Minor Rule Changes

[Donnie D]

Per EE:

The Board also endorsed rules changes that had been recommended by the NHL General Managers and approved by the Competition Committee:

A change to Rule 76.2 ("Face-Offs") will place the first face-off of a power play in the defending zone of the team that committed the foul.

A change to Rule 81.1 ("Icing") states that “Any contact between opposing players while pursuing the puck on an icing must be for the sole purpose of playing the puck and not for eliminating the opponent from playing the puck. Unnecessary or dangerous contact could result in penalties being assessed to the offending player.”

A change to Rule 85.5 ("Face-Off Location") provides that if a puck is shot off the goal frame, goal post or crossbar, the subsequent face-off will remain in the end zone where the puck went out of play.

Further, the Board endorsed immediate and long-term recommendations forwarded by the Goaltender Equipment Working Group and approved by the Competition Committee. Using the guiding principles that: (1) Goaltender equipment should not be any larger than it needs to be to provide adequate protection and (2) should be proportionate to the size of the goaltender, the Working Group will work aggressively with the goalies and manufacturers toward developing standards for the maximum size of all equipment that each individual can wear.

[Sotnos]

A change to Rule 76.2 ("Face-Offs") will place the first face-off of a power play in the defending zone of the team that committed the foul.
Makes sense

A change to Rule 81.1 ("Icing") states that “Any contact between opposing players while pursuing the puck on an icing must be for the sole purpose of playing the puck and not for eliminating the opponent from playing the puck. Unnecessary or dangerous contact could result in penalties being assessed to the offending player.”
Boy, they are really reluctant to go with no touch icing. I wonder how often they're actually going to call this one.

Further, the Board endorsed immediate and long-term recommendations forwarded by the Goaltender Equipment Working Group and approved by the Competition Committee. Using the guiding principles that: (1) Goaltender equipment should not be any larger than it needs to be to provide adequate protection and (2) should be proportionate to the size of the goaltender, the Working Group will work aggressively with the goalies and manufacturers toward developing standards for the maximum size of all equipment that each individual can wear.
I wonder when their suggestions will be ready and/or when they'll be acted upon.

[kid A]

Per EE:

A change to Rule 81.1 ("Icing") states that “Any contact between opposing players while pursuing the puck on an icing must be for the sole purpose of playing the puck and not for eliminating the opponent from playing the puck. Unnecessary or dangerous contact could result in penalties being assessed to the offending player.”


Huh, sounds like a compromise on no-touch icing. Be interesting to see how it is called, plenty of room for interpretation of "unnecessary or dangerous".

I don't have a problem with any of these tweaks, like'em all as a matter of fact.

[the_narrow_way]

They sound good to me.

[TexasBolt]

A change to Rule 76.2 ("Face-Offs") will place the first face-off of a power play in the defending zone of the team that committed the foul.

Good idea, makes penalties that much more costly. You really do not want to go two men down now.

A change to Rule 81.1 ("Icing") states that “Any contact between opposing players while pursuing the puck on an icing must be for the sole purpose of playing the puck and not for eliminating the opponent from playing the puck. Unnecessary or dangerous contact could result in penalties being assessed to the offending player.”

Probably as close to no-touch icing as the NHL will ever get.

A change to Rule 85.5 ("Face-Off Location") provides that if a puck is shot off the goal frame, goal post or crossbar, the subsequent face-off will remain in the end zone where the puck went out of play.

Another good idea, why should the shooter be penalized for hitting the post when the face-off would have stayed in that zone if the goalie had deflected it out?

(2) should be proportionate to the size of the goaltender

Well that ought to do it for Manny Legace's career. ;)

[Hoek]

"Unnecessary or dangerous contact could result in penalties being assessed to the offending player."

Could result in penalties? What kind of rule writing is this? Either it is or it isn't a penalty. That's like saying the puck crossing the goal line between the goal posts could result in a point on the scoreboard. :rolleyes:

Then again you never know what'll happen in the Toronto war room..

[Flycoon]

"Unnecessary or dangerous contact could result in penalties being assessed to the offending player."

Could result in penalties? What kind of rule writing is this? Either it is or it isn't a penalty. That's like saying the puck crossing the goal line between the goal posts could result in a point on the scoreboard. :rolleyes:

Then again you never know what'll happen in the Toronto war room..

Isn't this called "interference"?

[Jester47]

Isn't this called "interference"?

Depends on which ref you ask!!!