Click Here!
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 58
Like Tree38Likes

Thread: Some possible rules changes for next year Include FINE for diving

  1. #31
    mmmmm Taco's jammer06's Avatar




    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    8,386
    Liked
    6356 times
    Karma
    2147483647
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    932 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hornman View Post
    "They also agreed that a tripping penalty should be called on a player who trips another player regardless of whether he touches the puck first after diving and reaching out with his stick."

    So a diving defenseman chasing down a break swings his stick, touches the puck pushing it away from the offensive player, and as a result of the stick being in front of the offensive player trips him...that will now be a penalty?
    I'm pretty sure in USA hockey rules if you leave your feet to get a puck it's a trip regardless of if you get it or not. It's a good penalty and would only increase the ability of scorers to have a chance on a breakaway. Additionally diving towards another players skates is an exceptionally dangerous play.

  2. #32
    1st Scoring Line eskymi's Avatar




    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,646
    Liked
    3006 times
    Karma
    2147483647
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    317 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmytheKing View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KingInTheWest View Post
    The NHL's ratings relative to soccer have nothing to do with soccer's ratings. The potential ratings for a soccer without diving relative to actual soccer are what matter. The ridiculous diving is one of the top reasons I only care about soccer once every four years. The diving in the NHL is my biggest pet peeve with that league, and the diving in the NBA is way up there as well. The diving in soccer is the #1 punchline when Americans feel the need to make fun of soccer. If soccer wants more people in the US to watch it, they should do something about it.
    The reason no one in the US watches soccer is because we don't win it and we don't have the best players in the world playing it. It's not "our" sport. That and there's virtually no coverage of it in the country.

    If the reason was because people dive, they wouldn't be getting like 25 million people watching for a US game against Portugal. In comparison, Game 5 of the finals this year got 6 million. If the US team was in the final game of the World Cup, you could bet your ass there would be over 50 million people tuning in. Probably closer to 75. The problem isn't diving...it's the US not being that great.

    Thank you. I have been saying this for years that USA does not love soccer cause it is not our sport and we suck at it. My co workers give me crap all the time for that and say no it is because there is no action, etc. But these people love the NFL where you see twelve to fifteen minutes of action in a game. Most of these people hate hockey cause they say no action and it is a Canadian sport.

  3. #33
    2nd Scoring Line




    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    232
    Liked
    17 times
    Karma
    1060000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    95 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boy1der View Post
    In addition to this I also would like the offending team to NOT be able to call their time out. They keep committing the infraction...they should not be bailing themselves out like that. The offensive team deserves all the advantage they can get in this case.
    Perhaps. Either way, hopefully this will still totally be legal.
    KingzLA likes this.

  4. #34
    2nd Scoring Line Krussadams's Avatar




    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    632
    Liked
    725 times
    Karma
    1115000
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    191 Post(s)

    Default

    The Board also approved the general managers' proposal to change the wording of the embellishment rule to allow for an escalating scale of fines to the players and a fine to coaches of repeat offenders. The details are being worked out with the NHLPA.
    Jesus, Alain Vigneault's entire salary will be going to the NHL.

  5. #35
    1st Scoring Line jccawdrey's Avatar




    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,384
    Liked
    695 times
    Karma
    570953303
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    243 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krussadams View Post
    Jesus, Alain Vigneault's entire salary will be going to the NHL.
    The Ducks and Nucks had better budget some extra money

  6. #36
    2nd Scoring Line




    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    246
    Liked
    25 times
    Karma
    1005000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    8 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Palffy3314 View Post
    The trapezoid should be gone altogether…it's a dumb rule. All it takes is a goalie to mishandle the puck in the corner and it could result in a goal, which would probably happen more often than a powerplay happens from a goalie touching the puck there. At that very least, it could result in more excitement just for the fact that the goalie is way out of the net.

    The spin-o-rama shootout rule would be dumb as well, god forbid there's some excitement in the shootout.
    My guess is that the trapezoid rule works to the Kings advantage due to Quick's relatively weak puck handling skills

    Spin-o-ramas are probably already illegal with strict interpretation of the shootout rule, maybe just choosing to enforce it now?

  7. #37
    2nd Scoring Line Kerfuffle's Avatar




    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    304
    Liked
    56 times
    Karma
    1124084
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    357 Post(s)

    Default

    We lost a shootout to Marty St. Louis 2 seasons ago in which he did a dramatic spin-o-rama. And since the rule is that the puck must go forward and not backwards it did not make sense that they allowed it or even others doing it in the league. Cause when you do a spin-o-rama the puck is moving backwards. So eliminating this move altogether I believe is good.

    I also agree with the other poster above about eliminating the trapezoid altogether - I think it's a silly rule - let the goalie play the puck if he wants.

  8. #38
    Selke Smooth notbob's Avatar




    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,413
    Liked
    4714 times
    Karma
    5564128
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    358 Post(s)

    Default

    This is the same league that "forgot" to give James Neal his 1 game automatic suspension after his third diving penalty last season. I dont expect a whole lot of fines at least not this year.
    Maniacal Laugh, Maniacal Laugh, Maniacal Laugh

  9. #39
    2nd Scoring Line




    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    232
    Liked
    17 times
    Karma
    1060000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    95 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kerfuffle View Post
    We lost a shootout to Marty St. Louis 2 seasons ago in which he did a dramatic spin-o-rama. And since the rule is that the puck must go forward and not backwards it did not make sense that they allowed it or even others doing it in the league. Cause when you do a spin-o-rama the puck is moving backwards. So eliminating this move altogether I believe is good.
    I believe the rule technically is "the puck must be kept in continuous motion toward the opponent's goal line", not necessarily that it can't go backwards. The NHL has basically implicitly said in the past that the spinorama is legal, as it's all one big "continuous motion" that (eventually) makes its way to the goal line. That said, I'd be fine with eliminating it--it opens up too many cans of worms for other "continuous motions" that a goalie shouldn't have to defend against.

  10. #40
    Everybody relax, I'm here KingThomas's Avatar




    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,574
    Liked
    466 times
    Karma
    1088004
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    92 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kerfuffle View Post
    We lost a shootout to Marty St. Louis 2 seasons ago in which he did a dramatic spin-o-rama. And since the rule is that the puck must go forward and not backwards it did not make sense that they allowed it or even others doing it in the league. Cause when you do a spin-o-rama the puck is moving backwards. So eliminating this move altogether I believe is good.
    This isn't accurate. Every time you stick handle, the puck moves backwards.

    The rule says:

    NHL RULE 24.2

    The spin-o-rama type move where the player completes a 360 turn as he approaches the goal, shall be permitted as this involves continuous motion.


    *Edit* Beaten to my post by seconds!


Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66