I've always wondered why. Correct me if i'm wrong, but I dont think scoring on a delayed penalty gives the team a PP goal, so why cancel it?
Why is a penalty canceled when a goal is scored on a delayed call?
- Thread starter 1dreamof1cup
- Start date
Nature of the rule.
Distill it down to penalty shots if you want a more clear picture:
If you get dragged down on a breakaway, and still manage to score a goal, you do not get another penalty shot attempt to score 2 goals on the same play.
Distill it down to penalty shots if you want a more clear picture:
If you get dragged down on a breakaway, and still manage to score a goal, you do not get another penalty shot attempt to score 2 goals on the same play.
Cursed Lemon
Registered Bruiser
Usually the team pulls its goaltender thus making it a pp ??
Akrapovince
Registered User
- May 19, 2017
- 3,630
- 4,586
Pulling a goaltender doesn’t make it a power play. It’s still even strength, 6 players versus 6 players.
North Cole
♧ Lem
- Jan 22, 2017
- 11,332
- 13,571
Because the penalized team cannot touch the puck, so the play continues as if the penalty had occurred. A goal nullifies the oldest penalty, since the oldest penalty is the one that is pending, it gets nullified.
If two penalties happen on the same play and a goal is scored, the captain of the infracted team decides which penalty he wants his team to serve.
If a double minor is called on the play but a goal is scored, the team serves only two minutes of the double minor.
The bold is why delayed penalties are nullified by goals.
If there is a delayed penalty in a 5v4 situation against the short-handed team and the team with the PP scores, the delayed penalty is called and the original penalty is nullified. So the short-handed team has to kill another two minute penalty.
Ex - CGY v EDM. EDM scores on a powerplay with 45 seconds left, but there is a delayed penalty against CGY on the play. The guy who is still serving his 45 seconds comes out of the box and CGY has another penalty for 2 minutes.
When you see a delayed penalty called off because of a goal, think of it like this scenario above. There was no current powerplay for the goal to go against, so it goes against the delayed penalty. You cannot make the team serve the 2 minute penalty on a normal play that results in a goal, because it only occurs specifically when they are already serving a penalty. They are different scenarios and cannot have the same outcome, or the continuity of the rule book wouldn't make sense. A delayed penalty being served on a goal has it's own special provisions - on double minors, two independent penalties, or when a team is already on the PP.
The goal is to differentiate between a minor and a major penalty. If you are still serving the minor penalty after a goal is scored, the NHL is saying the only difference is the amount of time in the box. Major is a severe penalty, so it makes sense the punishment is higher along with the time served.
Last edited:
I have seen goals scored on delayed calls where the goalie doesn't even have time to reach his bench. It's just something that struck me in game 5 of the final when the bruins scored a goal on a delayed call.
Not that I care that much, but it just seems like a bit of a weird rule tbh
Because a goal was scored with the man advantage. Same as if a player was in the box and the attacking team scores 5 v 4.
Except the goal really wasnt scored with a man advantage, its still 6 vs 6. Like I said, ive seen it happen when the goalie doesnt even have time to reach the bench. I have also seen players missing their pass and puck goes all the way back into their own net, so pulling the goalie is still a risk.
StoneHands
Registered User
- Feb 26, 2013
- 6,608
- 3,674
Because this isn't the NBA where we get an And 1. Imagine a defenseman getting his stick into the hands of a who shakes it off and goes in to score a goal but the ref had his arm up so they get a goal and a powerplay on a penalty that obviously didn't affect the play. No thanks.
Last edited:
Skaters it's 6 on 5, which is really the only pertinent part of man advantage since a goalie is stuck in his net. With a delayed call they also have the advantage of not having to worry about defense, they know the other team can't score as the whistle will blow as soon as they touch the puck. Allows them to try some maybe riskier passes than they would at even strength, and also allows them to extend their advantage by playing keep away and to setup a play.
Calad
Section 422
Because once a penalty is called on the offending team they are not allowed to play the puck, so think of the time between the penalty being called and the whistle blown as extra PP time/
I always thought goals scored on the delayed penalty should be marked on the boxscore/game logs in a similar way as PP, PK, and EN goals.
I also don't recall seeing delayed penalties on the boxscore if a goal is scored, though I may be wrong here. Either way, I think these should be logged as well.
I also don't recall seeing delayed penalties on the boxscore if a goal is scored, though I may be wrong here. Either way, I think these should be logged as well.
tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
When the rule was originally introduced, you could score on the delayed penalty and still get your PP. And then proceed to score as many times as possible until the penalty expired.
I'm not sure when it was changed so that a goal could cancel the PP. My guess is in 1956-57, when they created the modern rule that a minor penalty expires after the first goal. The logical extension of that principle (no more than 1 goal per PP) would be to nullify the penalty if a goal is scored during the delay.
You are correct that it has nothing to do with pulling the goalie for a 6th man. That didn't start happening as a delayed penalty strategy till the early 1960s, and I'm pretty sure this issue was settled before then.
Noteworthy: around that same time in the early 1960s, the NHL tinkered with a rule change which canceled BOTH penalties if a team was already on the PP and then scored during a delayed second penalty. Taking the "1 goal per PP" concept to a logical conclusion, I guess, but it must have been an undesirable one because that tweak didn't stick for long.
I'm not sure when it was changed so that a goal could cancel the PP. My guess is in 1956-57, when they created the modern rule that a minor penalty expires after the first goal. The logical extension of that principle (no more than 1 goal per PP) would be to nullify the penalty if a goal is scored during the delay.
You are correct that it has nothing to do with pulling the goalie for a 6th man. That didn't start happening as a delayed penalty strategy till the early 1960s, and I'm pretty sure this issue was settled before then.
Noteworthy: around that same time in the early 1960s, the NHL tinkered with a rule change which canceled BOTH penalties if a team was already on the PP and then scored during a delayed second penalty. Taking the "1 goal per PP" concept to a logical conclusion, I guess, but it must have been an undesirable one because that tweak didn't stick for long.
agree with all of this but I would still think a team would be deserving of a power play since a penalty occurred.
ElysiumAB
Registered User
- Sep 12, 2013
- 5,920
- 5,772
Pulling the goaltender is still a risk, you can still get scored on.
Seems to me to be a very easy way to increase scoring, by allowing a goal to be scored and still allowing the power play.
Biggest downside I see is the refs would be impacting the game even more.
You think a team should get punished for 2 goals for a single egregious play of a single player?
It isn't a question of goals for me. It is more of a question of whether a team that is awarded a pp gets the pp. I understand your point, but for me, bad things should have a chance to happen to teams who commit penalties. Especially on the breakaway scenario I commented on.
I think the Nordiques once managed to score twice on themselves in the same game. Or maybe they own-goaled during the delayed call, and then got scored on SH?
