time in a set schedule without the ice quality suffering either for the latter game.
BalticWarrior
Registered User
decreasing the rink size is a great idea. international sized rinks are just too big. Also moving blue line is a good idea.
There is much more than that. 10-minute overtime is played straight after 3rd period, with a similar break as in regular season games. When the final goes to overtime, players go to their dressing rooms
10-minute overtime:
Regular time 130 minutes
Break 2 minutes
Overtime 15 minutes
Break 3 minutes
Shootout 5 minutes
Post-game Ceremonies 5 minutes
=160 minutes
20-minute overtime:
Regular time 130 minutes
Break 15 minutes
Overtime 30 minutes
Break 3 minutes
Shootout 5 minutes
Post-game ceremonies 5 minutes
=188 minutes
That's almost half an hour difference in game lengths.
There is four hours listed between the start of SF1 and SF2 on Saturday. The latter would make it too tight, as they have to empty the arena between games.
Everlasting
Registered User
QnebO
Wheel, snipe, celly
- Feb 11, 2010
- 9,763
- 644
Has there been talks to decrease it? It says standardize, I would hope for decrease too, but rather I scare that we won't see world championships in NHL rink anymore nor "FEL rink".
I'd like to know what they mean by "standarise the ice surface", as it is already standardised in the first rule of the rule book. And the margin allowed for IIHF competition is already pretty thin (1m in both width and length).
I'm not sure I like the idea of moving the goal line, it will take space away from playmakers as defensemen won't have to think twice about chasing a guy behind the net.
Still undecided regarding moving the blue line. It can help creative defensemen, but I don't mind the current balance between offense and defense. It would also make it much harder to clear the zone when shorthanded and I'm not sure I would like to see power plays have more weight.
I don't like the double minor for goalie interference. I have no idea why it should be seen as a more severe infraction compared to "normal" penlaties, and it's subject to a lot of controversial calls as goalie interference penalties are sometimes awarded when the player is pushed by an opponent.
A major penalty for grabbing the head is definitely a good thing. Very dangerous play.
I'm not sure what the point of the last proposal is, goalies already can't freeze the puck when not under pressure. And a long range shot can be used to get an offensive zone faceoff when there are a few seconds left in the game.
I'm not sure I like the idea of moving the goal line, it will take space away from playmakers as defensemen won't have to think twice about chasing a guy behind the net.
Still undecided regarding moving the blue line. It can help creative defensemen, but I don't mind the current balance between offense and defense. It would also make it much harder to clear the zone when shorthanded and I'm not sure I would like to see power plays have more weight.
I don't like the double minor for goalie interference. I have no idea why it should be seen as a more severe infraction compared to "normal" penlaties, and it's subject to a lot of controversial calls as goalie interference penalties are sometimes awarded when the player is pushed by an opponent.
A major penalty for grabbing the head is definitely a good thing. Very dangerous play.
I'm not sure what the point of the last proposal is, goalies already can't freeze the puck when not under pressure. And a long range shot can be used to get an offensive zone faceoff when there are a few seconds left in the game.
Perhaps, they want to know, if the actuall ice surface is still good or not.
I really like the idea, but only decreasing the rink size to NHL- or at least finnish-size.
Siamese Dream
Registered User
None of the mainstream manufacturers make the goalie gloves with the cheater on them anymore, you'll mostly only find them on much older models
As far as I see there is no talk about decreasing the rink size. The cost for doing this in all leagues that play according to the IIHF rulebook would be astronomical and most likely the small town rinks/teams won't even be able to afford it. (Especially here in central Europe, where most teams are just a bad season away from bankruptcy.)
They just want to standardize the offensive zone LENGTH. Moving the goal line back to 3.3m is equal to NHL distance. The move of the blue line most likely means moving it towards center by 1.15m to have an offensive zone identical to the NHL, but only in length. Of course most of those rule changes are to increase the number of goals per game.
Concerning the drums. When I started to go to German hockey games I hated the atmosphere, reminded me too much of soccer matches. But nowadays, whenever I see an NHL, KHL or International game I really miss the songs, chants.
They just want to standardize the offensive zone LENGTH. Moving the goal line back to 3.3m is equal to NHL distance. The move of the blue line most likely means moving it towards center by 1.15m to have an offensive zone identical to the NHL, but only in length. Of course most of those rule changes are to increase the number of goals per game.
Concerning the drums. When I started to go to German hockey games I hated the atmosphere, reminded me too much of soccer matches. But nowadays, whenever I see an NHL, KHL or International game I really miss the songs, chants.
What broadcasters care about much more are ratings and it is very unlikely that whatever is scheduled next would draw more viewers than overtime in an elimination hockey game.
Jeff Babchuk
Registered User
Domenica
Registered User
- Sep 17, 2013
- 822
- 0
It says "bass drum" in the thread starting post and is likely a measure to descrease noise emission. I'm pretty sure that there are laws about the kind of noise you are allowed to make indoors. It's a health concern and not about banning drums outright.
I personally like drums at games but I don't want to stand next to one (actually not even in the same block).
Last edited:
Domenica
Registered User
- Sep 17, 2013
- 822
- 0
That's a very self-centered view. I heard somewhere that Coronation Street (a soap opera) is very popular in Canada and can't be shifted for hockey games. Not without protest by its fans at least.
Jussi
Registered User
There's currently too much space behind the goal, defensemen aren't chasing anyone even now as everyone is playing zone defense of sorts, collapsing the net and isolating the opposing players to areas where they are scoring goals (mainly sideboards or behind the goal). If they eventually also go with the narrower nets the NHL has now, it won't mean a thing.
I wasn't of the opinion originally but after Sotshi it's now clear to me that it's better to have more space on the blueline than on the sideboards. All that extra space we have on the international rinks on the sides doesn't produce goals when teams are defending as I described previously. Therefore it's better to have more space on the blueline to allow for more shots as it's a much higher chance of scoring form there than form the sides.
I don't think the IIHF should base any rule change on Sochi. It's true that it was one of the least entertaining IIHF tournament in recent memories, but the current rink dimensions have offered good hockey for years, except for that 10 days period in February.
Since these changes will affect every level of hockey all over the world, I don't think it's a good idea to base it all on one tournament.
Agreed. Eliminating the area behind the goal line as an offensive zone would greatly detract from the offensive entertainment value of the game. I'm not sure why so many Europeans are so eager to install a dump and chase style of game like they have in the NHL? Its robotic, monotonous and mindless.
Watch an NHL game and count the number of beautiful passing combinations or great stickhandling solos that you see. I promise that you won't need more than 2 fingers. There is just not enough room in NHL rinks to allow for anything other than a boring dump and bump style.
Sounds like, that you would install the NHL rink size/dimensions. Greater offensive-space, but smaller size of the ice surface.
Jussi
Registered User
It's not just one tournament, the trend has been evident for several years in international hockey.
You need to watch more of Blackhawks games. Or games in general, the top teams don't use dump & chase unless it's necessary. You won't see passing combinations or stickhandling in the big rink either between two evenly matched teams, defensive strategies are effective enough to take out the room. No matter how much you keep on insisting otherwise, you're still wrong.
No, I still think NHL rinks could use a meter or two more in width (but i do understand it'd be a very expensive to renovate the arenas). I wouldn't mind if international hockey went to 28 meter wide rinks but I would like to see first what effect moving the bluline will have.
Jussi
Registered User
There's a wide variety in sizes, same in Czech Republic. There's a thread about the rink sizes in this section somewhere.
Its easier to play a defensive style on a smaller rink, because there is less demand to be able to skate to occupy the defensive position. Dump and chase is nothing more than an organized turnover of the puck. As for the Blackhawks, they have a few guys who handle the puck well, but the smaller ice still greatly limits them. Also, its worth noting that the most successful practitioner of the trap defensive system in Sochi was Canada.
Last edited:
Jussi
Registered User
You clearly don't know what the idea behind dump & chase is. It is used to get behind a trap AND it executed properly, there should always be a guy set get to the puck before the the defense. E.g. Canada did it several times against Finland yesterday successfully. Which brings us to the topic of trapping. It is just as effective on big ice too. Just ask Canada or Russia, whom have both struggled against our trap during this season's tournaments on various levels.Are we still subscribing to that myth? The trap is a very passive 1:2:2 with little or no forecheck, which was quite the anti-thesis of Canada’s game at Sochi.
Normally teams that rely heavily on the trap don’t outshoot and outchance the opposition, game in game out, by a wide margin, which is something Canada did If you look at the gold medal game, for example, the Swedish team spent very little time inside our zone, and even when trailing in the 3rd period were getting badly outchanced and outshot.
Our D were very adept at making a quick pass to the outlet man, inside our zone, leading to quick counterattacks. Our D were also good puck carriers, and were not shy about joining the rush, or even leading it, as witnessed by their heavy contribution to TC’s offense.
TC didn’t sit back waiting for the opposition to come at them, our boyz took the game to their opponents, well nigh for the full 60 minutes. And yes, dump and chase, driving the net and speed, speed, speed ( again as opposed to passivity ) were a big part of Canada playing THEIR GAME at Sochi...
TC’s game plan was all about BREAKING THE TRAP, NOT employing it!
Anyone know when the results of the 2014 IIHF Annual Congress will be published? It's supposed to conclude today (24th of May). End of day or maybe Monday?
Actually I'm now wondering if there are any active IIHF member on HFBoards... and if not, WHY not?
Actually I'm now wondering if there are any active IIHF member on HFBoards... and if not, WHY not?
