Some Habs content, for a change
In the last three games involving the Canadiens, there have been 19 goals scored. 18 if you discount an empty netter. Of those 18, 11 were scored on the PP or in the seconds after a penalty expired. Three of those were 5-on-3, or in the seconds after one penalty expired. There was also one SHG.
In three games featuring 19 goals, we've seen a measley six goals scored during 5-on-5 hockey.
Carbonneau, on the arbitrary penalties:
In recent games on Sportsnet, the broadcast team hasn't even bothered to try to replay penalty calls. No one can find them.
That's beef #1. Beef #2: that damned puck-over-glass penalty (again).
Two of the those 11 PPGs were a direct result of puck-over-glass minors. One of those was a 5-on-3. Last night's marquee matchup between the Sabres and Sens was decided by puck-over-glass penalties. Ottawa scored on two puck-over-glass PPs and won 4-2 with an empty net goal.
Koivu, on the puck-over glass rule:
Imagine if the NFL instituted a rule that made an accidental incomplete pass that goes out of bounds a ten yard penalty, or if the NBA called a foul for an out-of-bounds pass. It is obscenely unjust.
I understand that there are actually some crackpots out there that think this rule is a good idea. Their argument is usually based on the assumption that (1) NHL players should be skilled enough to avoid it or that (2) it forces defensemen to make higher risk plays.
Even if (1) were true (it's obviously not, given the number of these penalties that are called and NOT ONE of them being intentional), the penalty far outweighs the offense. The continuing number of these calls made this season is evidence that (2) is a bad assumption as well. Defensemen still prefer to try to bank it off the glass than send it up the middle, and rightly so. Guess which option will draw more ire from their coach?
There is no way that accidentally throwing a puck over the glass is equivalent to tripping an opponent to prevent a breakaway, or slashing or elbowing or boarding. The puck-over-glass penalty should be reduced to the equivalent of icing, post-haste. Having games decided by 5-on-3 goals because of this rule is no way to introduce new fans to the game.
New NHL hockey is promoted as a exciting, fast skating, back-and-forth game. It's false advertising, because in the last few games I've seen the lasting images are of PP goals scored on unjust or unseen penalties.
~~~
Yea or Nay: The guy featured on the front page of officepools.com is Darren Turcotte.
~~~
There has been lots of press for HOFer Patrick Roy over the last week. As usual, Red's article is the best, hands down.
~~~
Eric Staal went on an early third period high-sticking rampage last night against former his teammates who jumped ship for the Rangers.
~~~
As if the Buffaslug wasn't enough of an eyesore in Buffalo. BfloBlog has added some captivating footage of a dangling bison penis to the top of their page.
~~~
Just because no one else has mentioned it lately: Sidney Crosby is eligible to play for Canada at the WJHCs in Sweden this year. It is my opinion that he will be considered the best player in hockey by the end of this season, and he's still junior-eligible. Wow.
~~~
Some Gazette writers are authoring blogs! Dave Stubbs and Sidhartha Banerjee can bee seen at Habs Inside/Out. For some reason, Mike Boone gets his own page: Mike Boone's Online Eeee-mail.
On the Forecheck - more hockey numbers!
Sabermetric Research has occasional hockey material.
In three games featuring 19 goals, we've seen a measley six goals scored during 5-on-5 hockey.
Carbonneau, on the arbitrary penalties:
"The penalties are a concern. They're mostly hooking and that's the new NHL. The only thing that bothers me (about the refs) is that there are some other things that aren't being called out there."
In recent games on Sportsnet, the broadcast team hasn't even bothered to try to replay penalty calls. No one can find them.
That's beef #1. Beef #2: that damned puck-over-glass penalty (again).
Two of the those 11 PPGs were a direct result of puck-over-glass minors. One of those was a 5-on-3. Last night's marquee matchup between the Sabres and Sens was decided by puck-over-glass penalties. Ottawa scored on two puck-over-glass PPs and won 4-2 with an empty net goal.
Koivu, on the puck-over glass rule:
"That's the worst rule in hockey."
Imagine if the NFL instituted a rule that made an accidental incomplete pass that goes out of bounds a ten yard penalty, or if the NBA called a foul for an out-of-bounds pass. It is obscenely unjust.
I understand that there are actually some crackpots out there that think this rule is a good idea. Their argument is usually based on the assumption that (1) NHL players should be skilled enough to avoid it or that (2) it forces defensemen to make higher risk plays.
Even if (1) were true (it's obviously not, given the number of these penalties that are called and NOT ONE of them being intentional), the penalty far outweighs the offense. The continuing number of these calls made this season is evidence that (2) is a bad assumption as well. Defensemen still prefer to try to bank it off the glass than send it up the middle, and rightly so. Guess which option will draw more ire from their coach?
There is no way that accidentally throwing a puck over the glass is equivalent to tripping an opponent to prevent a breakaway, or slashing or elbowing or boarding. The puck-over-glass penalty should be reduced to the equivalent of icing, post-haste. Having games decided by 5-on-3 goals because of this rule is no way to introduce new fans to the game.
New NHL hockey is promoted as a exciting, fast skating, back-and-forth game. It's false advertising, because in the last few games I've seen the lasting images are of PP goals scored on unjust or unseen penalties.
~~~
Yea or Nay: The guy featured on the front page of officepools.com is Darren Turcotte.
~~~
There has been lots of press for HOFer Patrick Roy over the last week. As usual, Red's article is the best, hands down.
~~~
Eric Staal went on an early third period high-sticking rampage last night against former his teammates who jumped ship for the Rangers.
~~~
As if the Buffaslug wasn't enough of an eyesore in Buffalo. BfloBlog has added some captivating footage of a dangling bison penis to the top of their page.
~~~
Just because no one else has mentioned it lately: Sidney Crosby is eligible to play for Canada at the WJHCs in Sweden this year. It is my opinion that he will be considered the best player in hockey by the end of this season, and he's still junior-eligible. Wow.
~~~
Some Gazette writers are authoring blogs! Dave Stubbs and Sidhartha Banerjee can bee seen at Habs Inside/Out. For some reason, Mike Boone gets his own page: Mike Boone's Online Eeee-mail.
On the Forecheck - more hockey numbers!
Sabermetric Research has occasional hockey material.
posted by Jeff J at 5:07 p.m.
6 Comments:
"Just because no one else has mentioned it lately: Sidney Crosby is eligible to play for Canada at the WJHCs in Sweden this year. It is my opinion that he will be considered the best player in hockey by the end of this season, and he's still junior-eligible. Wow."
Who's to say the Pittsburgh Penguins won't be playing games at that time?
The best (really, only) justification I've come up with for the puckclearing rule isn't about the game, but public safety..... keeping guys from firing 80MPH+ pucks over the glass into the crowd.
Of course, if you say its a public safety issue, you may increase the risk of civil liability when someone does get hurt. So, instead, the rule is 'for the game'.
anonymous: The Pens will definitely be playing games at that time. The WJHCs are right after Xmas. Sid definitely won't be there - I'm just saying he's eligible. You must be thinking of the WHCs, which take place in the middle of the SC playoffs.
craig: That's the most sensible explanation I've seen.
Imagine if the NFL instituted a rule that made an accidental incomplete pass that goes out of bounds a ten yard penalty,
To me, the rule is closer to "Intentional Grounding" in football than anything else - I don't have that much of an issue with it.
I have no issue with the rule either. It's too easy to fire the puck over the glass intentionally without being able to actually judge intent.
As for players bitching about it, they know the rule so they should just shut their traps.
If a rule is unjust, you should just "shut your trap," like a patsy?
And are you suggesting that players are still deliberately shooting it over the glass when they're already killing a penalty?
Andrei Markov: "Oooh, I'm in a bit of a pinch here. I think I'll shoot it over the glass and hope none of the four officials notices!"
Before the rule was instituted, I had never seen a skater deliberately shoot the puck over the glass without getting a penalty.
The offense is basically the same as icing, but it's penalized the same as a boarding from behind offense. It's asinine.
Post a Comment
<< Home