Why is A Delayed Penalty Called Off when A Team Scores Even if They Havent Pulled the Goalie to Put on an Extra Attacker | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League

Why is A Delayed Penalty Called Off when A Team Scores Even if They Havent Pulled the Goalie to Put on an Extra Attacker

Stringer Bell

Registered User
Dec 16, 2009
2,373
1,432
I have never understood this. The team/player who commits the offence receives no punishment, even though the goal had nothing to do with the penalty being called.

Am I completely out to lunch and missing something here?
 
It's still an advantage even if the goalie isn't pulled.

You can make riskier plays knowing the second the other team gets possession, the play is blown dead.

The alternative would be to blow the play dead as soon as the penalty occurs to guarantee the powerplay.
 
I have never understood this. The team/player who commits the offence receives no punishment, even though the goal had nothing to do with the penalty being called.

Am I completely out to lunch and missing something here?
If the other team touches the puck it's called dead, if a goal is scored, we move on. It's not a court of law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Prairie Habs
Because there's an obvious shift in momentum from 'equal play' to advantage for the team carrying sole possession.

Also, give me one example of a goal being scored on a delayed call without the goalie gunning it for the bench.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Summer Rose
It's basically free reign to play keep away until you score and the moment the other team touches, the play is blown dead. That's an advantage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Straight Fire
I would be in favour of lowering it to a one minute PP if a goal is scored on the delayed penalty.
 
The team on the PK would still just ice the puck though to slowly chip time off the clock and the 2 minutes would just be filled with whistles.
Overall there are too many icings. 1/3rd are just passes that hit a bad spot on the ice or are just out of reach. I’d call icings more in line with the original intention of the rule.

I think if you called icings on the PKing team you’d just see more soft dumps or guys skating it out as a unit, which would necessitate a more skilled PKing unit. I think it would lead to more short handed chances and more PP goals, and not that many more whistles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matias Maccete
These are mostly rules adopted by the PWHL.


Scoring a goal doesn't negate a PP or end the PP.

It's a really interesting wrinkle to generate offense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jacob
Overall there are too many icings. 1/3rd are just passes that hit a bad spot on the ice or are just out of reach. I’d call icings more in line with the original intention of the rule.

I think if you called icings on the PKing team you’d just see more soft dumps or guys skating it out as a unit, which would necessitate a more skilled PKing unit. I think it would lead to more short handed chances and more PP goals, and not that many more whistles.

Why would teams risk properly trying to break out the puck down a man though? They would definitely just continuously ice the puck and powerplays would be horrible to watch.

Overall I agree with your first point.
 
The purpose of the penalty is to restore the aggrieved team’s scoring opportunity. That’s the whole purpose of the delayed penalty, to allow them to follow through and not give the offending team the benefit of shutting down the scoring chance entirely.

If they immediately score a goal, there’s nothing to restore.
This is the perfect explanation.
 
The purpose of the penalty is to restore the aggrieved team’s scoring opportunity. That’s the whole purpose of the delayed penalty, to allow them to follow through and not give the offending team the benefit of shutting down the scoring chance entirely.

If they immediately score a goal, there’s nothing to restore.

But plenty of penaltys are called with no scoring chance being present.
 
But plenty of penaltys are called with no scoring chance being present.

No rule is going to fit every situation, but that is the underlying principle in the system. Theoretically they could be justified in blowing the whistle immediately when there’s no offensive opportunity, but the rules aren’t that nuanced.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Ad

Ad