What goal crease style did you prefer?

[darkhorse686]

The old rectangle, rectangle-semicircle combo, blue semicircle, or today's rectangle w/bubble at the front?

 

[Kane One]

I always thought the blue semicircle was the nicest.

Does anyone know why they kept changing them?

Also, if you look at the blue semicircle crease, why was inside the net painted blue?

 

[tarheelhockey]

I thought the semicircle was the most elegant.

I still half-expect icing to be waived off when it crosses near the post.

 

[Killion]

Yes, they kept changing the dimensions over the years and radically in the 90's with the crease enlarged (from 24sq ft - 44) in order to try & protect the Goalies & stop the net or "crease crashing" as it's called. Guys were getting hurt, Goalies & Players.... personally, I liked the old rectangular or square creases, as a Goalie up to you and your Defenceman to clear the slot & shooting lanes fair & square. Exacerbating matters, the Brainiacs at NHL Inc then decide (Brian Burke) that everyone out there is a potential Wayne Gretzky, so they move the Goal Lines & Nets out by 3', losing another 300' in front of the net along with the increased Crease side, turning the slot & back of the net into a Puckchenko Kill Zone. Players are bigger, faster, stronger, need more room. So what does the league do? Removed app 350 sq ft from in front of the net where its the most dangerous to be playing. Brilliant... and in 2013, along comes Burke again, suggesting rinks should be widened. Like, go buy a clue Brian.

 

[Kane One]

If they made the crease bigger to protect goalies, why did they make it smaller? Was more goals more important than protecting goalies?

 

[Killion]

If they made the crease bigger to protect goalies, why did they make it smaller? Was more goals more important than protecting goalies?

Ya, the introduction of the 24 sq ft to 44 sq ft half moon crease in the 90's combined with moving the goal lines out by 3', combined loss of roughly 300+ sq ft of room out front of the net stifled play. No room, all clutch & grab, dump & chase in order to break past Neutral Zone Traps or Left Wing Locks, pushing the game to the corners with constant, incessant cycling, the Dead Puck Era. Coming out of the last Lockout, new rules, new crease, removal of the Centre Ice Red-Line, increased scoring. Crease shrunk to its current square with arched top, width shrunk, introduction of another foolish innovation, the Trapezoid.

 

[ES]

If they made the crease bigger to protect goalies, why did they make it smaller? Was more goals more important than protecting goalies?

It was changed because too many goals were disallowed due to "skate on the crease" rule. Hull's goal happened despite the change and then they decided to abolish video review for that rule.

 

[darkhorse686]

Yeah, it's weird how it changed, even going back and forth in some cases. I noticed, they used the semicircle-rectangle at a some international tournaments like Canada-Russia '74 or the 76 Canada Cup (when NHL still used the old rectangle), but at the Olympics and some WJC's they stuck with the rectangle until the early 90's. Did the rules of each competition outline what size of crease they used?

 

[DJ Man]

Something that I always found curious was that they originally drew the semicircle around the old rectangle, and both were painted in. It's as if the rules-dudes couldn't make up their minds, so, here are both, take your pick as to which to enforce, Mr. Ref.

Even now, they have little corners painted to delineate the old crease. Is this just some sort of visual aid to the goalkeeper, so that he can ascertain where he is without looking back?

I thought that was really stupid, in the years wherein they painted both the crease and the ice inside the goal in blue. Good way to blur the distinction between a goal and a non-goal for a new viewer.

Furthermore, why do they have to paint the crease blue anyway? Just to emphasize to the players that, hey, we really mean it, you're supposed to stay out of here? Shouldn't every player know this by now? (I mean, why not paint both attacking zones orange so that players know they're supposed to stay onside, or paint everybody's head in red so that we'll avoid high-sticking?)

(Reminds me of when our county added red flags to the "55 mph" speed limit signs because drivers were ignoring these once some roads were increased to 70 mph. Hey, guys, we really mean it, you're supposed to slow down.)

 

[Boom Boom Bear]

Ya, the introduction of the 24 sq ft to 44 sq ft half moon crease in the 90's combined with moving the goal lines out by 3', combined loss of roughly 300+ sq ft of room out front of the net stifled play. No room, all clutch & grab, dump & chase in order to break past Neutral Zone Traps or Left Wing Locks, pushing the game to the corners with constant, incessant cycling, the Dead Puck Era. Coming out of the last Lockout, new rules, new crease, removal of the Centre Ice Red-Line, increased scoring. Crease shrunk to its current square with arched top, width shrunk, introduction of another foolish innovation, the Trapezoid.

... for one season. Back down to Dead Puck level scoring. These new "innovations" didn't do a damned thing to increase scoring, for reals.

 

[begbeee]

Count me as a modernist here. Rectangle with bubble in the front. As you can see in the picture, the space "semicircle minus rectangle" on the left and righ is pretty much a dead space (from the goalie POV), no need to protect the goalie there.

 

[Killion]

... for one season. Back down to Dead Puck level scoring. These new "innovations" didn't do a damned thing to increase scoring, for reals.

Absolutely. Applied a temporary band-aid. Figured they were opening up the game which it did, increase scoring, which it did, for one year. Coaches & players adapted. Left Wing Locks deployed. Their messin things up, wont admit it, dont seem to have the vision, the critical thought to first telegraph the ramifications to the changes theyve made creating even more problems for themselves and then secondly; refuse to address honestly that "hey, maybe moving the goal line out by 3', increasing crease sizes & taking away valuable real estate, then shrinking the crease again to that bizarre hybrid square with semi-top-arc, adding that insane trapezoid turning the end zones into killing grounds, removing the centre ice red line mightve been collectively a series of mistakes"? And along comes Brian Burke with another hairbrained idea; lets just widen the ice surface by 4 or 5 feet. Yep. All new arenas built hereafter 200' X 90' plz.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

I prefer the crease as shown on the Irvin book (which I somehow ended up with two copies of, but if you're going to get two copies of one book, that'd be on my short list. What a great read). It's the one in place when I started playing goal.

Time for a one-off story; I was playing drop-in one day, and this ankle bender was consistently planting himself squarely inside the blue paint. I told him that he shouldn't be standing there (I had recently really injured my knee in a game when I pad stacked into a guy standing in the crease, and I sure as hell wasn't going to risk injury in a drop-in).

He looked at me and said (and I'm quoting, because I don't have the time or the energy to make **** up these days): "There's no refs out here. What are *you* going to do about it?"

So I did what Patrick Roy did to Dino Ciccarelli in the 1996 playoffs. Not too hard, and only once, but enough so that he got the point (so to speak).

 

[Killion]

So I did what Patrick Roy did to Dino Ciccarelli in the 1996 playoffs. Not too hard, and only once, but enough so that he got the point (so to speak).

... ya, you had to be pretty stick happy back in the day, and that was without blue paint, square crease, stand-up. Had to send a clear message to the opposition early in the season that guess what?; not only do you not set foot in my crease, but you come with 3-5' of the top of it & Im out there cutting down an angle for a shot from top of the slot or the point & your interfering with my vision, your goin down like a Redwood. I didnt care about the Penalties, playing shorthanded, stone you suckers 5 on 3 if necessary. You created room for yourself by being aggressive & when required, viscous. Nasty. Stick & filthy mouth. Works a treat. Not only does your opponent think your psycho so too do your own team mates, and will do whatever their told if for example leaving some guy open in the slot or wherever, so there too, give your own Defenceman a whack on the ass while screaming at him to wake the eff up. Do exactly as I tell you or consequences. None of this oversized crease blue paint artificial "safe zone" nonsense.

 

[Eisen]

I prefer the crease as shown on the Irvin book (which I somehow ended up with two copies of, but if you're going to get two copies of one book, that'd be on my short list. What a great read). It's the one in place when I started playing goal.

Time for a one-off story; I was playing drop-in one day, and this ankle bender was consistently planting himself squarely inside the blue paint. I told him that he shouldn't be standing there (I had recently really injured my knee in a game when I pad stacked into a guy standing in the crease, and I sure as hell wasn't going to risk injury in a drop-in).

He looked at me and said (and I'm quoting, because I don't have the time or the energy to make **** up these days): "There's no refs out here. What are *you* going to do about it?"

So I did what Patrick Roy did to Dino Ciccarelli in the 1996 playoffs. Not too hard, and only once, but enough so that he got the point (so to speak).

I'd say he earned that one.

On topic. I prefer the semicircle as well. It just looks good to me.

 

[Killion]

I'd say he earned that one. On topic. I prefer the semicircle as well. It just looks good to me.

Ya in rec hockey & beer leagues etc its a big problem for goalies. Hackers & crease crashers, guys who just wind up let fly at your head from 15' out or whatever, ankle benders as Taco encountered who just park themselves in the crease or in front of you pretending their Phil Esposito. Insane. I mean, these are all adults with jobs to go to the next day or whatever, playing pickup as a goalie in any number of such situations can be a risky pursuit. You dont really wanna lay the lumber on them as they too are out there to be having fun, but some people.....

 

[Bear of Bad News]

I don't mind it so much in games (where they're keeping score and where there are referees who watch for it). In drop-in? Please.

 

[Killion]

I don't mind it so much in games (where they're keeping score and where there are referees who watch for it). In drop-in? Please.

... what a Goomba. Was he wearin a Riddell football helmet?
Clock em' Taco, take em' down like Pine Beetle infested Fir's....

 

[pdd]

It was changed because too many goals were disallowed due to "skate on the crease" rule. Hull's goal happened despite the change and then they decided to abolish video review for that rule.

Hull's LEGAL goal.

So I did what Patrick Roy did to Dino Ciccarelli in the 1996 playoffs. Not too hard, and only once, but enough so that he got the point (so to speak).

 

[tony d]

Blue semicircle.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Who could forget this classic image?

Another vote for the semicircle crease. Back then, when the puck went through the crease on an icing, the icing was waived off. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the edges of the circle were straightened in order to prevent that from happening and the league eliminated icings being waived off when the puck went through a crease. I personally liked that rule.

 

[blamebettman*]

Any style except this current post 1998 monstrosity. Basically they shaved the sides off the old semicircle but kept the old crease rule for the 1998-1999 season. After the Hull debacle they got rid of the crease rule altogether.

So why not go back to the semicircle goal crease. What the hell is this thing we have now, it's not even a real shape

 

[darkhorse686]

Any style except this current post 1998 monstrosity. Basically they shaved the sides off the old semicircle but kept the old crease rule for the 1998-1999 season. After the Hull debacle they got rid of the crease rule altogether.

So why not go back to the semicircle goal crease. What the hell is this thing we have now, it's not even a real shape

That no-skate-in-the-crease rule was sooo annoying! It was pure frustration seeing your team score only to have the goal waved off because some guy had a toe in the crease.

 

[Killion]

That no-skate-in-the-crease rule was sooo annoying! It was pure frustration seeing your team score only to have the goal waved off because some guy had a toe in the crease.

The whole thing was/is ridiculous, enlarging it, oversized half moon, painted. The Goalies & Defenceman patrolled that zone, that was your territory, up to you to protect it, not to have Referee's & Officials from on high calling whatever. Sort of like the introduction of the Instigator Rule, ate away at what had previously been policed by the players. Initially introduced to "protect" the Goalies, has had the exact opposite effect not to mention taking away real estate on the ice surface.

 

[McGuillicuddy]

Ya in rec hockey & beer leagues etc its a big problem for goalies. Hackers & crease crashers, guys who just wind up let fly at your head from 15' out or whatever, ankle benders as Taco encountered who just park themselves in the crease or in front of you pretending their Phil Esposito. Insane. I mean, these are all adults with jobs to go to the next day or whatever, playing pickup as a goalie in any number of such situations can be a risky pursuit. You dont really wanna lay the lumber on them as they too are out there to be having fun, but some people.....

When somebody is compromising my safety I have no problems whatsoever dispensing lumber. Although I think I'm probably a bit more Billy Smith than most.