Should a penalty end if a short handed goal is scored?

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

It is something I have been wondering about, do you think if a team is on the PP and they give up a short handed goal the PP should end?

I kind of think it should, I mean if you are on the PP there is no reason to give up a goal since you have more players on the ice.

I kind of think if the short handed team manages to score a goal the penalty should end.

 

[IceNeophyte]

No? That doesn't even make sense.

Let me actually expand upon this.

The point of a power play is to give the aggrieved team an advantage. If the aggrieved team scores, a goal is sufficient compensation for the crime. If a shorty is scored, the aggrieved team hasn't been compensated for the crime.

 

[Windy River]

Seems kinda random.. logic being??

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

No? That doesn't even make sense.

Sure it does, if the team that is short handed scores a goal they get a kill, if you have a PP you shouldn't be giving up goals

 

[IceNeophyte]

Sure it does, if the team that is short handed scores a goal they get a kill, if you have a PP you shouldn't be giving up goals

See my expansion above.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Seems kinda random.. logic being??

If my team is on a pp I dlove not expect them to give up a goal so if they do I feel like the other team should get an automatic PK

 

[yeaher]

shitposting

 

[JianYang]

No, I think this is uneccessary. The penalties were originally implemented for the full duration, and they only changed the rule because Montreal got too good at scoring multiple goals on the same PP.

Scoring too many shorthanded goals on the same penalty will never be an issue, obviously. This seems like a pointless move that accomplishes nothing. You very rarely see a team score on the PP after they have allowed a SHG on the same penalty anyways, so the end result pretty much follows what you're looking for already.

 

[krutovsdonut]

this reminds me of playing poker with kids who include too many wild cards.

 

[Zen Arcade]

I wouldn't do it, but it could create an interesting dynamic in terms of strategy.

Do you go for a purely defensive set up or do you try putting a speedy scorer or two on your PK? Seeing both teams going all out trying to score when one has less players would be really chaotic.

 

[Tryamw]

Scoring too many shorthanded goals on the same penalty will never be an issue, obviously.

Are you sure???

3 SHG 1 penalty Boston vs Carolina

 

[Realgud]

Makes no sense. Why are you rewarding the team that commited the infraction in the first place?

And also, what if a team was so good at scoring shorthanded that they would purposefully commit penalties because they could negate the infraction by being better at the game. So being better at the game would allow you to cheat more. It certainly would go against parity.

 

[Confused Turnip]

If anything we should run all penalties full time like it used to be.

 

[TGWL]

Why is the short handed team rewarded with the penalty ending? You'd probably see more chances taken when players skate over the red line and either dump the puck or try and keep it against the boards deep in zone, but it makes no sense to reward the team taking the penalty.

 

[powerbomb]

I like this idea, in the same way that I like how in Blades of Steel on the NES the referee would only drag away the person who lost a fight to throw into the box, while play immediately continued with the victor of the fight claiming possession of the puck and a power play!

 

[alphabetical]

If my team is on a pp I dlove not expect them to give up a goal so if they do I feel like the other team should get an automatic PK

In all seriousness, a penalty kill, by definition, is keeping the other team from scoring for the duration of the penalty. Short handed goals have nothing to do with that specific requirement, even though you feel that they should.

Why is this coming up? Did the leafs score a shg then give up a ppg last game?

 

[TGWL]

Are you sure???

3 SHG 1 penalty Boston vs Carolina

That didn't become an issue, that was just a laughing moment at Carolina's expense.

 

[JianYang]

Are you sure???

3 SHG 1 penalty Boston vs Carolina

It will never be an issue. Just because it happens on the rare event does not make it an issue.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

In all seriousness, a penalty kill, by definition, is keeping the other team from scoring for the duration of the penalty. Short handed goals have nothing to do with that specific requirement, even though you feel that they should.

Why is this coming up? Did the leafs score a shg then give up a ppg last game?

No actually they gave up a short handed goal last game

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

this reminds me of playing poker with kids who include too many wild cards.

More like, it reminds me of playing poker with kids who want to change the rules to Go Fish.

 

[SotasicA]

How about counting shorthanded goals as 2 goals? Then a team chasing late could intentionally take a penalty (attempt to injure, for instance) to come back with a shortie.

 

[MaxDummy]

In fact they should come back to full 2 minutes PPs even if the team scores. That'd be great

 

[kingsholygrail]

If they score shorthanded, they should get a PP.

 

[YYC]

I think it should count towards your penalties killed.
Ie. if you go 3/4 on the PK and get a short handed goal it would go up to a 4/4/. You cannot exceed a perfect PK for the game...ie. A shorty and a 4/4 PK does not turn into a 5/4 PK

 

[Dache]

Sure it does, if the team that is short handed scores a goal they get a kill, if you have a PP you shouldn't be giving up goals

when “should” you be giving up goals?

 

[IceNeophyte]

when “should” you be giving up goals?

New rule: Maple Leafs get a mulligan every time they are scored on.