What’s bugging me: The instigator rule

[c-carp]

Sarcasm, right?

I don't think so, he was replying to my post and it came off to me that he meant every word of it

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

I hope they get rid of the instigator so players have to answer the bell for their actions.

Dirty hit? Getting Jumped!
Huge clean check? Getting Jumped!
Score a goal like a soft Euro? Getting Jumped!
Saucer pass? Getting Jumped!
Named one of the 3 Stars in Away Arena? Getting Jumped!

 

[drganon]

I'm in favor of getting rid of it.

 

[Talain]

I say that they should modify it so that it doesn't apply after dirty hits. One shouldn't have to worry about being jumped by the other team's goon for laying a clean hit, but at the same time punks like Raffi Torres shouldn't be able to knock star players out cold with dirty, dangerous cheap shots and then turtle.

I think another part of the problem is that teams are too afraid to take the extra penalty for instigating, even when a clear message needs to be sent. While an extra two minute instigator penalty could cost a team a game, losing a start player for an extended period of time due to a dirty hit could cost a lot more games. If the Matt Cookes, the Steve Downies, etc, realized that there was a line beyond which even the instigator rule wasn't going to protect them, then they might be just a bit more careful.

 

[Your Boy Troy]

Players being 'forced' to fight after a clean hit?

Challenged to a fight? Sure. But, infrequently do we see a player being forced to fight. Look at Niklas Kronwall as an exemplar. He has no fighting majors in his NHL career. And, he has left his feet on some of the impactful hits that he has given in the past. Players have the decision whether or not they decide to drop the gloves

There isn't enough accountability in the NHL today. Zac Rinaldo, Matt Cooke, Ryan Garbutt, Steve Downie, Alex Burrows, Max Lapierre, Dominic Moore, and Johan Franzen are rarely held accountable for their actions on the ice. Nothing frustrates me more then to have to watch these agitators purposely get under players' skin knowing that they will likely never have to face the consequences.

If I desire to watch a bunch of fake tough guys trying to make a name for themselves; I'd watch NCAA hockey. I'm more interested in watching Crosby excel at his broadest potential. I sometimes can't relish watching him play when I have to see a bunch of punks seeking to get his focus off of his game.

Abolish the instigator; reduce the amount of ten-minute/game misconducts that are given out.

 

[Dr Quincy]

Yes let's get rid of a rule that applies a penalty on 1 player attacking another player for no reason. Genius.

 

[Random Forest]

Fans who through the years have witnessed pretty much anything you can imagine when it comes to NHL hockey, the associated violence and how it has morphed into the game we witness today. From regular bench-clearing brawls that reached a pinnacle in the Broad Street Bullies era, to stick-swinging fights (one of which almost killed Ted Green in 1969), to riots in Montreal over an ill-advised suspension of their hockey idol.

Such was NHL hockey we had always known, and crude as it was, it worked for the most part, and it kept the players honest.

So there were regular muggings, brawls, and frequent stick-swinging incidents, but "letting the players police themselves" was a totally effective method of keeping dirty hockey to a minimum. Right.


I don't understand how one can't see how inane this argument is.

It's entirely revisionist history that hockey is dirtier today.

Today we're concerned with bad hits. And the worst of those hits are still fairly tame compared to the BS antics in the 70s.


Terrible article, and poorly written (as are most "articles" by HF partners). The instigator rule is perfectly fine, and only dated traditionalists are put off by it. And those people tend to be too blinded by their nostalgia for the "good old days" to understand how ineffective "the code" was at policing the players. When I was 15, I used to believe so fervently in the code. It made hockey seem so noble and honorable. I've since grown up to realize it did absolutely nothing to limit the amount of cheap and dirty plays in the league.

 

[Beerfish]

Totally disagree.

People like myself who want to see more skill and less thugs in hockey like the instigator rule.

Its the pro fighting crowd who seem to despise of it.

Since Bettman cares about safety he feels the rule should be strictly enforced.

Eliminating fighting would be a lot easier and it would justify the league in its efforts to protect players from concussions and other serious injuries especially those to the head and face.
Problem is Bettman doesn't want to alienate the fans who like brawls.

(Crappy pop up truck ads are annoying.)

Actually I find the instigator rule the way it is called is counter to the skill argument. The last few years one guy tries to start something with a skilled player, another guy steps into defend and he gets the instigator.

It was or should be intend to stop players from suckering others into fights or going after vulnerable players, it is called in the exact opposite way.

 

[Oak]

There isn't enough accountability in the NHL today. Zac Rinaldo, Matt Cooke, Ryan Garbutt, Steve Downie, Alex Burrows, Max Lapierre, Dominic Moore, and Johan Franzen are rarely held accountable for their actions on the ice. Nothing frustrates me more then to have to watch these agitators purposely get under players' skin knowing that they will likely never have to face the consequences.

Wait, what? What the hell are you talking about? How do you list Dom Moore with a Cookie and Rinaldo?

 

[kingsfan28]

I like the instigator rule. Somebody who deliberately jumps another player uninterested in fighting or who delivered a clean check should be punished.

Like when Shane Doan gets hit, lays around like his knee is blown out and then by some miracle gets up and charges after Jake Muzzin moments later trying to throw punches?

Nothing called btw.

 

[CaptainKishimoto]

The instigator rule lets the rats do what they want on the ice. It needs to go away.

 

[BobbyJet]

Interesting, that the subject is so polarizing. I plan to do a follow-up in February and would be interested in hearing some views on what folks consider to be viable alternatives to the current instigator rule. I have some thoughts but will hold on to them for now.

 

[BeardedCanuck]

No need to get rid of the rule or change it only thing that needs to happen is have the refs actually call the game instead of sitting on their hands and trying to even up games, and have consistent discipline for dirty hits. You can add or take away any rule but nothing will change until the refs just call the game and consistent supplemental discipline.