What was the rule you struggled without the most?

[Cursed Lemon]

Someone can feel free to define boarding or charging in a way that makes literally any sense, any day now

 

[TheDawnOfANewTage]

Someone can feel free to define boarding or charging in a way that makes literally any sense, any day now

Ugh, it’s perfectly clear. Boarding is when you see numbers and hit regardless, unless they turned recently, are right up against the boards, the hitting team is PKing or has 2+ more penalties, it’s the Panthers, or mercury is in retrograde. Charging is when you take too many strides before a hit, except when that’s ok (you’ll know, maybe), or you don’t hit him too too hard, or it’s playoffs.

 

[Norwegianoiler]

I struggle with many rules. Like, I know offside in general, but don't really know it when it's Cale Makar in possession but not in possession. I also struggle with letting things go.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Goaltender interference

 

[JianYang]

If a penalty (like tripping) is taken in the last two minutes of the 3rd by the team that's winning, it doesn't extend the period

Late period penalties in general are more forgiving.

It seems very rare to me that if a penalty carries over to the next period, that a team will actually score with it. Not only that, the team with the PP often has trouble setting up at the start of a period, let alone score.

Ive often thought that if you're going to take a penalty, take a late one in the 1st or 2nd period.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I don't recall offside being hard to understand, but delayed offside was a bit confusing. Same as the too many men penalty with how bad and lax some changes are.

Intentional offside is the one that goes over the heads of a lot of newer fans. Just when you think you know what you expect from an offside call, here’s a totally different outcome based on a judgment call and no arena announcement explaining it.

 

[Summer Rose]

Intentional offside is the one that goes over the heads of a lot of newer fans. Just when you think you know what you expect from an offside call, here’s a totally different outcome based on a judgment call and no arena announcement explaining it.

Even goes over the heads of some of the coaches I've worked with, especially at the peewee and younger level in USA Hockey rules where there's no delayed offside and it's immediate offside instead. I've had plenty of them yell at me (granted, this is just what coaches do) for taking it all the way down for intentional offside in a situation such as a player getting the puck in the neutral zone, and dumping the puck in with teammates in the zone. That would be a perfectly valid play with delayed offside, but with immediate offside it's not. What I mean by it going over their heads is that even though they may know it's immediate offside at that age level, the words they chose for yelling at me about the call demonstrated a clear lack of understanding, if you know what I mean.

As for the NHL level (or age groups where delayed offside is in effect in general), if the linesman has his arm up for delayed offside, and a player who's supposed to be tagging up harasses the defending player with a forecheck instead, I feel like the play should be blown dead and brought all the way back for intentional offside. That's how I generally called it myself at least, although I would give the forechecker a second or two of being me yelling at them to knock it off and tag up before I blew the whistle if they didn't listen. However, I don't really see NHL linesmen call it that way for some reason.

 

[PistolPete]

That's great that you enjoy it. Im telling you exactly what a lot of people DONT like about it. It's already pretty much the chinziest penalty called as half the time it's a complete accident and the player doing it isn't even in trouble, the puck just gets away from him. It gets significantly exacerbated by letting every other penalty go by.

Im willing to bet if one of your defenders got ran from behind and was down and the refs let it go and in desperation his partner shot it over the glass and your team lost on the subsequent power play goal, you wouldn't be too happy.

Why can every single other penalty be at the ref's discretion but not the dumbest one?

Because of the hockey before the rule. A dozen stoppages a game because they shot it into the crowd- on purpose.

Having the ref determine intent would negate the effectiveness of the rule because of game management, aversion to calling penalties in certain contexts etc

These are professional players, they knkw how to clear a puck without putting it out of play.

 

[tarheelhockey]

As for the NHL level (or age groups where delayed offside is in effect in general), if the linesman has his arm up for delayed offside, and a player who's supposed to be tagging up harasses the defending player with a forecheck instead, I feel like the play should be blown dead and brought all the way back for intentional offside. That's how I generally called it myself at least, although I would give the forechecker a second or two of being me yelling at them to knock it off and tag up before I blew the whistle if they didn't listen. However, I don't really see NHL linesmen call it that way for some reason.

I’m with you on this. It’s among the easier calls that a linesman has to make. Just that it’s on that list of things that aren’t in the NHL’s secret rulebook, like crosschecking.

 

[Leafshater67]

Delay of game. Stupid that a legit accident causes a game to be decided. Refs can make a judgment call live if they think a dude air mailed it on purpose.

To be fair, I remember when I played before that rule we were blatantly flipping it over the glass to get changes or a breath when we were getting caved. Even I, a winger have done it before. People forget that it was a tactic used before the rule

 

[PistolPete]

To be fair, I remember when I played before that rule we were blatantly flipping it over the glass to get changes or a breath when we were getting caved. Even I, a winger have done it before. People forget that it was a tactic used before the rule

I suspect the people who hate the rule the most never watched hockey before that rule change and had no idea how common a tactic that was during the course of a game

 

[MikeyMike01]

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."

 

[Grifter3511]

I suspect the people who hate the rule the most never watched hockey before that rule change and had no idea how common a tactic that was during the course of a game

I've been watching hockey since long before it was a rule. And when I bitch about it I'm strictly talking about overtime when literally every other penalty is ignored.

 

[Plastic Joseph]

Delay of game. Stupid that a legit accident causes a game to be decided. Refs can make a judgment call live if they think a dude air mailed it on purpose.

Disagree.

"Accident " you mean mistake? You should be penalised for making mistakes.

That's like saying accidently stepping out of bounds in the nba shouldn't result in a turnover. You need to keep the puck in play. You're in the nhl. If you get lazy there are repercussions.

I think the rule does far more good than bad. If we leave it up to the refs you know they will hide their whistle come playoffs especially in a close game for worry of being blamed. Better to make it black and white to remove judgement

 

[Reality Czech]

Delay of game. Stupid that a legit accident causes a game to be decided. Refs can make a judgment call live if they think a dude air mailed it on purpose.

Plenty of high sticking penalties are accidents too, should they also let them go?

Some people saying it's obvious when it's an accident or if it's on purpose? I doubt you'd be able to tell the difference, especially when players perfect the accidental on purpose move.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Goaltender interference

That's the free space.

Nobody knows what that is.

 

[banks]

As a young fan, I thought that a "short-handed goal" meant that the player was only holding the stick with one hand when he scored. "Short-handed" wasn't a term I was familiar with to mean "having less people than normal", so it only made sense to me that it was referring to literal hands.

I thought this for.... longer than I'd like to admit.