Puck Daddy - NHL

The American Hockey League is the official NHL guinea pig (or canary in a coal mine for the pessimists) when it comes to rules changes. That's where the overtime skills competition got its trial run, before it started bastardizing the notion of "team sports" in the NHL regular season.

Now, upon the NHL's suggestion, the AHL will be the testing ground for one-minute minor penalties in overtime during the regular season.

The Toronto Star reported earlier this year that "39 percent of the penalties in OT that have resulted in a 4-on-3 power play have produced the winning goal in NHL games." A two-minute minor penalty can literally leave a team shorthanded for 40 percent of overtime when the same call would eat up about 3 percent of regulation.

So empirically, this rule change experiment is worth a shot. That is until you hear the potential details of the AHL overtime amendment. According to Jason Chaimovitch, Vice President of Communications for the AHL, a minor penalty called in regulation whose time carries over to OT will have its remaining time cut in half, under one proposed form of the new rule.

His example: A minor penalty that carries over 50 seconds into overtime will actually only result in a 25-second power-play during sudden death.

What this does, in effect, is reduce the punishment for a desperation minor penalty at the end of regulation. Raise your hand if you think a defensive player might kill or maim to prevent a goal knowing that his team would only be shorthanded for, at most, under a minute in the OT?

No sir, I don't think I like it. Chaimovitch said the rule still needs to be finalized, which means these details could change.

The AHL also adopted NHL standards on icing, high-sticking, face-off location and finally came around to the "over the glass" delay of game penalty for defensive player. They held out as long as they could on that one; rejecting the rule after a test in 2002-03 and making the penalty for that kind of delay a simple loss of a line change.

But the AHL must keeps its rules in line with the NHL. Somewhere, Don Cherry weeps into a Technicolor suit jacket.

digg delicious
more

47 Comments

Post a Comment
  1. Bleed
    1. Posted by Bleed Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:24 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    i like the idea of the rule change. however as far as the carry-over is concerned i feel that anything up too one minute should carry over completely, and anything over one minute should be dropped to one minute. no matter what happens though someone will always complain, most notably when it costs a team a game... however i'm also a firm believer that if you would have prevent overtime by playing better in regulation, you wouldn't have to worry about one call.
  2. Seedy
    2. Posted by Seedy Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:33 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    I like it. Although, since so much is left to the descretion of zebras as it stands, allowing them the option of determining the duration of the penalty, be it 1, 2, 4 or 5mins would be better.
    The idea of a 1min 'embelishment' penalty to offset a 2 min minor of the actual offense could be considered too. In cases in which a penalty has occured but the player embelishes to make sure the ref sees it *cough* Osgood Finals*cough* It would cut back on alot of the acting thats been infesting ALL pro sports.
  3. blueeyes_greeneyes
    3. Posted by blueeyes_greeneyes Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:09 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    I think this is a terrible idea. If you commit a penalty in overtime, you shouldn't be rewarded by only getting half of the punishment than if you comitted it during regulation time. If your team loses in OT because you can't control your stick, so be it. I really hope this doesn't carry over to the NHL
  4. Jak-0
    4. Posted by Jak-0 Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:45 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Good idea. Like it long time.
  5. Wyshynski
    5. Posted by Wyshynski Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:21 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    I can't believe there's this much support for the rule?
    Do you guys think refs will call more penalties in OT with a one-minute minor? Because that could seriously mess with the flow.
  6. Koba
    6. Posted by Koba Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:24 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    being down a man in a 4 on 3 situation is more challenging to face than being down a man in 5 on 4 regulation play so the 1 minute rule seems well "weighted" in that sense.
    oh i forgot, "Wyshynski, you suck" etc.
  7. roadrash172
    7. Posted by roadrash172 Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:44 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    No more mother [profane]!ng rule changes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  8. books
    8. Posted by books Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:22 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Wysh...I'm sure they'll call more penalties if they are only 1 minute. (More TV time for some of our least favorite personalties during the big games.) Personally, I'm a fan of putting the whistle away completely in OT unless it's something really viscious or it takes away a scoring opportunity. I think it is a stupid change and really wish they would stop trying to rewrite the rule book every year. All this tinkering can do little to help the game and doesn't exactly endear long time fans to the current game. If they keep changing it, soon our favorite game will be too much like a Japanese reality game show for my liking. In stead of trying to cater to the casual fan how about trying to emphasis the traditions of the game?
  9. Edward V
    9. Posted by Edward V Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:55 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Say, why not just play until someone wins the game? I'm all for free bonus hockey and for seeing a team earn a win, not a tie. Never was into sister-kissing and don't like it now. Bettman needs to go away before he tries to locate his brain again. Period. Hope like all get out he's term limited??
  10. Wyshynski
    10. Posted by Wyshynski Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:21 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    @ Koba
    I can't believe there's actually an Etc. after "Wyshynski, you suck." I thought that was a rather emphatic statement.
  11. Koba
    11. Posted by Koba Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:24 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    it's a lazy replacement "[sic]" for sarcasm, irony is a hipster currency, must stack them chips. but i'm with books, put away the whistle for OT when humanly possible, unless Chris Pronger is on the ice.
  12. Wyshynski
    12. Posted by Wyshynski Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:21 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    @ Koba -- "irony is a hipster currency."
    You forget I used to write on Deadspin...
  13. se@n
    13. Posted by se@n Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:25 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    as far as rule changes I would like to see penalties awarded after missed penalty shots much like a delayed penalty call currently is handled. Goalies are seeing way more penalty shots these days and getting better "books" on players since the shootout was created. It really feels like a major momentum change when the shot is stopped and it goes right back to full strength hockey.
    any thoughts?
  14. Jeff G
    14. Posted by Jeff G Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:31 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    If they are that worried about a 2 minute minor taking up 40% of the time, here is a solution.....play a whole 20 minute period of OT before going to the SO.
  15. jtk2s
    15. Posted by jtk2s Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:43 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    If the NHL wants the AHL to follow it's suggestions, the biggest one should be that you need TWO officials, calling the games!!!
  16. Michigander21
    16. Posted by Michigander21 Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:35 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    All penalties are based on one of two premises.
    1. The act is likely to cause injury. (high sticking, checking from behind, etc.)
    2. The act gives one team an unfair or unsporting advantage in play. (tripping, hooking, etc.)
    I am sick of hearing that refs need to "let players play" in overtime or anytime. This favors teams and players that are in effect cheating or engaging in acts that are likely to cause serious, unwarranted injury. I loathe seeing a team win because they were holding, tripping, etc. on a play that resulted in them winning. I have seen it, and so have all hockey fans at some point in time. The rules are there for a reason, letting them go for "continuity's sake", only sets the example that breaking the rules is ok, when it gives you a chance to win. Exactly what kids don't need to be influenced by, and a few adults (Enron, etc.)
    Nope, if you can't do the time, don't do the crime. Here is to keeping full penalties and calling them regardless of the time in the game.
    Thoughts?
  17. tim78862
    17. Posted by tim78862 Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:10 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    I'm with ya James B. Pre-lockout I could see it as it was choas at times but not now. With the rules as they are(clearly defined) you can't have this approach. Here's a perfect scenario. Whole game interference has been called strictly in front of the net. First play in overtime team A sets up and team B gets scored upon because player X(member of team B) was knocked down, shot is taken, rebound kicks to player Y(team A's player) and he has an easy goal. In the interest of not having the game "decided by the refs" you still, in effect have it decided that way. Since the standard of what is/isn't allowed changed, they DID decide the game NOT the players. If this rule is to make a penalty call in ot more likely....more revision is needed than the time served on an offense.
  18. B S
    18. Posted by B S Thu Sep 03, 2009 3:13 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    the 1-minute idea sounded terrible to me at first, but the more I think about it, is not too bad....... the half a penalty idea absolutely stinks any way you look at it.
  19. Brad
    19. Posted by Brad Thu Sep 03, 2009 6:53 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Hmm. Ok so let me get this straight.
    Goals are down because of various reasons.
    Solution: Call more penalties so players aren't clutched or grabbed and they have more room to skate.
    Now goals are supposedly up and teams are losing in overtime because teams are scoring goals on
    powerplays....
    Solution: Lessen the time they are in the box by halving the penalty time.
    Did I get this right? Does this sound completely asinine to anyone else?
  20. lowflyingcessna
    20. Posted by lowflyingcessna Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:54 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    STOP SCREWING AROUND WITH THE RULES!!!! This whole game has become almost unrecognizable with these silly rule changes. Bring hockey back to what it was.
  21. Handzus20
    21. Posted by Handzus20 Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:15 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    This is just an excuse for the NHL to get more games to be shootouts. A lot of teams are having 1/8 of their regular season games or more decided by shootouts; way too many. The smart change to OT would be to make it 10 minutes to cut the number of shootouts and actually make them rare and exciting again.
  22. John H
    22. Posted by John H Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:38 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    Are they kidding?!?!?!?! They are doing this to reduce the advantage of the team with the power play advantage because they are worried about the fairness of having a team on a 4 on 3 for to long a period of time???? This is the same league that bastardizes the team sports as you mentioned in your article... and their trying to balance out OT power plays??? What's next ... taking the blocker pad away from goalies to enahance scoring in OT... I better keep my mouth shut ... they might read this and implement that too.
  23. John H
    23. Posted by John H Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:38 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    I agree with you handzus20 ... we've been talking about that on Islander message boards for a while ... best solution to decide OT is to play it out. Forget shootouts and call more penalty shots for blatent fouls during the game. 10 minute OT is reasonable ... I'll accept that ... I'd rather they play out the games like they do in the playoffs ... if they kept it 4 on 4 ... with full 2 minute penalties in OT most games wouldnt go past 10 minutes to begin with.
  24. Wing Nut
    24. Posted by Wing Nut Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:37 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    I wish the NHL would FIRST have the automatic icing rule in place before they change the OT rule. Based upon the number of players that still continue to be hurt when they get jammed into the boards while racing to touch the puck first just totally frustrates me.
  25. Buddha
    25. Posted by Buddha Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:45 pm EDT

    Report Abuse

    I feel that O.T n eeds to be extended. 10 min sounds about right. Before rule changes lets get the refs all on the same page of what an infraction is. We see too many penalties called by the trailing official wit the play in front of the other official.

Puck Daddy

Add to My Yahoo! RSS

Greg Wyshynski

Puck Daddy is an NHL blog edited by Greg Wyshynski. Email him, and follow him on Twitter.

Teams

Customize to follow news and rumors on your favorite teams. [ Sign in ]

Related Photo Gallery

Y! Sports Blogs

Puck Daddy Recent Readers

Watch Live Hockey Online with GameCenter Live™