What was the rule you struggled without the most?

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Charging. Still unclear how many steps constitutes a charge. I used to take five steps then glide into a hit and would get called sometimes. Its too grey.

Also how many seconds after the player passes or loses a puck is fair game for a hit before its interference?

I think It's 2 seconds

 

[nbwingsfan]

I grew up playing with two line pass. Man was I glad they removed that ridiculous rule

 

[Sniper99]

I grew up with two line pass. Man was I glad they removed that ridiculous rule

dumbest rule in the sport was the 2 line pass.

 

[A Hockey Fan]

42.1 Charging: A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who skates, jumps into or charges an opponent in any manner.

I completely understand "A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who...jumps into...an opponent in any manner."

I don't understand "A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who skates...into...an opponent in any manner." (The rule actually reads "A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who skates...an opponent in any manner" but I edited it charitably.)

And I especially don't understand "Charging: A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who...charges an opponent in any manner."

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

42.1 Charging: A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who skates, jumps into or charges an opponent in any manner.

I completely understand "A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who...jumps into...an opponent in any manner."

I don't understand "A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who skates...into...an opponent in any manner." (The rule actually reads "A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who skates...an opponent in any manner" but I edited it charitably.)

And I especially don't understand "Charging: A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who...charges an opponent in any manner."

Neither do the officials.

The RAW have no on-ice verisimilitude with: Charging, Boarding, Goaltender Interference, Slashing, and Crosschecking.

Interference really grinds my gears. If an attacker chips a puck past the defender it should be against the rules to track him laterally. I'd love a standard of beyond half a step left or right gets called.

 

[DaveG]

I grew up with two line pass. Man was I glad they removed that ridiculous rule

yep, first one that came to mind for me, I grew up thinking it was a bullshit rule and its removal was the #1 rule I was happy about out of the 05 lockout.

 

[Leafs87]

I agree. It’s easier for me to watch my team when travelling than at home if I don’t have cable. Problem is there was a whole bunch of long term deals signed that will see this format continue.

 

[Summer Rose]

42.1 Charging: A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who skates, jumps into or charges an opponent in any manner.

I completely understand "A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who...jumps into...an opponent in any manner."

I don't understand "A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who skates...into...an opponent in any manner." (The rule actually reads "A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who skates...an opponent in any manner" but I edited it charitably.)

And I especially don't understand "Charging: A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player who...charges an opponent in any manner."

The second paragraph attempts to clarify: "charging shall mean the actions of a player who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner. A "charge" may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice."

Used to be that they measured it by how many strides you took to deliver a check (more than "two fast strides" made it a charge), but it was often only selectively enforced or outright ignored. My opinion is that their attempt to redefine it by "distance traveled" makes it even more ambiguous and stupid. The way I used to call it is that if a player hit an opponent with excessive force or primarily just to hit said opponent, with no obvious effort to actually separate the opponent from the puck, I could smack them with a charging penalty. That was in addition to, of course, charging by leaving your feet to deliver a hit. Although when I worked games where body checking was allowed, I was usually the linesman so I didn't get a lot of experience looking out for it.

 

[swissdude]

red line offside lol

 

[Phil Kessels Hot Dog]

Offside is easily the most difficult rule for kids to learn. The offside rule in ball hockey is even more confusing, but I'd be kind of interested to see how that one would play out if they implemented it in ice hockey.

 

[Summer Rose]

Offside is easily the most difficult rule for kids to learn. The offside rule in ball hockey is even more confusing, but I'd be kind of interested to see how that one would play out if they implemented it in ice hockey.

At least hockey's offside rule is on a fixed line. Soccer's offside rule is... well, kind of stupid. Plus it's timed at when the pass is made, which makes it even weirder.

Rugby's offside rule at least makes sense. You're technically not allowed to be in front of the ball for any reason, ever, but if there are some back and forth punts or something, you're good as long as you don't interfere with play and make a reasonable effort to get back behind the ball after the punt fest stops.

 

[landy]

That used to be the rule, it was never called and flipping the puck into the crowd was a common tactic for tired defenders

100%. I played in a league with a running clock and would air mail it over the far goalie to get 30 seconds wasted off a pk. Totally get it, but 99% are pure acciental puck on its side now and playoff games are decided by these.

 

[landy]

It should just be treated as an icing imo. Or maybe delay of game after back-to-back flipping-into-the-crowds.

This makes too much sense. Game 1's OT goal was decided off an obvious accidental. That shouldnt happen. I get deterring defenders from doing it on purpose, but maybe 1 is icing/cant change and 2 for that specific player in the same game is a penalty.

 

[HugeInTheShire]

Offside was difficult to understand when I was young, now it is definitely goaltender interference. If someone could explain that one I'd appreciate it because I have no idea what it is.

 

[nbwingsfan]

Offside was difficult to understand when I was young, now it is definitely goaltender interference. If someone could explain that one I'd appreciate it because I have no idea what it is.

I don’t think the league has any idea what it is either

 

[KeyserSoze81]

Instigator penalty. If they removed it chicken littles like Bennett and the rat pack would not be throwing the people's elbow every chance they get because a goon would settle it like McCarty did on the other chicken little claude the Lemieux Turtle. Cheap shot artist actually get protection with this rule and has the opposite effect.
View attachment 1048899

This argument irritates me because it does a dissservice to the deaths of Bob Probert, Derek Boogaard, Wade Belak, Steve Montador, and Rick Rypien (among others). Bare knuckle fighting in hockey is absurd given how little it adds to the game and what we know about CTE and brain injuries.

Yes, contact will happen as part of the game, and there will be dirty plays (and players) that exist within the fringes of the rules. But they sure as hell existed before the instigator rule, and the league as a whole was a whole lot dirtier in the 90s even with the prevalence of the enforcer. The rats would just play on the same line as the enforcer. As a Sabres fan, I watched Matt Barnaby do all sorts of craziness, but he was backed up by Brad May and/or Rob Ray. It just creates an arms race. One can long for the day of the enforcer (as it was entertaining), but I find it disingenuous to say that the enforcer cleaned up play. If anything, it was the opposite.

 

[DaveG]

At least hockey's offside rule is on a fixed line. Soccer's offside rule is... well, kind of stupid. Plus it's timed at when the pass is made, which makes it even weirder.

Rugby's offside rule at least makes sense. You're technically not allowed to be in front of the ball for any reason, ever, but if there are some back and forth punts or something, you're good as long as you don't interfere with play and make a reasonable effort to get back behind the ball after the punt fest stops.

nah the soccer one is fine. Most often it just comes down to the timing of the run and being able to be quick enough to keep the opponents from playing a high line. Then again most of the time I was a winger or a CAM rather than a 9 so it wasn't often that I was the guy making those runs off the ball.

 

[Hotsam Batcho]

I think everybody here understands hockey at this point

Quite the bold statement given some of the stuff I read on here.

 

[HolyHagelin]

Agreed that the 2-line pass was Pejorative Slured, whoever thought that was a good idea should be banned from ideas for eternity.

Nobody understands goaltender interference, not even the league, except that the calls must always go in favor of the Rangers opponents. Somehow this is true even when the Rangers aren't in the current game.

How about embellishment? I can't recall seeing it blown for any of the multitude of obvious embellishments over the years, and then we get it for something like that Rodrigues play in... round 2? Everyone knows Rod is a diver, but you're going to pick *that* play to call it? Wild.

 

[Summer Rose]

nah the soccer one is fine. Most often it just comes down to the timing of the run and being able to be quick enough to keep the opponents from playing a high line. Then again most of the time I was a winger or a CAM rather than a 9 so it wasn't often that I was the guy making those runs off the ball.

Eh... I disagree slightly. It's kind of weird. I mean, I understand it by now, but I still think it's weird.

 

[nucksflailtogether]

I was lining a game with this very old referee who had just a broken brain moment where he was going to call a goal offside even though the team had tagged up. I had to argue with him for at least 5 minutes while the players waited to preserve the goal. It's a weird thing that can mess with your head.

Just be glad it's not soccer offside. That is just neverendingly confusing to people, especially for Canadians who are used to hockey offside.

For me, I never understood why some offsetting penalties ended up 4 on 4 or not. I'm sure it's a simple explanation that if I actually read the rulebook (luckily don't referee hockey anymore) I would get it.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Intentional a 2 min penalty for delay of game, unintentional there's no line change. Every puck clear since the rule has been instituted has been unintentional.

This isn't like a high stick where someone could get hurt, it's like a missed pass that turns into an icing. And there can be caveats with the rule, if no pressure from forechecker and the puck bounces and goes out... penalty, if there's pressure and it goes out and it's pretty clear the defender wasn't trying to flip it out, Face off and no change. An accidentally on purpose flip out is so obvious, an unintentional act is also obvious. Teams shouldn't be punished for accidental acts like this that don't cause bodily harm.

I agree with you in principle, but in practice it’s dangerous to have the refs playing mind-reader — or worse, applying “game management” to their calls.

 

[ACC1224]

Nothing. As a Canadian I understood everything right out of the womb.

 

[M88K]

It was the 2 line pass, not because i didn't understand it, but because it was dumb.
Now it's the trapezoid. For the same reason

 

[PolishPrince21]

2 line pass always bothered me