12/27/24
October 24, 2005
I'm diggin' it so far. Having my hockey back is what counts. I have always enjoyed the brawls as much as the amazing goals you never thought possible. These new rules make it more exciting to want to keep up. The players have to get used to playing in a way that most never had to play before. We can't fault them this soon for any problems that may occur. The enforcers are going to have to do something that they never had to before and that is to play hockey! This is where We can see just how good the fighters really are. Some were good at both, others are one dimentional brawlers who will have to learn to play the game in a different way.
posted by melcarek69 at 09:36 AM on October 24, 2005
Oh no, Wade Belak doesn't like the new rules! Of course he doesn't. They make him think too much, or at least too quickly. He's used to having ten or fifteen seconds to decide whether or not to let go of someone's jersey. Now he's got to make that decision inside of a second or two. Must be tough on his poor brain. And the stepping-on-sticks tripping penalty has always been an issue. Sometimes the refs will get that wrong, sometimes they won't. Quinn is right that many games are being decided on special teams right now. But if coaches are mad that they're losing so many games because of power plays, freaking figure out how to make your team stop taking so many penalties. Like everyone with brains is saying -- be patient. It's only a month into the season.
posted by fabulon7 at 10:10 AM on October 24, 2005
Belak nuthin'. I bet you can't find more than a handful of defencemen (if any) that are happy to have to adjust to play under the current hyper enforcement of the old pre-existing rules.
posted by gspm at 11:04 AM on October 24, 2005
thank you, gspm. (btw, are those the call letters for an over-night male focused television station? I ask, becuase when I say it in my head, it sounds like espn.) Belak is not a beacon of defensive play to be held up as an example for the league. He was victimized on Saturday, but whatever. I'm sure every team will lose games simply because of poor officiating this season. The Leafs played like sh!t for most of the first period, and most of the third, so I'm not going to blame the refs for that one. When Primeau and Brashear are leading point getters for a game, the other team wasn't playing well. But, I digress. I'm no stat geek, though sometimes I wish I was, but I'd wager there is a very strong correlation between having more power play opportunities and Ws, early this season. And the number of 5-on-3s you have to defend will strongly correlate with Ls. Unless you are Bruce Leroy, you can only bite the bullet and survive so many times a game.
posted by garfield at 11:21 AM on October 24, 2005
Well, we're still definitely in the adjustment phase of the new NHL, so I think we can expect some grumblings such as this. When all the parties (teams, refs, league) are a little more confident in what to expect during the course of game, we'll see the hitting coming back and probably more battling in front of the net. Honestly, the only big differences I've noticed is a lot less fighting. Unless you're a Thrasher. Right now you see some teams really benefiting from the new rules (Nashville - who only seem to score on the powerplay and shootout) and those that are having a really hard time (NYI and Pittsburgh come to mind - especially the Isles who are still playing 2003's game - and the Pens have lost 4 shootouts) - but I have to think that given what I've been watching, this will all start coming back to some degree of normalcy. Frankly, 5 on 5 is not gone from the game. There's just more penalties there right now.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 12:18 PM on October 24, 2005
The desired side effect of the new rules and tons of penalities is too stop obstruction. This means checking the guy not on the puck (interference) and clutching and grabing (obstruction, hooking) It it now way is going to tone down the physcality of hockey. Guys will still get nailed in the corners(provided they have the puck) get rocked with their heads down coming through the neutral zone and get punished in front of the net. I think the biggest reason for the increase in scoring is the bigger offensive zone (or smaller neutral zone of your glass is half empty) D-men are able to keep it in the zone more shots on net, less time "re-setting" in the neutral zone. Players will adapat and less penalties will be called. They have been talking about this obstruction noise for a long time but it took a lockout ot finally enforce it. I for one like the new rules.
posted by HATER 187 at 01:16 PM on October 24, 2005
I dunno. I just don't get it I guess. Everyone is talking about the better, faster and more fair NHL but I don't see the thrill. Don't get me wrong, I don't like the "goons", but I miss defensive hockey. I would rather sit there for 2 1/2 hours watching a game in 1-0 if they were hitting and strategy was involved and it got physical. Now it seems like I'm watching someone playing PS2 on my TV and all they do is run up the right side boards and shoot and score or shoot, rebound and score. These games that are 9-4, 5-3, 8-6 are just plain boring. Also, they have taken one of the most exciting plays in all of sports, the penalty shot, and have reduced it down to be as exciting as a 25 yard field goal. But you know what? I'm still watching. God bless hockey.
posted by willthrill72 at 04:23 PM on October 24, 2005
I think the guys that are running the show are the same guys that designed that PS2...
This is not the time to assess how the game is going to look from now on. Sure the skaters and special-teams specialists are goingt o adjust first, but defenders will adjust and learn how to move people without taking penalties. And they will. Even Belak will. He may not think so, but he will. I'm confident. Until then, it's not like the games aren't compelling. The Leafs-Bruins game tonight had me screaming at the damn TV. It felt good.
posted by chicobangs at 09:31 PM on October 24, 2005
That was a good game. Thrills, spills and chills.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 09:50 PM on October 24, 2005
I was screaming at the damn TV too, but mostly at the inconsistent officiating. IMO, the "crackdown" is already starting to show cracks.
posted by mkn at 11:56 PM on October 24, 2005
Man that was a great game. Maybe I just think so because I was stricken with angry bowel just before the shootout, but it was enjoyable. Even if the Bruins can't score on a 5-3 advantage and Brian Leetch died two weeks ago.
posted by yerfatma at 06:10 AM on October 25, 2005
If you want to see inconsistent officiating find tape of a series of games from 2003. In those days there was no standard. You couldn't say, "That's a hook!" because two periods later or over on channel 773 they were letting 'the hook' go as 'good defensive hockey'. At least now we all can say that Exhibit A was a bad call and we have a set of clear rules to fall back on. And as much as we all talk about the players, it's the refs who will now be accountable to that clear set of rules. It will get better. From time to time the new rule enforcement standards have me frustrated for nasty nits and tight battles like everyone else. Of course then I see Thornton chasing a guy down on the breakaway and I see him make a fantastic play. And it's a play we never would have seen two years ago. In 2003 he would have water-skied that guy from center ice, turned him around, flung him to the ground, and because it late in a tight game the refs would have turned a blind eye. Instead, he made an incredible play and no one can complain about a non-call. Great game last night. Belfour was awesome. And Jason Allison needs to stop taking shootout attempts. They hurt to watch.
posted by 86 at 08:17 AM on October 25, 2005
Belfour was awesome. At times. At other times he looked ready to retire. I don't understand how he stopped ~50 shots when he looked so out of the game in places.
posted by yerfatma at 08:26 AM on October 25, 2005
Jason Allison needs to stop taking shootout attempts Oh my god, yes. He is the suckiest suck that ever sucked at those. No wheels - none. I'd take Steen, Wellwood, Stajan, Tucker, McCabe, Belfour and Belak before Allison again.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 09:11 AM on October 25, 2005
...but mostly at the inconsistent officiating They were brutally inconsistent for last night's Canes/Sens tilt too. But it's really hard to complain when my boys put the Sens down after spotting them 2 goals. Whoooo!!!!
posted by NoMich at 09:21 AM on October 25, 2005
Jason Allison needs to stop taking shootout attempts. They hurt to watch. I dunno. I find them...relaxing. Kinda like watching fish in an aquarium.
posted by fabulon7 at 09:47 AM on October 25, 2005
How many attempts does Allison get? That's three shootouts the Leafs have been in (I think), and what is it? One goal (I think)? I mean Domi scored in a pre season shootout (the 14th shooter and first to score, something like that). Maybe it is time to mix it up a little. Tucker's goal the other night (wrist shot into the top corner off the wing) was just sick. Stick him in there. Lots of the 'role' type players in the NHL had considerable offensive talents in jr. They might be worth a look in the shootout when you don't necessarily think of them as 3o goal threats. Though I will defer to those in charge, they probably know better than I.
posted by gspm at 02:28 PM on October 25, 2005
I'm having trouble understanding the new offsides rule. I swear I've seen it called just like before. I thought the "tag-up" rule would effectively make it okay for a player w/o the puck to enter the zone before the puck. The whistle would only be blown if that player touched the puck before going back to touch the blue line. Am I misunderstanding the rule? I know I've seen offsides called as soon as a player crosses the line with the puck - if I were right about the rule, that would be impossible.
posted by mullacc at 06:47 PM on October 25, 2005
Offsides is called if puck is touched in the offensive zone while a person is in an offsides postion (in before the puck). This prohibits as player from carrying the puck over the blueline when a player crosses that line before the puck. And obviously, it also prohibits passing to a player already inside the offensive zone. If the puck is shot in from center ice while a player(s) is in the offensive zone that player(s) can "tag-up" at the blue line and avoid an offside call. For at least an instant, all players must be outside of the offensive zone before they can go attempt to play the puck. So, it's not the individual who must tag up, as much as the entire team. They must all be outside the offensive zone at the same time prior to going back in to play the puck. In the past, if a player was inside the zone when the puck was shot in, offside would be called regardless of whether or not he played the puck. Now, offsides requires that he or another player on his team play the puck for the whistle to blow.
posted by 86 at 08:03 AM on October 26, 2005
Jebus. Does that make any sense? I bet Denis Leary could explain this better.
posted by 86 at 08:04 AM on October 26, 2005
It's simple - the offensive team cannot beat the puck into the offensive zone. If they do and have possession, the play is whistled dead and the face off moves outside. If they don't have possession (the puck is shot in, comes out and then back in) they must clear the zone (tag-up) before attempting to gain possession.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 09:03 AM on October 26, 2005
Got it. The possession vs. non-possession thing is what was tripping me up. Thanks.
posted by mullacc at 09:22 AM on October 26, 2005
Though I will defer to those in charge, they probably know better than I. My God, you haven't been watching the Blues, have you?
posted by wfrazerjr at 11:05 AM on October 26, 2005
Great article. I am thinking that its going to take awhile, maybe be the end of the season, and we will see play that has a little more of the "good stuff" without loosing the new pace of the game! It takes a while for changes to fully take over something. Everybody needs to be patient. I dont think we have a finihed product here-but a work in process...