Rules I'd Like To See Implemented and/or Changed

[Sheppy]

The Offside Review needs an overhaul.

1 - If defending team gains control, it can't be challenged. If they can't get the puck out after 3 or 4 clearing attempts, a guy who was a third of an inch offside shouldn't be punished for that.
2 - If there's a review, you get 30 seconds to review at real time speed, none of this 1000 frames per second trash.
3 - If the puck is in the attacking zone for longer than 20 seconds, it can't be reviewed.

It's f***ing annoying as a fan getting hyped up for a goal, then you see a delay and the dorks are all huddled around an ipad. You just know it's going to be called back.

 

[RoccoF14]

My 2 rule changes I'd like to see, both pertain to OT.

1. I think you should play 3 on 3 until a goal is scored and get rid of the shootout (Doubtful the Players Association would go for that, however).

2. I'd also eliminate the Loser Point for a regulation tie. You either get 2pts or 0.

 

[Fenian24]

1-Get rid of the instigator
2-Get rid of the instigator

 

[Aussie Bruin]

#1 is wildly impracticable. Will never happen.
#2 and 3 fall at the first hurdle that a rule must be simple and applied consistently. It can't be that it's 'x' unless 'y' or 'z'. You can't have that. A play is either offside and therefore illegal or it's not. End of. Can perhaps tighten up the regulations around the challenge system, but IMO that's it.
#4 why shouldn't it be icing? The intent on the part of the defending team is still the same, regardless of whether a goalie is present.
#5 feels like double-dipping. No thanks.

Good conversation topic, but sorry these are a strike out for me.

One pet hate I do have though, is the awarding of goals to players who get the tiniest bit of body or skate on a puck before it goes into the net. A lot of guys, especially defenders, get robbed of goals that are really theirs because the puck brushed a teammate's jersey on the way to the net. I'm not talking proper deflections with the stick, just those incidental body contact ones. You need to get around the 'simple and consistent' principle I raised above, and perhaps the way to do that is that stick/body divide - a goal is awarded to the last attacking player to touch the puck with their stick, or perhaps also when applicable with their skate. Any part of the body doesn't count. I'd like to see something like that implemented, just for fairness.

 

[ON3M4N]

The only rule I'd like changed is when a team pulls the goalie and ices the puck, they can put a goalie back in. When the puck is iced the offended team can't change players normally (barring injury) so if they don't have a goalie on the ice and ice the puck then they're SOL. They can take the FO with 6 skaters

 

[KrugAvoy]

#5 is already a thing I believe in NCAA hockey

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

The only one I like at all is 5. I’ve been saying that for years (surprised I almost never hear it supported or suggested by others).

The other 4 all hard no’s

1. How long is it gonna take to serve an 8 game suspension against the Coyotes? Don't like this one.
2. You still have to account for the guy in the attacking zone, whether he handles the puck or not. Don't like this one.
3. This one you could have an argument for. Then again, if the defensive team gains possession they could still be under pressure due to the offside.
4. Why? Each team still has 6 players on the ice. Don't like this one.
5. The scoring team already had a de facto pp. Don't like this one.

Potentially 1 out of 5 ain't bad.

So the defensive players are supposed to themselves keep track of a guy being offside and choose to disregard said player in terms of defending?

 

[TD Charlie]

1-Get rid of the instigator
2-Get rid of the instigator

Can i add axe the instigator to this?

I could also do without a coaches challenge

 

[jgatie]

I am replying before reading for maintaining independent thought clarity.

offside reviews need to go.

the Brodeur bucket should go.

I would like either team scoring to end all currently-being-served two-minute penalties, or at least any that keep an imbalance and thus would otherwise allow a powerplay to continue. why let a powerplay continue after they fail it so thoroughly that a goal is scored against them? it's silly this current way to me.

I hate the recent commercial that rubs in faces that the determinations in the game can be altered via computers to produce wanted results/entertainment. I already distrust the league. AI excitement and animated on-ice advertisements are not indicators of a good and honest vector of "adjustment" within the sport.

Admit it, you are a bot. Some arcane AI experiment gone haywire. It's the only sane explanation.

 

[mjhfb]

If there is a penalty in 3-3 OT, play 3-2 instead of adding players to make it 4-3.
Get that circus over sooner.

 

[UConn126]

I've thought if a suspendable play resulted in injury, the offending player should receive X games + the length of time missed by the injured player. So if there's a head shot deemed a 3 game suspension and the victim misses 2 weeks with a concussion, the offender's 3 games don't start until the victim plays again.

 

[shelbysdad]

Ref skates over to coach and says do you want to challenge...5 seconds, yes or no. No looking your iPad for 30 seconds to decide

If the team on defense has possession and can't clear the zone after a questionable offside, sucks to be them. If you gain possession no challenge

 

[IntentionallyWide]

Puck over the glass is the dumbest penalty in the NHL. Treat it like an icing and don't let the offending team change lines. A 2 minute minor is overkill.

 

[Sheppy]

I've thought if a suspendable play resulted in injury, the offending player should receive X games + the length of time missed by the injured player. So if there's a head shot deemed a 3 game suspension and the victim misses 2 weeks with a concussion, the offender's 3 games don't start until the victim plays again.

Unfortunately, if a guy like Pasta injures a guy like Reaves. They could just milk the injury because Reaves sucks and it doesn't effect them.

 

[James Walker]

If you don't eliminate it completely why not require the penalized team to advance the puck over its own blue line before icing it?

Good point. I considered that, but I think icing should be icing period.

I wonder what percent of PP time is lost because there is no icing on the SH (no analytics on this is my guess).

 

[James Walker]

My 2 rule changes I'd like to see, both pertain to OT.

1. I think you should play 3 on 3 until a goal is scored and get rid of the shootout (Doubtful the Players Association would go for that, however).

2. I'd also eliminate the Loser Point for a regulation tie. You either get 2pts or 0.

I would get rid of overtime entirely, 3 on 3 is very entertaining, so that won't happen.
To me, a tie after 60 minutes is a fair result.

In the same vein, (rhetorically) why does the NFL have overtime in the regular season?
If 2 teams battle for 60 minutes and end up tied, neither deserves to lose and get nothing.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

The only rule I'd like changed is when a team pulls the goalie and ices the puck, they can put a goalie back in. When the puck is iced the offended team can't change players normally (barring injury) so if they don't have a goalie on the ice and ice the puck then they're SOL. They can take the FO with 6 skaters

First one that I really like.

And it makes sense.

 

[BB79]

Get rid of the stupid trapazoid. Marty Brodeur retired long ago, time to let goalies come out and play the puck again. Move the net foward to where it used to be. More room to get creative behind the net again