Why is a penalty canceled when a goal is scored on a delayed call?

[Whalers Fan]

The NCAA changed their rule a few years ago, so a goal on a delayed penalty does not negate the penalty. It caught me off-guard this season when the US NTDP was playing an NCAA opponent. Each team scored a goal on a delayed penalty, and they still went on the power play.

 

[Fixxer]

The goalie usually goes to the bench and an extra attacker goes on the ice. If the team scores without the opposing teams controlling the puck, it's a goal and the penalty's cancelled.
Pulling the goalie for an extra player, while there's a delayed penalty, seems to be considered like a powerplay.. ??
The league might be afraid that it gives a double advantage to a team (delayed penalty goal + possible PP goal afterward). .. ??

 

[KinCornKarn]

Getting scored on is enough punishment no?

 

[Byrral]

I could support this. I could also support seeing the penalty stand when being awarded a penalty shot whether a goal is scored or not.

 

[Ezekial]

Hudler scores own goal with drop pass on delayed penalty

This is how Game 7 will end tomorrow in the 3OT.

 

[me2]

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?

The real point you are raising is "Should play be stopped immediately and there be no delayed penalty at all.". This would solve your dilemma. It would also be unfair to an attacking team about scored just after the penalty was commited but instead got sent back to the PP. How many teams would take a PP over a goal scored in delayed penalty time?

The best way to approach the delayed penalty/PP is to think of it as a single extended item,t delayed penalty as part of the PP as free bonus attacking time. The attacking advantage starts from the time of the offence and ends after 2 mins of PP or a goal.

 

[Kane One]

They get to pull their goalie, so in a way it does.

No rule is stopping the other team from pulling their goalie.

 

[Whalers Fan]

No rule is stopping the other team from pulling their goalie.

But common sense stops them.

 

[ElysiumAB]

How so ??The play is dead as soon as the other team touches the puck

You've never seen a team score on themselves on an errant pass, or slapshot that rims around the boards?

 

[TheDawnOfANewTage]

I see your point, but it's just not worth concern to my mind. Usually the goal that results is a direct result of either the 6 on 5 or the desperation that led to the penalty in the first place, so it'd usually end up being like giving the team a goal and another opportunity to score off of the same play, which is much more unfair. You could make it at the refs discretion, but that sucks too. I'd say 75% of the time the goal is directly connected to the 1 player advantage or the breakdown that also led to the original penalty- 1 goal is all you should be able to get from that.

 

[doublechili]

Yep ,are those the only3 ever??Lol ,the risk is very small

The first NHL goal ever credited to a goalie happened that way. Billy Smith of the Isles made a save and was the last player on his team to touch the puck before a delayed penalty was called against the Isles. The opposing team (I think maybe Colorado Rockies) then scored on their own empty net and the goal was credited to Smith.

 

[SympathyForTheDevils]

Safety concerns aside, the main reason penalties are called is to prevent a team from gaining an unfair advantage over the other. If your infraction wasn't enough to gain possession or to prevent the other team from scoring, then it clearly doesn't warrant giving a PP on top of the goal that was just scored.

 

[McXLNC97]

I've always wondered about this particular scenario where a player gets highsticked and draws blood, and while the play is going on, a goal is scored. So does 2 mins out of that 4 mins get cancelled out because of the delayed call, thus it's only a 2 minute minor for highsticking? Or is it still gonna be 4 mins because blood was drawn?

 

[IDuck]

I could support this. I could also support seeing the penalty stand when being awarded a penalty shot whether a goal is scored or not.

I agree...or atleast change the PS rule so ANYONE can take the shot or you can choose to decline the PS and have a PP

 

[Yog S'loth]

It's tradition. That's what makes it okay.

Now come on over and draw your stone...

 

[GoCanes2015]

Is an own goal by the team awaiting the power play on a delayed penalty registered in the stats as a shorthanded goal for the team that committed the penalty?

 

[HabsQC]

They could change the rule to give the penalty anyway and I wouldnt mind. Even playing out the 2 minutes even if theres a goal I wouldnt mind

 

[tarheelhockey]

I've always wondered about this particular scenario where a player gets highsticked and draws blood, and while the play is going on, a goal is scored. So does 2 mins out of that 4 mins get cancelled out because of the delayed call, thus it's only a 2 minute minor for highsticking? Or is it still gonna be 4 mins because blood was drawn?

The first guess is correct. The double minor is essentially two minors served back to back. If a goal is scored during the delay, the first one is wiped out but the second still has to be served. So it’s a 2 minute PP.

 

[Burke the Legend]

At this point it's basically a question of if you want to slightly increase the amount on power plays happening. We're probably talking about a pretty low amount, how many goals are scored on delayed PP? Not many I guess. So the NHL could say, would we want to increase the amount of PP time by say 1%, and in a way that creates a big argument? I kind of doubt it, it would be a low impact, relatively high controversy change. If they really wanted to increase the amount of PPs happening they could just do something like tell refs to call interference tighter.

 

[middletoe]

Usually the team pulls its goaltender thus making it a pp ??

The goalie can’t go past the red line, so why is his replacement allowed to?

 

[SUBdrewgANS]

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.

... but you should.. If you are impeded illegally and are still able to score a goal, that shouldn't negate the penalty/penalty shot IMO.

 

[Finnish your Czech]

It's not something I'd be against changing. The question is basically: do you want to slightly increase the severity of getting minor penalties?

 

[Whalers Fan]

I agree...or atleast change the PS rule so ANYONE can take the shot or you can choose to decline the PS and have a PP

IIHF rules allow for declining a penalty shot and instead taking the power play.

 

[Patmac40]

Safety concerns aside, the main reason penalties are called is to prevent a team from gaining an unfair advantage over the other. If your infraction wasn't enough to gain possession or to prevent the other team from scoring, then it clearly doesn't warrant giving a PP on top of the goal that was just scored.

Why not? If someone gets tripped, the puck is recovered by the offensive team a couple seconds later and they score, the trip still warrants a penalty whether or not the penalized team got possession of it. The scoring team didn't benefit from a man advantage, weren't afforded the chance to set up with their powerplay, and the trip was still a penalty. The only thing "unfair" about the situation is on the player who was taken down illegally

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.

Again, why not? Not necessarily another penalty shot but at least a powerplay. They were dragged down and scored on a breakaway, the opposing team's punishment would just be the goal that occurred during the normal course of play and there's no real consequence of the penalty. The guy just happened to score in what would be a pretty remarkable way I'd imagine. But the offending team hasn't actually been penalized.

 

[Midnight Judges]

No rule is stopping the other team from pulling their goalie.

Sure it is. Once the offending team gets possession, the whistle is blown. This effectively stops a team from pulling their goalie after committing a penalty.

Certainly I would be interested in seeing you coaching a hockey team and pulling your own goalie after your team commits a penalty.

That would be awesomely hilarious. lol