NHL Rules are a joke!

[golfisforfun]

So the NHL is clearly worried about Sidney Crosby and the reality that he may not return for the start of the season.
They are clearly worried about the high number of head shots and concussions.
They are clearly worried about the recent deaths of 2 of the leagues "tough guys". They are clearly worried about the long-term impact of concussions and head shots.
They are clearly worried about player safety...

or are they???

When will they realize that the ONLY way to stop all this nonsense is to remove fighting from the game and hand out lengthy suspensions? The fact that fighting is considered "part of the game" is a joke! If it was part of the game, there would be no penalty for it. Skating, passing, shooting and scoring are parts of the game.

The NHL has the same issues our society is having with respect to handing out penalties for breaking the law. For some reason we are afraid to punish someone, to really make them pay for what they have done.

And in the NHL, just like in life, the repeat offenders are well known to authorities and continue to offend because they do not fear the consequences.

If being caught drinking and driving meant a lifetime ban from driving and a minimum 5 years in prison, people might think more about the risks.

If deliberate head shots in the NHL meant a minimum 40 game suspension and a loss of half a year salary, players might think twice. If a second offence meant a one year suspension, things get serious.

AND before the "we need fighting" arguments start, you are wrong. The Olympics offer great hockey. World Juniors offer great hockey. We do not need fighters to patrol the ice and hold people accountable. We need the rules and suspensions for that purpose.

What would scare you more as a player?
Knowing that if you blinside someone in the head with an elbow there will be a tough guy from the other team out there to try and fight you, or would you be more afraid of a 40 or 50 or 60 game suspension, with no pay. I think the answer is obvious.

The NHL has no concern for its players and their current or long-term health. If they did, they would enforce the current rules (Intent to injure) and hand out lengthy suspensions.

And I would like someone to explain to me why Fighting is not an Intent to Injure penalty?

[nokids]

Sidney Crosby wasn't injured by intentional elbows, they were accidental (most pple think). So there's nothing the NHL could have done to save Crosby.

Fighting, I like watching fights. Too bad my Red Wings don't have more goons in the lineup.

[HoganWoods]

It's a tough situation, it's not as simple as giving 40 game suspensions for any head hits. No matter what you do there will always be head hits and some are accidental. Should a player lose half a season for an accidental head hit that injured no one? What if he happens to injure someone? It's such a fast sport, accidents will happen. That being said I think players need to protect themselves a hell of alot better. In the end I agree with your feelings but implementing a solution isn't that easy. As for fighting, I'm on the fence. It used to be invaluable in the sense that if a player crossed the line they knew they'd be fighting a beast afterwards. It's not so much like this anymore so I'm not sure what its use is.

[golfisforfun]

I am not saying it is easy to implement because some hits are accidental, and I do not think a blanket rule is appropriate. The league needs to examine each case one by one, but the fact is, when it is intentional, the punishment needs to be severe. 1 and 2 and 3 game suspensions are a joke!

Players do need to protect themselves, but the league needs to protect them also.

And on another rules issue, why is it that once the whistle blows, it is a free for all and no rules are enforced??? It is ridiculous how much crap goes on after the whistle. It is almost a given that someone will get facewashed in front of the net when the goalie covers the puck, a few jabs are thrown, maybe a headlock etc... If you did that during the play, it is an automatic 2 minute penalty, but after the whistle it is ok!!! What????????? Again, the rules are a joke...

The NHL needs to clean itself up...

[sharkshooter]

...

Fighting, I like watching fights.

There are all kinds of sanctioned fight shows on TV - hockey need not be one of them.

[golfisforfun]

Maybe they should just have a fight or two at the end of the first and second periods... Before all the fans go for snacks... Have a main event and an up-and-comer fight...

[nokids]

There are all kinds of sanctioned fight shows on TV - hockey need not be one of them.

There is also figure skating on tv. Hockey need not be one of them.

[mberube]

World Jr’s , Olympic hockey are a few of many tournaments witch fighting is not allowed and it’s far from figure skating and I would say more entertaining than the NHL IMO. Fighting should be out and only one rule book should be enforced.

The NHL rules are a joke, plain and simple.

[imozzie]

Tone down the equipment and you'll diminish the number of serious injuries. Guys would be a lot less 'braver' delivering the elbows, shoulder hits etc. if they were wearing similar thickness padding to that which players wore in the 1960s. The marketing ploy by manufacturer's in their 'bigger and harder' is better has produced the exact opposite of what they claim to be their objective - safety. Players have no fear of injuring themselves when delivering such blows on ice these days because they are so well protected in the armour called 'equipment' - IMHO

[orangeTANG]

I've all but given up on watching NHL hockey.... too many games, too many bad attitudes has really made me lose interest in the sport. Don't get me wrong, you'll find my plugged in front of the TV screen during World Junior's time.

Its the only sport I know that penalties are based not only on the infraction, but who did it, who got the last penalty, how much time is left in the game and what the score is.

I say this to people all the time, someone explain to someone that never watched hockey in their lives what a hooking call is, what an interference call is, or what a roughing call is. They'll be more confused then ever.

[jonf]

And on another rules issue, why is it that once the whistle blows, it is a free for all and no rules are enforced??? It is ridiculous how much crap goes on after the whistle. It is almost a given that someone will get facewashed in front of the net when the goalie covers the puck, a few jabs are thrown, maybe a headlock etc... If you did that during the play, it is an automatic 2 minute penalty, but after the whistle it is ok!!! What????????? Again, the rules are a joke...

for one thing, you're not preventing a player from participating in the play, as the play is already over.

[nokids]

World Jr’s , Olympic hockey are a few of many tournaments witch fighting is not allowed and it’s far from figure skating and I would say more entertaining than the NHL IMO.

So it's okay to allow hitting a player with your stick and get a penalty (cross checking, slashing) and also hitting someone with your elbow, shoulder, butt... I say you can intend to injure another player with all those body parts; but if a player uses his hands to injure someone else (fighting), that should not be allowed. Why?

[golfisforfun]

My point is, intent to injure is NEVER given for fighting! I agree with you that you can intend to injure with various body parts and with a stick, BUT I have also seen penalties given for those infractions. They need to put in a rule, if you want to fight, that's fine, but it carries an intent to injure which is an automatic game misconduct.

So it's okay to allow hitting a player with your stick and get a penalty (cross checking, slashing) and also hitting someone with your elbow, shoulder, butt... I say you can intend to injure another player with all those body parts; but if a player uses his hands to injure someone else (fighting), that should not be allowed. Why?

[golfisforfun]

Well, I would love the chance to referee an NHL game... It would end up being 3 on 3 the entire game, suspensions would be handed out, and the skill players would take over the league. Offence would increase, the games would be exciting and skill would lead the way...

But instead, the NHL will remain a junk league... No rules consistency, no logic to suspensions, fighting is allowed, drug and alcohol issues are ignored, concussions are usual events...

[golfisforfun]

Can someone explain to me why hand passes are allowed in the defensive zone? What a dumb rule.

[mberube]

So it's okay to allow hitting a player with your stick and get a penalty (cross checking, slashing) and also hitting someone with your elbow, shoulder, butt... I say you can intend to injure another player with all those body parts; but if a player uses his hands to injure someone else (fighting), that should not be allowed. Why?

I don’t see your point. I never said anything in regards that it’s OK to injure the opponent in anyway shape or form. I said no fighting and enforce the rules. In my book enforcing the rules means penalizing if you do something wrong. Stiffer suspensions and bring back the full 2, 4 or 5 minute penalty. When a team scores more than 1 goal during one penalty that hurts the whole team. The problem is that the NHL won’t make changes. Instead they are changing the depth of the nets………..

[mberube]

My point is, intent to injure is NEVER given for fighting! I agree with you that you can intend to injure with various body parts and with a stick, BUT I have also seen penalties given for those infractions. They need to put in a rule, if you want to fight, that's fine, but it carries an intent to injure which is an automatic game misconduct.

That's a good rule change. Good point.

[nokids]

I don’t see your point. I never said anything in regards that it’s OK to injure the opponent in anyway shape or form. I said no fighting and enforce the rules. In my book enforcing the rules means penalizing if you do something wrong.

My point is why would you be against one form of violence (fighting) and not the other forms of violence (hitting, slashing, spearing, cross checking, elbowing, headbutt, etc..)? I think it's strange if you think fighting is terrible but cheer when you see a highlight reel hit. To me, violence is violence, and players are trying to hurt each other within the rules. Fighting's within the rules, so I have no problem with it.

[Chambokl]

Just to keep the play going. Less whistle is always better..

[mberube]

My point is why would you be against one form of violence (fighting) and not the other forms of violence (hitting, slashing, spearing, cross checking, elbowing, headbutt, etc..)? I think it's strange if you think fighting is terrible but cheer when you see a highlight reel hit. To me, violence is violence, and players are trying to hurt each other within the rules. Fighting's within the rules, so I have no problem with it.

Where did I say I was for the other forms of violence? Hitting, slashing, spearing, cross checking, elbowing, headbutt, etc are all infractions in the rule book and penalties are given to players doing so. That’s what I mean by enforcing the rules. I think you are fishing for a confrontation here. You are reading things that are not there. Do I like to see a fight? Yes I do. Heck I competed in martial arts and sparing was the highlight of my training but I still don’t think it has its place in any team sports. Buy the way fighting is NOT within the rules. If it was there would be no penalty given after fighting. It’s tolerated but it’s not legal.

[Manto87]

The majority of injuries aren't coming from fighting. Here's what I think they should do: Get rid of the trapezoid, let defencemen pick forwards to protect their partner retrieving the puck, and implement the Brian Burke rule (bear hug rule). This would reduce hits from behind and the icing touch-up race.

[golfisforfun]

I agree, get rid of the trapezoind and force goalies to play the puck... BUT I don't want a rule that allows clutching and grabbing again!!! Let the current rules protect the players. Make the suspensions protect the players. A faster game is a better game and if you run someone from behind, you will pay the price. 40 game suspension. DONE!
We do not need to add rules, they just need to call the game and enforce the current rules.
They could call charging 10 times a game if they wanted, but they don't.

The majority of injuries aren't coming from fighting. Here's what I think they should do: Get rid of the trapezoid, let defencemen pick forwards to protect their partner retrieving the puck, and implement the Brian Burke rule (bear hug rule). This would reduce hits from behind and the icing touch-up race.

[nokids]

You are reading things that are not there. Do I like to see a fight? Yes I do.

You like watching fighting but don't want to see it in hockey? I'm sorry, I do not understand.

Watcing sports is entertainment. I wish there was fighting in all sports. Basketball, tennis, golf, soccer, it would be entertaining as !

[mberube]

I agree, get rid of the trapezoind and force goalies to play the puck... BUT I don't want a rule that allows clutching and grabbing again!!! Let the current rules protect the players. Make the suspensions protect the players. A faster game is a better game and if you run someone from behind, you will pay the price. 40 game suspension. DONE!
We do not need to add rules, they just need to call the game and enforce the current rules.
They could call charging 10 times a game if they wanted, but they don't.

[strong49]

Great talking

[jonf]

stiffer sentences and mandatory minimums are BAD policy from a criminal justice perspective. They are costly, and they do not decrease offences, or recidivism. So, while I generally agree that clearer standards for headshots and other infractions would be beneficial, the argument that stronger penalties will reduce the number offences doesn't really hold much weight.

[cleek]

if you alter the rules to protect players slowly but surely the rule breakers ( players like Matt Cooke ) will be gone from the game (or learn to play within the rules ) . I agree with many of the recommendations mentioned but the one I would like to see brought in is the hit from behind ejection. Like the hit Eager laid on Sedin in the playoffs, not picking on Eager but that was classisc no respect from behind and dangerous. I'd go with automatic 5min major and game ejection for hits from behind. Suspensions are cumulative by season : first time 1 game ; 2nd time 3 games ; 3rd time 10 games , 4th time 20 games. To me, this and touch icing are the most dangerous plays in the game, especially considering the size & speed of the players today ( not to mention lack of respect ) . I am ok with fighting but think the game would benefit from weaning out the heavyweights who play 4mins a game ( those fights are the least entertaining anyways ). There are some teams in the NHL who go without guys who just fight (Detroit) . If you are big , can play and scrap fine I want guys like you on my team. If you can only scrap ... don't need you around.

[golfisforfun]

Not sure how you can say that stronger penalties will not reduce the amount of suspensions when they have not yet tried it, and the fact is, if a hockey player knew that dangerous acts could result in expulsion from the league and a loss of career and income, they would think twice I am sure...

stiffer sentences and mandatory minimums are BAD policy from a criminal justice perspective. They are costly, and they do not decrease offences, or recidivism. So, while I generally agree that clearer standards for headshots and other infractions would be beneficial, the argument that stronger penalties will reduce the number offences doesn't really hold much weight.

[golfisforfun]

I tend to agree with you but what I still fail to understand is the fact that you want to start with a 1 GAME suspension. Why not start at 10 !!! One game is a joke. This is the problem, there is not a serious threat of penalty or justice. So you are basically saying that you can take a clear run at someone from behind and only get a one game suspension and then do it again and only get 3 games... Let's go with 10, then 20 then 40 then gone from the league! And they don't need to add rules, just call INTENT to INJURE... it's already in the rulebook, just enforce it.

if you alter the rules to protect players slowly but surely the rule breakers ( players like Matt Cooke ) will be gone from the game (or learn to play within the rules ) . I agree with many of the recommendations mentioned but the one I would like to see brought in is the hit from behind ejection. Like the hit Eager laid on Sedin in the playoffs, not picking on Eager but that was classisc no respect from behind and dangerous. I'd go with automatic 5min major and game ejection for hits from behind. Suspensions are cumulative by season : first time 1 game ; 2nd time 3 games ; 3rd time 10 games , 4th time 20 games. To me, this and touch icing are the most dangerous plays in the game, especially considering the size & speed of the players today ( not to mention lack of respect ) . I am ok with fighting but think the game would benefit from weaning out the heavyweights who play 4mins a game ( those fights are the least entertaining anyways ). There are some teams in the NHL who go without guys who just fight (Detroit) . If you are big , can play and scrap fine I want guys like you on my team. If you can only scrap ... don't need you around.

[cleek]

Let's go with 10, then 20 then 40 then gone from the league!

pro players have been playing w/o strict enforcment of the rules so you can't all of a sudden make a drastic change like you're suggesting ( 10/20/40 games right from the get go. Not to mention the owners would not allow it because they would be paying for guys to sit out. And if you say they don't get paid so the owners are not on the hook well the NHLPA will have an issue with that.

Bring it in slowly at the pro level, it's at the minor hockey level where you can bring in the more severe suspensions. If kids grow up playing under these conditions by the time they reach pro they will be accustomed to what is allowed or not.