Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

NHL wants to change Faceoff rules


Recommended Posts

As it stands now the visiting Center must put his stick down first in the faceoff,

This gives the Home team Center an advantage

The NHL has proposed at the GM meeting that the Defensive zone center would have to put his stick down first, giving the Offensive center the advantage

  1. ...the team on defence must put stick down first. So potential edge on faceoff goes to team closer to other team's net, not home/away.

  2. If approved by Competition Committee/BofG, next season instead of visiting team always having to be first to put down stick on faceoffs...

  3. There was another rule change recommendation coming out of today's NHL GMs meeting, proposed by CAR GM Ron Francis and endorsed by the GMs.

    Best way to think about proposed NHL faceoff rule change: center closest to own net puts stick down first. Visitor goes first at center ice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a bunch of nonesense. It all irons out in the wash when a team plays 50% of its games on the road.

Talk about reinventing the wheel and making more things complicated. Stupidity to say the least. The refs seldon adhere to the rule anyway.

Same with goalie interference. What in hell is the crease markings for? Opposing player in the paint. Whistle is blown and a face off is called for outside the blue line. Touching the goalie, two minutes for interference. Goalie outside the crease cannot be touched. Simple.

This is not rocket science is it? Just a week of leisure for GMS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a bunch of nonesense. It all irons out in the wash when a team plays 50% of its games on the road.

Talk about reinventing the wheel and making more things complicated. Stupidity to say the least.

Same with goalie interference. What in hell is the crease markings for? Opposing player in the paint. Whistle is blown and a face off is called for outside the blue line. Touching the goalie, two minutes for interference.

This is not rocket science is it?

This
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why should a team be punished for an opposing player shooting it out in the d zone. What about a penalty call. Puck is dropped in d zone. Why the double jeopardy there.

why would you punish a team who already had to fly into town just to play the game? why the double jeopardy now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a bunch of nonesense. It all irons out in the wash when a team plays 50% of its games on the road.

Talk about reinventing the wheel and making more things complicated. Stupidity to say the least. The refs seldon adhere to the rule anyway.

Same with goalie interference. What in hell is the crease markings for? Opposing player in the paint. Whistle is blown and a face off is called for outside the blue line. Touching the goalie, two minutes for interference. Goalie outside the crease cannot be touched. Simple.

This is not rocket science is it? Just a week of leisure for GMS.

The intent of the rule is to increase offense, not address home/away fairness. It's a small change and I like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok clearly you guys aren't getting this.

Right now (and for as long as I remember) visiting centres must commit their stick to the ice first. The home centre can come down on top for an edge. I think it's about a 5% edge league wide.

The proposal is to give that edge to the attacking centre instead of the home centre.

Probably could lead to a few more late goals in the o zone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

meh... not going to make much difference for a bad faceoff team like the Canucks anyway. Henrik can still lose most of the o-zone draws and Horvat will do ok in the d-zone.

I don't know what happened to Hanks faceoff ability. He has never been league leading in that category but was respectable until this season when he has really fell off a cliff in his faceoff percentages.

Ever since his injury last year he just hasn't been the same consistent faceoff guy he used to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This looks to me like a fix for something that isn't broken...

Rearranging the deck chairs. Looks like something has changed when it really hasn't. Refs don't enforce the existing rules which if they did would create much more offense than this silly change would.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a bunch of nonesense. It all irons out in the wash when a team plays 50% of its games on the road.

Talk about reinventing the wheel and making more things complicated. Stupidity to say the least. The refs seldon adhere to the rule anyway.

Same with goalie interference. What in hell is the crease markings for? Opposing player in the paint. Whistle is blown and a face off is called for outside the blue line. Touching the goalie, two minutes for interference. Goalie outside the crease cannot be touched. Simple.

This is not rocket science is it? Just a week of leisure for GMS.

I was right with you till the end there. then you kind of back tracked on yourself.

Why have a crease if goalies are allowed to roam?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everybody complains about the refs taking too long on faceoffs. Now the GMs go out and throw this garbage into the game only making it slower and more complicated. NHL has to over think everything...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok clearly you guys aren't getting this.

Right now (and for as long as I remember) visiting centres must commit their stick to the ice first. The home centre can come down on top for an edge. I think it's about a 5% edge league wide.

The proposal is to give that edge to the attacking centre instead of the home centre.

Probably could lead to a few more late goals in the o zone.

Or, maybe they could quit trying to nickel and dime their way into more offense by imposing new rules and start enforcing the existing ones...

A good start would be to scrap this idea that a foul has to be twice as bad in the third period, or thrice as bad if a team is already short handed, before calling a penalty.

A little less "game management" and a little more calling it like it is, would go a long way, IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...