|
Four new rules that will make for a more entertaining and fairer NHL |
|
|
|
|
|
The NHL’s first 100 years has been a success, but that doesn’t mean the league shouldn’t be tweaking elements of its operation to reflect the way the game and the world around it has changed. This includes the rulebook, which has some rules that need updating, and other areas that need brand new rules.
Luckily, yours truly (unless I’ve blocked or muted you on Twitter) has been hard at work between the ears, and I've produced a number of new/rejigged rules (apologies to Bill Maher) that should help the sport thrive in the next century. You’re welcome in advance!
New Rule: Penalties taken in final 1:59 of overtime or less carry over into the shootout in a creative way. Thus far, the league penalizes rule-breakers in overtime by adding a player to the offending team’s opponent in 3-on-3 play. That’s fair, but what happens when, say, a player cross-checks someone in the mouth with just one minute left in OT? Here’s what happens: they get a one-minute penalty, and if the other team fails to capitalize on its power play in that span, they get no extra benefit in the shootout.
That changes under this new, exciting and totally-on-the-up-and-up rule. For however long remains in the overtime penalty, the penalized team has to labor under an added hurdle that carries over into the shootout. What kind of hurdle, you ask? Maybe you allow the opposition’s coach to choose the shooters on the penalized team for however long the OT penalty carries into the shootout. Maybe you only allow the shooters on the penalized team to hold one hand on the stick for the duration of the penalty. Maybe you let them only glide down on one leg before they take their shot.
We can hash out specifics when the Board of Governors are set to approve it, but the gist is, a penalty in overtime – no matter when it happens in overtime – must be completed in some shape or form in the shootout. That’s fair, too.
New Rule: Vexing. A two-minute minor to augment the current unsportsmanlike conduct rule, this penalty would apply across the board to virtually any aspect of the game that harms the competitive, fair-play, entertainment ideal of the sport. Brad Marchand pulling his borderline-dirty shenanigans routine again? Two minutes for vexing. A coach employs a boring system devoid of joy? That’s two big ol’ minutes for vexing, pal. Home team’s in-arena operations crew goes one-too-many times to the Kiss-Cam or Stompin’ Tom’s The Hockey Song? You got it: two minutes, vexing.
It’s subjective, of course, but in this era of instant replay and coach’s challenges, we should know now that every rule is still interpreted subjectively, so let’s embrace that. Most importantly, let’s remember that, when people pay NHL-level dollars for their tickets, they should be vexed as little as possible. And the best part of this new infraction: the official will have to signal it by making a giant V with his arms, like he was dancing to the Village People’s "YMCA". The penalty call alone makes the product more entertaining, but the spirit of it strikes at the heart of all the little things that can wear on a hockey fan’s nerves after a while.
New Rule: Officials can impose suspensions immediately after heinous plays by assessing multiple-hundred-minute penalties. We all seem to want to be super-tough on those who break the law, right? So – and with due respect to the NHL’s Department of Player Safety – let’s give on-ice officials the ability to hand out de facto suspensions for egregious actions.
How do we do that? Well, let’s say a player clearly and recklessly drives an opponent’s head into the boards from behind. Immediately, he gets ejected from the game – but in addition to however many minutes he’s unable to play in that game, the referee truly lays down the smack and gives him 300 more penalty minutes, to be served consecutively until they expire.
In effect, you’ve given the player a five-game suspension – unless overtime or the shootout happens, in which case the sentence gets reduced in one sense – and there’s no controversy over punitive discrepancies in similar cases. We leave it to the officials on the scene (with the help of video replay) to decide, and live with the ramifications for better or worse. This is the way I’m feeling about instant replay in general, but I think the mentality should be applied across the board.
New Rule: Puck-over-the-glass delay of game penalty changed to a one-minute man advantage. The delay-of-game penalty teams incur by shooting the puck over the glass is one of the most loathed in the league, as it frequently penalizes a player who didn’t intentionally shoot it into the stands to prevent an opponent from scoring. However, let’s not pretend players weren’t doing this before the rule was changed in the first place. They absolutely were, and the flow of the product suffered for it.
That said, there's room for compromise: if we agree this type of offence isn’t as bad as, for instance, a hook or a charge, let’s assess a one-minute toddler penalty – smaller than a minor, but larger than a non-call – and restart the play in the offending team’s zone as we do with all penalties. There’s still going to be occasions in which players are sent to the box at times they probably don’t deserve to be, but with this change, we have a relatively happy medium that addresses both accidental and intentional puck-clearing situations.
Blogger •NHL Columnist • 
Join the Discussion:
»