What Rule Changes Would I Make If I Had Any Say?

I don't have any say, but these are rules changes I would make if I had that kind of power.
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @thehockeyguy
Join us on our discord to chat hockey, talk with others during the game, share pet pictures, and more.
/ discord
Order jerseys from Ben H Sports while saving 10% off the listed eBay prices by sending him an email regarding jerseys you spot in his listings. [e-mail] Just tell him Shannon sent you.
Support The Hockey Guy via Patreon / thehockeyguy
/ youtubehockeyguy
Instagram: thgshannon and thg_cats
Spoutible: spoutible.com/...
[e-mail]
Contact me via snail mail at:
The Hockey Guy
PO Box 15038 Seven Oaks PO
Abbotsford, BC
V2S 8P1
In the USA:
Shannon Skanes
1125 Fir Avenue
Suite 119
Blaine, WA 98230

[@SofaMuncher]

I would be fine with just one rule change. No gambling advertising.

[@nathanbork2479]

I don’t even know what they are talking about with the odds numbers

[@goose5462]

But they are hilarious, advertising all the options they have to regulate your betting, like any of these companies fk'n care if you gamble your entire life away.

[@biggiejerseysTV]

@@nathanbork2479same here man. I’m like what do these numbers even mean, lol.

[@gingabread2690]

me too. i'm alsso sick of my favorite hockey youtubers advertising them as well. like come on...

[@russell-di8js]

Nether a truer word spoken. I live in the UK & we're ahead of u with this gambling nonsense & believe me it causes so many problems both with the clubs + leagues & with sports fans it's like the devil himself has devised it!! Killing football fans thru suicides.

[@berniedc9354]

need to eliminate blackouts of games , especially replays of games on NHL network

[@taterhamster]

It's like the NHL wants to make it as hard as possible to watch their games...

[@bangyahead1]

Yup, those are self-imposed rules anyway and those rules cause them to lose advertising money. One would have to think the NHL would want every cent they can get.....

[@christianjforbes]

Blackouts need to go away like cellular roaming and long distance charges … I can’t watch my team unless I leave the area or buy an expensive cable tv package. Who pays for cable these days?

[@shockwave315]

I want an announcer "mute" option. Pay to have the announcer and color commentator be muted. But in addition to that, i want the mics around the rink to be turned up. I want the skates scraping ice to be louder. The stick smacks. The vocal chatter between teammates. The chirping. The coaches. I want to hear it all, unfiltered. NASCAR does this for roughly a minute or 2 each race. They call it "Crank It Up." Just the sounds of the cars and some radio communications sprinkled in. It's GREAT!! Bring that to hockey, but for the entire game if i choose.

[@RinkrattHockey]

I had one of those big satellite dishes back in the day and my receiver had a setting on it where I could turn off the commentary and just have crowd noise.

[@jimmyzarkis6276]

you might be able to find an areana stream feed. I have come across those. They all use the same footage and just talk over it anyways. Found the same games in Russian, German, sweedish, english, spanish, same exact camera shots.

[@DigitalLogos]

Very much this. Especially when you have commentators that are incredibly biased for one team or just going on and on about BS. Just shut up!

[@barrybrennan1045]

Remember when CBC was on strike? Games were broadcast without announcers, just the sounds of the game: heavenly.

[@taterhamster]

Yeah it's pretty annoying when I'm watching a national televised game where the announcers are so biased that I have to mute the TV and turn the radio broadcast on.

[@LSA30]

I just want ads gone from jerseys again. It's sacrilegious that they defiled our holy ice garments like that, but I know it's never gonna happen.

[@EvilOdin]

100% agreed, guaranteed we'll continue to see more and more tacked on over the years until they all look like nascar drivers out there.

[@jean-michel8307]

yeah you cant put anything on the habs jerseys. its a royalty jersey ffs

[@CNSPORTZEDITZ]

Apparently jerseys cost an arm and a leg more for the ad so you're in luck if you hate the jersey ads.

[@icewyre]

120% they need to go

[@Ramuh.]

The only things that should be added on jerseys, is patches like SCF, Anniversary, Memorial, and Special event types.

[@ErrorVector]

Standard benches in every arena that accommodate the backup goalie. These arenas that have the backup sitting all alone … ridiculous.

[@Bowman1999]

I'm with you on the cross checks, multiple penalties, goalies playing puck & icing on penalty kills. If I could change something I would get rid of gambling .

[@bartsanders1553]

I'd settle for not being reminded every time I exhale.

[@cousinit718]

The cross check in the playoff game was horrendous. Calling embellishment only made is worse.

[@nicknajduk6485]

I think the blood determining 2 or 4 minutes is a tough one. Anyone can fake an injury, but it’s much harder to fake blood. We all know there are blatant divers in the league, but I can see a player furthering the embellishment if it means the opposing player may get an additional 2. Also, as far as the icing on the penalty kill. I agree that it would make powerplays more exciting. But maybe change the ruling (just for PK icings) to the shorthanded team still being able to change players. That way it’s still a big play to clear the puck. But the downside is that the faceoff comes back in their zone.

[@TheHi-T]

It should be automatic game misconduct for faking an injury. How many times have you seen a player claiming to be hurt on the play immediately to be on the PP?

[@ErrorVector]

For the PK icing how about you have to at least gain your own blue line? Rather than the red. Could be a half decent compromise.

[@ryanbrown3283]

@@ErrorVector I think that a combination of your two suggestions would be cool, more confusing, but cool. If its from your own zone its a standard icing, if you gain your blue line you can change but still take the faceoff in your zone.

[@HDreamer]

@@TheHi-T Impossible to enforce. Too many hits sting like hell initially and after a moment it's fine.

[@MrMpa31]

It should be based solely on the severity of the infraction. Injury or blood can be an indicator, but shouldn't be the determining factor

[@claytonmalkowsky3241]

Dark mode - for when you’re watching hockey in bed and the screen is too bright

[@JacobONeal-d1f]

Black ice would be cool

[@dalriada]

@@JacobONeal-d1fwith neon lines!

[@andrewclarke8163]

​@@JacobONeal-d1f... With a white puck?

[@slothkng]

I can get behind this 🤣

[@leatherbound4233]

@@JacobONeal-d1f any more adds where there.

[@corymahoney3081]

The IIHF has 3 points for a regulation win, 2 points for an OTW, 1 point for OTL. What do you think of that idea?

[@SpyroPS1iscool]

Remove the trapezoid and only give out one penalty while calling an embellishment, no point giving a penalty to both players when one is embellishing

[@fredbrandl880]

Remove some of the advertising on the ice like in the corners for example and the ones they add on inside the blue line that’s on screen. Aren’t there enough ads on the boards it’s so nice to watch the puck move on clear ice instead of over an add.

[@anthonyfaccaro7118]

Youve never seen an international rink have you?

[@fredbrandl880]

@@anthonyfaccaro7118 yup and they’re gross

[@NaughtyPrincessfkhandles]

@@anthonyfaccaro7118 So thats a reason to not keep atleast one league to not have them for a clean ice? I want other leagues ice ads gone too rather then give every league that dont have it

[@theclamhammer4447]

Don’t be silly. Less advertising… of any kind, is absolutely a non starter in the league discussions.

[@sdcorreia123]

I agree with the time limit for offside challenges, but I would only allow 2 minutes instead of 5.

[@shawnwharry952]

1 min should be more then enough time.

[@jaedenh]

@@shawnwharry952 honestly, you are not wrong.. If you go offside and then have an entire minute in the offensive end before scoring i think you deserve that goal

[@HexagonalMan6]

If the standard is overwhelming evidence, it shouldn't take more than 2 minutes, I agree.

[@neonwired4978]

i'd base it on the play rather than time, whether it directly contributed to a goal

[@PD-hv4js]

Only allow to review offside at game speed. If it's not obvious it's not offside.

[@Breathtaker5000]

I’d love to see goalies being able to play the puck past the redline - we need more goalie breakaways…

[@dennislopez1272]

Would love a goalie odd man rush 😂😂

[@robc1980]

They know the risk, if they want to try to carry the puck up the ice, go ahead. Loved it when Roy tried that with Colorado

[@20thCenturyManTrad]

And goalies be fair game to hit.

[@FritzyBeat]

Gary Smith is smiling somewhere right now.

[@20thCenturyManTrad]

@@FritzyBeat I'm good with that, he was a great joy to watch play goal.

[@ultimate8550]

I don't mind the idea of the icing on the penalty kill, but I think I would add one caveat. If the killing team does ice the puck, the ensuing face off should occur exclusively in the neutral zone. I don't think it would be fair to completely punish the killing team by constantly bringing the faceoff back to the defensive zone, they should at least get some reward for regaining puck possession and getting it out of their own zone. This seems like a good middle ground - the regular rules of icing apply (in that you can't sub players before the face off) but at least the killing team gets out of their defensive zone.

[@ThePhoenixPhil]

One, there can’t be embellishment and a matching penalty originating from the same action. It’s either a penalty, or it’s embellishment. And I would like to see a lot more embellishment penalties ahem Marchand. (Present injury status aside) Two, an “in arena” mode for broadcasts. No ads, no commentators, no graphics, just in-arena audio with a multi-camera feed. It happened one Pens game by accident for a period a few years ago and it was GLORIOUS

[@endertamer3273]

I would LOVE an in-arena mode, sometimes you just want to listen to hockey asmr without the broadcasters talking over the ice sounds

[@kaansoler1431]

I agree. I hate the embellishment penalty. There are gray areas where I think sometimes the player needs to fight for his positioning. Just cause you get off balance for a bit doesn't mean it's a penalty. If a player embellishes, cause it does happen, just let them play. It's gotten to the point like I'm watching soccer. I've never seen an Era of hockey where players complain so much. Every little small tug, they want a penalty. I got tapped on the glove.... PENALTY!!! It's almost really hard to watch hockey anymore.

[@BGerbs66]

The NBA did courtside mode for a couple years a while back. My dad loved it

[@biggiejerseysTV]

I’ve seen ESPN do this for college football games on ESPN+ so I don’t see why the NHL couldn’t implement something like this.

[@kenmammel7748]

Excellent solution. One penalty, not two.

[@TonesBalones]

On Number 10, they changed the rule just 2 seasons after first introducing icing to not include power plays. I know you think it would mean increased aggression on defense, but really it would just be a stoppage every 20 seconds while the refs grab the puck and drag it all the way back for a faceoff. It would be unbearable to watch. On the point system, I think the positives outweigh the negatives. Ice Hockey is a low-scoring game by nature, meaning it's incredibly likely that games end in a tie. Teams should be recognized with a reward for tying in regulation, because it happens so often. Relying on an all-or-nothing system isn't fair when OT is so volatile and unpredictable.

[@azisles02]

1. 3-on-3 for 10min & is still tired, the teams get 1 point each. Plus your allowed only 3 "back-courts" (voluntary leave the offensive zone) in ot or it's a delay of game 2. No gambling ads (that goes for all sports) 3. Goalies can play the puck anywhere they want. However, if it's outside the trapezoid and cross to our past the defensive face-off circles, you are fair game. (Gentleman's Rules request, no headhunting or Darius Kasparaitis hip checks though) 4. Offside challenge is minutes to 2 minutes of review and only allowed if play was in the zone for less then 30 seconds. 5. In a penalty shot (since there would be no shootouts), you have 10 seconds to shoot once you get possession of the puck. 6. If a penalty carries over into the next period, the opening face-off is in the pk side of ice.

[@spicekid6259]

Like Ken Daniel's has been pushing for, make entering the zone be when the puck touches the blue of the line. Not fully crossing the line. Then the size of the zone doesn't change when you're entering vs exiting the attacking zone

[@redtriangle576]

Having a time limit for offside challanges is something I've been talking about for years. Give 'em 30sec. If it's not immediately apparent that offsides, the call stands.

[@McEla82]

I think in most cases the benefit is lost already after 20s or less.

[@kenmammel7748]

I agree totally because a team could spend a huge amount of time in the zone only to score a goal and get the goal taken back.

[@SquigglesTheKitty]

I agree- example: Buffalo v Edmonton. I left the arena (to beat traffic) and was told they recalled the goal and thought they were lying, LOL!

[@Bruhaha9]

- No adding time back on the clock just because it's the end of the game. You could just as easily do it at any time during the game, and the effect at the end of the period would be the same as adding it only at the end. It doesn't make sense. - Call cross checking, yes - Stop allowing D-men to hold up attackers after dump-ins. When the obstruction rules came in, they didn't let any of that happen, and it was better. More exciting attacks and offence. - Goalies play puck in corners - Since the rule exists, why not call intentional offside when it logically applies? That, in my opinion, is every time a player touches a puck when they're in an offside position if they had a moment to realize it/the ref yelled "off'. Using all this judgement as to whether it's intentional or not is beyond a ref's ability. Judging the thought process of a player and guessing why he touched it is too sloppy. If he knows it's offside and touches it, isn't it intentional every time? Yes, in my opinion. - Putting anyone in a headlock during a scrum should be treated like intentionally kicking with skate, head butts and other such serious violence. You have someone's central nervous system locked in your dumb, sweaty arm, and often twist and torque the head around. I know sometimes it's fairly casual, but sometimes players really mess with the neck.

[@jim7297]

Cross checking is legal now! Instigator rule stops you from dealing with an ass who just cross checked you and skated away smiling. The rules are ruining the game.

[@toedrag-release]

A cross check I believe is illegal but you can push off a player with puck possession with your stick. Kinda a grey area.

[@devinkuhn2861]

yeah icing called on the PK is not it.... you trying to have powerplays at 75%?

[@ronaldwayne7092]

The WHA was nowhere close to that.

[@thecaffeinequeen]

Agreed. 10 is kind of a whiff imho. Also the slowness would be resolved if they implemented the Jailbreak rule on non major penalties. It encourages actively playing the puck on both sides and not just killing time. Honestly NHL powerplays have looked SO SLOW by comparison. This has especially been the case when the refs made a bad call, and the team it was called against were MAD so they would play hard and get a jailbreak goal 40 seconds in.

[@thejoulesthief6841]

@@ronaldwayne7092 You're using a league that lasted 7 seasons and started over 50 years ago. Icing on the PK would lead to more injuries and exhausted players, especially on the long change.

[@dontrapani7778]

Good points, all around. but I disagree with #10. Icing is the counter to the man advantage, and should be kept.

[@stephenayer8255]

I agree the only time it gets repetitive if the the team’s PP is so weak they can’t maintain control of puck so don’t deserve to benefit from the advantage the are given!

[@dark_nation_7]

Another possibility would be to move the icing line to the defender's blueline on PK, so if they can get it out of the zone, then they can ice it.

[@brodiebrazil]

WOW! ALL 10! I think you nailed these. Even if the NHL went with half of them starting next season, think how much improved the game would be.

[@angiebee2225]

I don't like his #10, but agree with most of it!

[@lumpyspacepickles]

For offsides review: the refs should be allowed to watch the play from any angle NO MORE THAN 5 TIMES AT FULL SPEED! Because if you can’t tell after 5 full speed replays whether someone was offsides or not it clearly could not have had an impact on the play and we should just get back to the game

[@theold4734]

depends... if you got 5 guys in the offensive zone and the puck comes out of the offensive zone for a split second and you bring it back and score due to the set up. Then yes it had impact on the play. But other than that i agree with you

[@colatrl.damg3167]

yes, but not just offsides. Even hits have to be seen in real time. Slow motion is a lie. You stretch milliseconds into seconds you think you see things that in real time are impossible. Usually "he's aiming for his head" as if a human being can react that fast. It just looks like aiming in slow motion.

[@Dylandontplay]

I TOTALLY AGREE THANK YOU IVE SAID THE SAME THING FOR A FEW YEARS BOW

[@angiebee2225]

@@colatrl.damg3167 *cough* Sam Bennett

[@kickinacoustic6119]

My solution to offsides is just make it a zone. If the puck gets to the line before the player fully crosses it’s onside. I’d add that if the player or a member of the other team are the one make last contact with the puck before it reaches the line it’s also onside. Having an infinitely small plane to determine offside is ridiculous at the speed of hockey. Even if you have a couple inches of zone it eliminates the calls that take the longest to review.

[@bobsmith284]

When you score on the delayed penalty, you should still get the power play. 3 points regulation wins. If a player is suspended, the team must use 19 players for the duration of the suspension.

[@bigjohn08865]

Yes, give an extra point for winning in regulation would give teams incentive to want to avoid overtime.

[@cousinit718]

If a team scores shorthanded, the penalty is over.

[@coderaspberry]

I’d like to see the (almost always) unintentional puck over the glass penalty changed slightly - first one of a shift is treated like an icing, no player change, defensive zone faceoff. To deter repeated clears over the glass, if the resultant faceoff sequence results in another puck out of play, then it’s a penalty like it is now.

[@romaliop]

I'd go a bit further than that and just lump everything including icing, pucks out of play, offsides from defensive zone passes etc. in together, make it so that you can't change with any of those and then give 2 minutes for delay of game if you commit two of these in a row without clearing the zone. And if you want to go even further than that, require having possession outside of the zone before the counter resets, so you can't just flip the puck out to bail yourself out.

[@OldRustySteele]

I really like your idea. And yes, most of the pucks over the glass are accidental, not intentional delays of the game.

[@OldRustySteele]

@@romaliop Nah, I can’t agree on those changes. That’s way too severe. 2 icings or offsides in a row don’t warrant a penalty to me. Not being able to change players is “punishment” enough.

[@anthonyfaccaro7118]

​@@romaliopRefs cant follow whats going on now, you expect them to keep all that in check? What happens when they are in the middle of a body check or get hit by a puck....where they take their eyes off the action? We would need 4 refs lol.

[@romaliop]

@@OldRustySteele Don't think about the punishment but about the adjustment teams would do to avoid getting that punishment. There would be more emphasis on clearing the zone without stoppages and more opportunities for the attacking team to build pressure in the offensive zone. I know such a change will likely never happen, but it could be an answer to the epidemic of anti-hockey (trap + just flipping the puck out) that most teams like to play nowadays.

[@nbarealtalker]

If you want more sustained offensive pressure, they could adapt the ball hockey offside where once you gain the zone, the blue line becomes the red line. So going in, offside is the same as it has always been. But once the offensive zone is established, the blue line becomes the red line and the defence has to clear the red line to clear the defensive zone and force the offence to reestablish the offensive zone. You’d also see lots of shots from right outside the blue line on the powerplay cycle and the ice would be spread out. I think that’s a better option than not being allowed to ice the puck on a penalty kill because you gotta give the defence something to work with. Especially if goalies were allowed to play the puck again.

[@KreepCA]

Offside challenge time limit! This one is mine, too! 2 parts, for me. The review can't take more than x minutes. But also, if one team controls the zone for a full 60 seconds, no offside can be called at all. You want to attract new viewership to your awesome sport, but fans often feel like their time watching didn't matter, bc a minute plus of zone control goes out the window when offside is called retroactively. Then going fwd the fans often feel uneasy about investing their emotions in their team's time in the O-zone, thinking... was that offside? Is all this cycling pointless cuz we're just waiting to find out if it's even valid? edit - especially considering how often we wait and wait, and then it all comes down to a quarter of an inch after waiting 10 minutes for a review plus whatever amount of time the team was in the o-zone wasting everyone's time. Definitive proof of offsides shouldn't take more than 2 minutes of looking at a screen with your ref bud. If it does, just let us get on with the game.

[@yoholmes273]

The extra linesman the NHL added for no reason , were placed there specifically to lock down real time offsides calls. Think about that...

[@angiebee2225]

I think number of puck touches should also be a factor. If the puck has been passed around several times, or was stolen and taken back, the offside didn't really impact the scoring chance.

[@buzzsaw1000]

I'd say 60 seconds is way too long, I'd be at something more like 5-10 seconds from zone entry. The only real impact of a missed offside is on a rush, and usually within like 2-3 seconds of zone entry. Anything over 10 seconds is a long time if you really think about it.

[@icedo1013]

No matter how long the play lasts, it wouldn't have existed at all in any capacity if it wasn't for the missed offsides call. Nothing is lost if the call is made and the time is put back on the clock. Even if two whole minutes pass, if they can determine the play was offside within x minutes then it should be fair game.

[@buzzsaw1000]

@@icedo1013 By that logic, then are we going to watch the play for any missed whistle back to the last one? Even the other team being offside 2 minutes earlier? Because the play should've been blown dead and the goal shouldn't have been able to happen

[@corymahoney3081]

I really think the NHL should fix the payroll taxation situation. For example; It’s unfair that a contract in Tampa has more “take home” value compared to the same contract anywhere in Canada. It’s unfair to the teams that are in states/provinces that have higher payroll taxes. The “take home” value after taxes should be the same in every market to avoid any unfair advantages for teams looking to sign players during free agency. So every team’s salary cap would be different based on their state/provincial taxation laws, but ultimately the player would “take home” the same amount no matter what market they’re in. I know some markets that have higher taxation can offer more advertising opportunities, but why do the NHL leave it up to a third party to even the playing field? The whole idea of a salary cap was to even the playing field…right?

[@ForthEorlingas9]

When awarded a penalty shot teams should get the option of the penalty shot or a 2 minute powerplay.

[@maxfish4270]

Not a choice. Unsuccessful penalty shot is followed by the regular call. Treat the penalty shot similar to delayed call.

[@Tyekiller115]

@@maxfish4270yeah no

[@maxfish4270]

@@Tyekiller115 Why not?

[@elementalargon7597]

​@maxfish4270 I like your idea. Plus, it's not as though a penalty shot is awarded very often.

[@ctochs]

That’s actually already a rule it’s just no one ever chooses two minutes over a penalty shot

[@codysias2265]

1. A shorthanded goal ends the penalty 2. A power play goal does not end the penalty 3. NHL officials need to be made available for media questioning. At the bare minimum, the NHL needs to implement something similar to the NBA's "L2M Report". 4. I agree with your call on blood on the high stick, but it should be 2 minutes regardless. If blood is drawn, the player should get the 2 minute minor penalty, as well as a technical foul, like the NBA. Accruing the technical fouls will lead to predetermined punishments (NBA has fines up to the 16th TF, and then suspensions for each subsequent 2 TF's). Obviously would be adjusted for the sport. 5. Goalie pads need to be smaller. 6. Get on the same page about embellishment. Either call it consistently, or don't. 7. Either add more on ice officials (ehhh, they're kinda bad and old as it is) or implement a sky judge like NCAA football for calling penalties in real time. 8. Get rid of the trapezoid!! 9. Eliminate the digitized advertisements PLEASE AND THANK YOU 10. Every single time a forward dumps the puck in and tries to chase, the defensemen pins him to the boards. No puck within 15 feet. It is blatant interference and I've only ever seen it called once. 11. I am okay with ads on the helmets, just please don't put them on the sweaters. 12. If awarded a penalty shot, you still get the power play if it isn't successful. 13. Over the Glass - Delay of Game needs to be an automatic review. I am sick and tired of blind 60 year old men from the opposite corner of the ice calling a penalty because he's emphatic enough of the call. If the puck goes over, Toronto looks at it and signals the officials within seconds. 14. 3-2-1-0 points system. Pretty straightforward. 15. Carry over PP's should begin the period in the attacking zone, not center ice. 16. AAANNNDDD one fun one, eliminate offsides all together, they got rid of two-line passing violations, the can get rid of offsides, which is essentially just three-line passing. For how long my list is you'd think I hate the game lmao

[@GrahamSlam]

I like most of these, but enforcing icings on the PK would be brutal. I don't really want to see powerplays scoring at a 40%+ clip.

[@BluesMan123]

I agree with the time limit for reviews, McDavid even said earlier this year after a lengthy review "You zoom in until you cant zoom in anymore, if it takes 15 minutes, it probably doesn't matter."

[@tIhIngan]

The one rule I would change is: if officials make blatant phantom calls or even-up calls, they get suspended.

[@Tyekiller115]

So you will have 0 refs by the end of the season

[@jimmyzarkis6276]

@@Tyekiller115 you mean after the first game of the season.

[@joemarkivich635]

1) No ads on jerseys 2) puck over the glass is to be treated like icing (not a penalty) 3) still call icing on the PK 4) call more cross checks (no abusing star players) 5) remove the trapezoid behind the net 6) offsides challenges can only be reviewed for 30 seconds. This was intended for obviously missed calls.

[@toedrag-release]

Nah to 2). It should be a penalty or they'll just keep doing it for a faceoff if they get possession. It's a slippy slope

[@wheelsofmercury]

Interesting ideas, Shannon! Personally, if I ran the NHL, I would have the point system be 3 points for a win, zero points for a loss (regulation or overtime, doesn’t matter) and one point for a tie for both teams if the five minute three on three overtime isn’t settled.

[@CanadianChiGuy23]

I would make a win worth less points the further on you get it: 3 pts for a regulation win 2 pts for an OT win 1 pt for a shootout win…..and 0 pts if you lose in regulation, OT, or shootout No ties at all, and no points for losing a little bit later in the game. But if you’re losing points by allowing the game to go to OT or shootout, it should make the end of the games a lot more energetic.

[@KelsoBradshaw]

I have the same idea but I would extend the 3v3 OT to 10 minutes. Adds a little more time to get a tie breaker, but still much less time in the grand scheme than carrying out a shootout.

[@mfischer387]

I’ve never heard someone suggest awarding only 1 point for a shootout win. But honestly, I don’t completely hate it.

[@weregretohio7728]

That's what I was looking for. Change the point system. I would go 3 for regulation win, 2 for OT win, and 1 for an OTL. That way, you actually reward teams for winning but don't have to convince everyone to abandon the shootout. I'm not opposed to loser points... regardless, the current point system is terrible and it's baffling that it hasn't been addressed yet, but then again, look at the playoff structure over the years. I could go for an extended 3v3 as well, not much for shootouts and 5 minutes feels short.

[@thecaffeinequeen]

@@weregretohio7728 You just described the point system for PWHL, actually. Hopefully the NHL will be keeping an eye on how that's rolling out. Plus the jailbreak rule is super fun (and would negate rule 10). There's also Draft Point rule which basically means the first team to be mathematically eliminated from playoff contention will start earning 'Draft Order Points' in all subsequent games (including all regular-season games that begin following a team's elimination) to encourage teams to not tank their entire season for a 'lottery', and a few other good ones.

[@maxfish4270]

At the very top there needs to be a Ref watching video to get calls better right. Power play when penalty shot is unsuccessful. I'd like delay of game for consecutive icings. And for offside I'd like it changed to puck touching blue and player touching blue is good enough.

[@tim.kaiser_aka_timmaay]

100% on the point system. You either won, tied, or lost and that's it. No more points for overtime losses.

[@MrEkitten]

The problem with this is that OT would end in ties so often. The teams would be so defensive to not give up that point. It would be 20 minutes of nothing. Giving the teams a gtd point in OT promotes offense, since there is nothing to lose.

[@rabeechowdhury]

What about 3 points for regulation wins and 2 points for overtime wins?

[@JB_II]

I’ve got 2 suggestions, the 1st not so much for the play of the game but rather, change the points system. Make it 3 points for a regulation win, if it’s a tie teams get 1 point but if a team wins in OT the winning team gets an addition point for a total of 2. This would add excitement to game in the later part of the season. A team needing points to get into playoffs might pull a goalie in a tie game to get the 3 points, rather than settle for a tie and hope to win in OT. The other suggestion to your point on calling icing on the PK team was actually a rule back 50 years ago. The reason why it was changed was it slowed down the flow of the game and added a lot of time onto the length of the game. They’ll never go back to calling that icing, and frankly it takes some excitement out of the PK playing. Maybe a rule where you can only shoot the puck down 2x with in the PK before icing taking effect might work.

[@TheDualJoyStick]

Rules: Sensors under both blues, the center, and both goal lines that can use the puck trail sensors in the pucks already to gauge if a puck crossed the line for a goal, offside, or icing. The technology has been used in tennis and soccer for years now. For broadcasts: A commentary free option and a panoramic rink view during stoppages/tv timeouts Never gonna happen: 10 minutes 3v3 OT instead of 5v5, still no loser point. If they want shootouts still, then a 3-2-1 point system for RW-OTW-SOW. Completely agree on eliminating the “play for the OT” that can happen sometimes as much as halfway through a third period.

[@theclamhammer4447]

Came here to say this. 3v3 is the way to go!

[@jimmyzarkis6276]

thanks for the 3 point system. My braindeadness said 4 point system.

[@WanukeX]

This isin’t a rule change per se, but is something I would want to see changed. A big source of annoyance for me is whenever you have a controversial call on a video review, then after the fact someone posts a screenshot of “the footage the refs were looking at” on twitter that wasn’t shown on the broadcast. In cricket whenever they do video reviews, on the broadcast, they show exactly what footage the umpires are looking at and you can hear what they’re asking to look at, to rewind footage or play in slow motion etc on the broadcast.

[@Marixa1979]

The strict criteria for goalie interference sounds great in theory, but do we all remember the skate in the crease rule? That is a case where there's strict guidelines that limit what you can do even though in actuality there was no impact to the play.

[@colatrl.damg3167]

every rule has unintended consequences. Usually, they're not predictable.

[@hockeymike333]

Great take, my biggest frustration watching hockey lately, is when after about 10min of a period, the refs clearly call anything that's not even close to offsides to give the TV Timeout. SO Many Times I see this called when it's not close, and at a very opportune rush. This takes the game onto the backburner and putting the advertisers above the players and game integrity. Just wait until the actual next whistle, take a longer break if it's been awhile, just let the game continue if it should be.

[@TheDolfanar]

Agree on 1-9, think 10 goes too far. Instead of #10, how about: #10: Like an icing, the penalized team is not allowed to make a line change and must start the pk with the same players as they had when the penalty was called. Also… #11 - On a delayed penalty, scoring a goal does NOT eliminate the penalty call #12 Either eliminate the trapezoid or change the angle so that it slants away from the goalie crease (thus making it a bit smaller) #13 if the 8th and 9th team are tied in points, have a one game, winner-take-all playoff #14 Increase OT to 6min #15 A player on LTIR for game 82 must wait a min 14 days before being eligible to play in the playoffs

[@angiebee2225]

Change your #15 to a player on LTIR at the trade deadline must be on the active roster for game 82 (for cap hit, but can be a scratch) or cannot play in the first round (or at all, if we want to go there). It gets the money part out there but doesn't force a player back too early.

[@TheDolfanar]

@@angiebee2225 I’d be ok with the first round… 14 days would probably take them out til game five or six anyway.

[@OfficialTeamSuper]

For your #14. Why only 6 minutes. Make it at least 10 minutes. Double the time and hopefully reduce the chance of shootout.

[@TheDolfanar]

@@OfficialTeamSuper I cheaped out. Honestly if I could do ANYTHING, I would do 10min of OT, kill the shootout completely and go to 3 points for a regulation win, 2 for an OT win and 1 for a tie or OT loss

[@gregranger6241]

Mostly good changes. Definitely eliminate trapezoid. Not sure I want to see icing called on PPs. A few of mine not all are rules. 1) 4 min penalty for player initiating an altercation after clean hits. 2) Shorthanded goals end the power play. 3) 7-8 mins for overtime. 4) 3-2-1 point system. 3 points for regulation win. 5) Go back to 1 v. 8 in playoffs. 6) Start season a bit earlier so playoffs start at least one week before NBA playoffs and end at least a week before NBA season concludes. Arena rules - Wish they would announce goals and penalties quicker over the PA. Think visiting team should always take the ice first at start of each period. Play the Good Old Hockey Game at every arena before every game.

[@maxfish4270]

Playoffs are still 1v8 and you need 2v7 to reward the other division winner. The 3v6 and 4v5 is often the same, more interesting now with division play, and reseeding each round was tried an blah.

[@gregranger6241]

@@maxfish4270 true it's 1 v. WC 2. But should not be divisional format. Should go by points the whole way. Getting out of your division does not create any additional excitement. If anything it's boring cause you might face the same teams in playoffs year after year. Those games will sellout no matter who you play. The East should be Boston v. NYR and Carolina v. Florida.

[@maxfish4270]

@@gregranger6241 Typically that complaint is from Toronto fans mad they can't beat Boston and maybe now L.A. fans mad about Edmonton.

[@JoeMagician]

DOPS reps would be great, they'll never do it. The don't want to have to explain their thought processes on why they let some things go publicly because clearly they either are of the opinion or are being told that hockey, especially playoff hockey, should be violent as part of the league's marketing strategy and they don't want to have tons of suspensions being given out in critical games. They don't even explain themselves in private to the teams sometimes. Disagree on one thing, they should get rid of the penalty for challenging wrong. It's a kick in a teeth since most often the team will be challenging a goal against them, then if they're wrong they go right on the penalty kill? If the problem is that they think teams will use them too much, then limit challenges per game like they do in baseball and football. A double whammy like that is really overly punitive for a fairly normal thing in modern sports. Imagine if you failed a challenge in football, and the other team gets the ball on your 20. Or in baseball they get to put a runner on 2nd base. Just a massive swing for no reason.

[@colatrl.damg3167]

I'd get rid of the replay entirely. Go with the calls on the ice. Oh, and gambling would also have to go to avoid any influence to the calls. I don't think replay adds anything to the game so trying to improve it is just trying to make it less bad.

[@legoalert33]

a DOPS rep should be available in Toronto just like play reviews

[@derekashworth5884]

I thought the biggest problem with DOPS is that they have no punitive options between game suspensions and $5,000 fines.

[@pstudio4096]

Hi Shannon, I agree with you about the goalie on corners and double minors when there is blood. I think they should find a way to limit the time a player is taking refuge behind his own net. A maximum of 10 seconds then he has to move out or get a delay of game penalty. Unless there is offensive pressure.

[@MrMpa31]

The other team are the ones letting him stay there. It's up to them to press the play

[@tensortab8896]

Make the goalie a player, too. The goalie owns his crease. If he leaves the crease, he's just another player. Make the crease a little bigger if you have to (like the old semicircle), but stop allowing goalies to skate around with no consequences.

[@TheHi-T]

When the goalie initiates contact with a player outside the crease by bumping him, then the player should be able to bump the goalie back. Still, the player should not be able to run over the goalie.

[@jimmyzarkis6276]

if you want to be a defensive player then be treated like a defensive player. Goalies love flopping when there is contact. How about also starting calling goalies on more penalties. Call their slashes and hooks. Also more goalie fights. If they want to go, let them both skate the entire rink. Its always a good laugh when it happens.

[@XaviRonaldo0]

10:09 the problem with that is you have to wait until a goal is scored before you challenge. If they were to bring this rule in you would have to allow a team to challenge without a goal being scored. Then the 2 minute penalty would make sense. How about just do away with OT altogether?

[@Whiskeymoth]

I agree with all your changes except #5. If "injuries" become the determining factor for 4 minute penalties, then every player in the league will now have a 2nd career in acting.

[@keldzh]

But why when one player should go and be checked for a concussion, the other gets only 2 minutes because there is no blood. Isn't that weird? No acting involved if a player is checked to the head. edit: fixed word “concussion”.

[@derekashworth5884]

Maybe 2 vs 4 should be based on intent by perpetrator rather than harm suffered by victim.

[@stupidas9466]

@@derekashworth5884fyi it already is by intent. If intentional, it's a five and a game. Unintentional means two without visible injury, four if there is a visible injury..

[@AndyLong]

I agree with you about just going to 1 extra period for OT/no more 3v3. But I also agree it's never gonna happen. A minor tweak I'd like to see, is to the PP during 3v3. Why do they just give the opposite team an extra skater when a penalty is called? It drives me crazy. If it's 3v3 and a penalty is called, the offending player should just go to the box. Then it's 3v2. It would open things up a little more and we just might see less of those shootouts.

[@ronaldwayne7092]

Let's get rid of the rule that allows hand passes within a team's defensive zone. In fact, make doing specifically that like an icing so teams don't do it just to get a whistle.

[@speedyv6247]

I would change the price of the food at games cuz $24.99 for a burger, chips and water should be a war crime.

[@speedyv6247]

@ReedMiller-rf7im games are like 3 hours +

[@CNSPORTZEDITZ]

@ReedMiller-rf7imtbh I'm surprised that more people can't go a longer time without eating.

[@speedyv6247]

@ReedMiller-rf7im It takes me just under an hour to get to the arena, so 5 hours total.

[@closethockeyfan5284]

A crime, sure, but war crime when such a thing kills many people day after day? Poor taste to say the least

[@speedyv6247]

@@CNSPORTZEDITZ It takes a while to get there and back, atleast for me, plus you spend 3 hours with an elevated heart rate, especially in the playoffs.

[@adamhall3344]

My problem with 3 point games is that most games are only 2 point but some are 3 points. So a team fighting to get into playoff position is hurt extra when two teams ahead of them go to overtime (which makes no sense). So my proposal: EVERY game is worth 3 points. If (and only if) the game is decided in a shootout, the winning team gets 2 points and losing team gets 1. Otherwise, the winning teams gets 3 points and the losing team 0. You want to really climb in the standings? Win your games in regulation or overtime. Additionally, I think I would go back to 4v4 overtime. 3v3 was initially a good idea to get more scoring chances in overtime (because teams were so reluctant to sacrifice a point in hand and always playing it safe). But when teams you are chasing are getting 3 points in a win, I think that disincentivizes playing it safe to get to a shootout where you would only be guaranteed 1 point, and we could possibly get to see more dynamic 4v4 hockey.

[@greaseweeklygames]

It always bugged me that a goal on a delayed penalty negates the penalty

[@keldzh]

Goal negates minor penalty is pretty simple. And the team scores then we don't need to wait until player goes to the penalty bench and then while all settle for face off. But some timing or forcing to play would be good. When a team just passing the puck in defensive zone in the last minute of a period to get more PP time in the next, it neither fair nor entertaining.

[@icedo1013]

@@keldzh The onus is on the defending team to go touch the puck. There's no reason the opposing team should make that easier for them.

[@romaliop]

The penalty is delayed so that the attacking team can finish their scoring chance before play is whistled dead. Then the ensuing power play is a compensation for the scoring chance that was lost by the infraction. A goal on a delayed penalty negates the penalty, because the scoring chance was not lost due to the infraction after all.

[@keldzh]

@@icedo1013 but why? They already have to play short handed. Why they have to be punished even more? As I understand from the rules, penalty should not deprive the team from a scoring chance. But if they have no scoring chance and just toying with the puck in their end, it looks like delay of game.

[@greaseweeklygames]

@@romaliop oh, ok. I love it now, thanks

[@thelifeofalex3546]

I think onside/offside calls should have a (in play)time limit also. If you are offside but control the play in the offesive zone for 30 seconds, it shouldn't count as no goal due to offsides. The offsides in that case didn't effect the overall play that much.

[@BlakeWheelersBurnerAccount]

Screw it, get rid of offsides and make it like basketball 🤭

[@kenmammel7748]

The game is too fast, but it might be fun to try a few exhibition games just to check it out. I think too much kaos would erupt.

[@drewbaisden3475]

They do need to do something with the offsides rule if they ever want to get more scoring in the NHL. At least find a way to tweak the rule somehow. I know the purists will scream blasphemy but It needs to be done. Look how the NBA changed their game with the 3 point line. Times change, people like more scoring. Just the way it is.

[@albertwong1182]

Mine are (1) no instigator, (2) icing called on penalty kill, (3) no hand pass anywhere, even in defensive zone, and (4) penalties must be served in its entirety, even if the opposing team scores a goal. Other ideas that will never happen are (1) no loser point…just have a straight win-loss record (2) reduce the league back down to 28 teams (3) make sure Quebec and Hartford get their teams back (4) salary cap hits are based on net salary, not gross salary (5) get rid of the hard salary cap and replace it with an NBA-style soft cap, which allows teams to go over to re-sign their own players and draft picks while simultaneously prevents teams from going over the cap to sign another team’s player

[@KirkSennett]

I always thought that if the goalie was playing the puck outside the paint, he should be fair game.

[@colatrl.damg3167]

That's how it used to be. Teams saw a goalie go behind the net or into the corner and they went for the hit. Many a goalie got lit up behind his net. That was back when the NHL was a contact sport.

[@icedo1013]

Yes! If a goalie wants to act as a third defenseman then he should be treated like a third defenseman, within reason of the limitations of his equipment of course. If a goalie wants to stay safe and untouched, there's a bunch of blue paint to stand in. Otherwise, there's a hockey game going on out here!

[@2themoon863]

@@colatrl.damg3167 That’s odd; I got a copy of a rulebook back in the early 1970’s, written by a former NHL referee, Bill Chadwick; in that book the NHL rule was-to use the quote-that the goaltender was “NOT fair game…and the word NOT was capitalized”. So how far back are you talking about?

[@colatrl.damg3167]

@@2themoon863 Late 80s, early 90s. I'm not referring to rule books. I'm referring to seeing goalies blasted when they were behind their net. Probably on KZbin if you want to see some. Goalies used to get hit. It was a thing.

[@floppywaffle69]

Agreed!

[@nobuddy2012]

I will always remember a ref's explanation as to what is a fight and what is roughing, when my player got a fighting major and the other kid got roughing. He said, "the first punch is roughing, the second is fighting".

[@CuratedPile]

How about the near ref can veto calls from the far ref? Far ref should only call fouls that the near ref was not in a position to see.

[@Goodall10]

I'm with ya on everything except 9 and 10. I have no desire to see the goalies playing the puck more. And I feel powerplay conversion rates are already high enough. No reason to make it significantly harder on the PK.

[@EncorePerformances]

I think these are pretty reasonable. I'd actually purchase an annual subscription if it's 1) "video game"-free; 2) digital ad-free; and 3) was all-in-one, meaning ZERO blackouts and the ability to stream EVERY SINGLE GAME. Unless that happens, I'll proudly pirate NHL games. No way am I going to pay for a half-dozen overpriced subscriptions that don't even allow me to see all the games properly, only to have these digital ads shoved down my throat (alongside a quadrillion gambling ads). As for rules, I'd add the ability to challenge for a missed penalty call on a scoring play. For instance, remember game 5 of Colorado/Seattle, where the Kraken scored in a tie game because MacKinnon got blatantly tripped, creating an odd man rush? In this instance, Bednar would've been able to challenge the play, and the goal waived off plus Seattle given a 2 minute minor. Placing a time limit on the video review for that would be reasonable, and there'd have to be conclusive evidence to overturn the call on the ice (as in, the scoring play was the direct result of a missed call). Another example was a 2-on-1 goal Winnipeg scored during game 1 of this year's series, and it was a 2-on-1 because Makar's stick got held at the blue line. Another change I'd make is to enforce the salary cap during the playoffs. The ability to do what Tampa Bay and the Vegas LTIRs did should be illegal, but isn't due to such a glaring loop hole. Finally, I'd abolish the draft lottery in favour of "elimination standings," where points teams earn after being mathematically eliminated are how they'd be ranked in draft order.

[@hockeyfan7100]

How do you enforce the salary cap during the playoffs when no salaries are paid after the 82nd game. I like that any team in the playoffs can have whatever players they want in the lineup, regardless of how much they make. Why would you want any playoff team to have less than their best lineup? No point in watching then. The true Stanley Cup winner is very questionable then.

[@Tyekiller115]

Disagree on 2 3 and 4

[@Dave1982]

-Remove the phrase “during play” from the rule that makes ripping an opponent’s helmet off a penalty, making it a penalty at all times, including post-whistle scrums. -Call all penalties seen, and formally end “game management” as a concept, especially during the playoffs. Discipline referees who consistently put the whistle away (for example, no playoff assignments). -make deliberately trapping the puck along the boards to run down the clock a delay of game penalty, unless you are on the PK. -goaltenders may only freeze the puck under *actual* pressure. If there isn’t an opponent anywhere near the crease, delay of game penalty. -not specifically a hockey issue, but scrap all existing broadcast deals and start over. No blackouts - especially on paid services - and local sports networks can cover ALL playoff games their team plays. - 3-2-1 point system, keep overtime and shootout as is otherwise. -Call all dives. Also, it’s a legit penalty OR it’s embellishment, NEVER BOTH. -8:30ET/5:30PT puck-drop for east coast teams playing out west and vice versa -bring back “home and home” series

[@dfoleyusa]

Create actual criteria for goalie interference that are clear and measurable using modern technology. Certainly with all the computing power, machine learning and such a system can be put in place to quantify what is / is not GI.

[@mik8o1]

Goalies can play the puck in the trapezoid but need to also be fair game for full body contact. Belongs in the not going to happen category.

[@Slidezy]

For the crosscheck penalties, id be fine if the rule said "multiple or egregious" that way you could give a little leeway on single "bumps" where the person is trying to push the guy and accidently catches them with their stick. That said, crosscheck penalties need to be tuned

[@Slidezy]

I also don't think challenges should be a penalty if you have your timeout. Having a 90 second limit on reviews in the regular season would also be a great idea. I don't think you need a time limit in the playoffs, but id be fine with 2-5 minutes

[@Slidezy]

I'm fine with icing on a pk if the pking team can line change. if they cant its OP and unbalanced to my eye

[@maxfish4270]

Better to simply not let players hold the stick with both hands to hit another player. If you want to shove do it with two hands.

[@jeremeymcdude]

The issue I have with the issue of offsides, It's right that it should have a time limit for reviews, but if you're offside and it's fairly easy to look back and see it was offside then it shouldn't matter HOW LONG you were in the zone when you shouldn't have been in the zone from crossing the line to begin with. The issue I have with Offside is that if it wasn't called then you don't get that faceoff outside of the zone that could change how that section of minutes actually goes and that goal probably doesn't happen. That's my issue with "Oh it was a minute after that offside happened so lets just let it go" because it doesn't matter how long after an Offside was missed if the call was actually made then none of that after it would happen most likely. Here's also my idea for OT and season scoring 3 points for a win 2 points for an OT win 1 for an OT Loss or a Shootout win 0 for losing in regulation or in a shootout also make OT 7 minute 3 on 3 like it is in the minors I don't mind the 1 point for losing in OT because you're supposed to win in 60 minutes and nobody wants to see a game end in a tie. You still reward the team for winning but they still lose one for not winning in the amount of time they SHOULD have won the game in. I also like the idea that the PWHL has been using with the Jailbreak for Penalty Kills where any goal results in a penalty ending. would make Penalty kills act more aggressively if they can actually end the PK by scoring themselves and it gives incentive for actually scoring shorthanded. and finally, I also agree with doing away with the trapezoid rule. It might be a bit more screwy because goalies have probably gotten used to it, but there's tendies out there that would absolutely take advantage of the freedom of movement again. It was a rule put in place to "Increase Scoring" in an era where scoring was rare to nonexistent. It just seems to me like it was more of a misguided attempt to hurt good goaltending and at this point it's one of the things i lament the most about the modern game of Hockey is just the massive amount of goals per game you get sometimes. I love a game that's 1-0, 2-3, 3-4 because the goals aren't just piling up and it's just who can bully the one guy between the pipes harder.

[@robl5040]

I would like to see them call penalty's in the playoffs the same way as in the regular season, just like every other professional sporting league

[@zdvickery]

Surprised he didn't mention this. The fact that the playoffs turn into "let the boys play" is the worst thing about the NHL IMO

[@robl5040]

@@zdvickery turning back in to the old chuck Norris division

[@therecalcitrantseditionist3613]

Have to disagree. I think it's one of the more cool things about hockey. It's a sport that kind of resists regimentation more than other sports and that's to it's credit. Because the rough play is part of what makes the playoffs so good. I think doing it your way would be worse for the game like most of the newer rules are.

[@jomojonarvaez-grey1193]

Off sides Challenges Require a clear and obvious requirement, twice at set slow speed, twice at full speed. If unsure, it's a no and move on Icing on PP Keep it but add the jailbreak option so that if a shorthanded goal happens, PP is over. Overtime/Point Go to the 3-2-1-0 system. 3 regulation win, 2 OT win, 1 OT Tie, 0 Loss or OT Loss. Do 1 round of 10 minutes at 5 on 5 and then a round of 5 minutes of 3 on 3

[@neilflood6508]

Either (A) Call the rule book, or (B) Change the rulle book to what you are currently asking the referees to call.

[@deanm375]

#11 - After an icing call if the guilty party is not ready for a puck drop by the time the other team is ready at the faceoff dot it should be an automatic delay of game penalty. No more fixing a skate or switching a stick. If the offending team is not ready too bad.

[@joew4656]

I agree with the related idea on the offsides challenge: If the puck has stayed in the offensive zone for 15 seconds after the alleged violation, the alleged violation is not reviewable. Your defense already had 15 seconds to get the puck out. The offsides did not cause the goal.

[@davekuhn9342]

Many of these are great points! I totally agree on the Cross Checking, Offside reviews, and removing the Trapezoid.

[@vaultsuit]

3 points for a reg win, 2 for OT/SO win, 1 for a loss, and 0 for a reg loss. Tiebreakers stay to make SO less valuable. Makes sense plus you can retabulate old records and put old values in parentheses or what ever.

[@DanHelll]

As someone who works for a Hockey Team in the broadcast department I can tell you that when it comes to the video game view (it’s called SAP) it’s usually one person who’s just clicking on a random thing trying to put something extra on the screen. It costs 50K+ just to set up as well. Think of the savings if we didn’t need that nonsense

[@specialshockey]

If a team scores on a delayed penalty, it’s still a penalty and still a power play.

[@YOUTY209]

I would like there to be an option for the ref's to call a stoppage for certain things in overtime (regular season OT here). Now I know what you're thinking, adding more discretionary penalties - that sounds like a horrible idea. Here's why: far too often I see a penalty happen in overtime that is very minor, and I can tell that the ref sees it too. Let's say it's a slight trip, and it's the kind of play that you wouldn't call during regulation because it wouldn't matter. However, because there's only 3 on the ice in overtime, that minor incident ends up leading to a 2-on-0 and decides the game. Here's why I'm advocating for a stoppage/dead play call option: I actually really like that referees are so averse to calling penalties in OT. I don't want to see a game decided by a penalty, and the referees don't want to be the one deciding who wins a game. On top of that, a minor or incidental trip doesn't really warrant or deserve the near death sentence that a 4-on-3 OT penalty often means. However, I also don't want that hesitancy to end up meaning that an uncalled penalty is the deciding factor in who wins. By adding the option to blow a play dead/call a stoppage during 3-on-3 overtime, both of those situations could be avoided. The ref doesn't have to hand down a death sentence for an incident they wouldn't normally call during 5-on-5 anyways but also doesn't have to just allow a team to win based off of an unfair advantage.

[@airsicklowlander7756]

A goal on a delayed penalty should not negate the penalty.

[@markusmuhs]

My biggest pet peeve is off-side challenges period. Get rid of them entirely! If the linesman didn't call it offside during the play then it wasn't egregious enough of an offside to create an advantage for the attacking team. Having crucial goals called back because some player not involved directly in the play had a toe over the line ruins the game.

[@tnoff732]

You should start rooting for the Sharks Just saying

[@johnsweet96]

To your point on offside needing time limit, i agree but in a different way. I present 2 different scenarios. Scenario 1 Its a two or three on one attack, they cross into the offensive zone, one or two quick passes and the puck is in the back of the net. From the second(time wise) the puck crosses the blue line 7 seconds pass and the puck is in the net. Scenario 2 Offensive team breaks into the D zone to attack. They move the puck around and generate a few scoring chances. After 30-45 seconds of zone time, a shot results in a goal. I would say Scenario 1 is challenge-able, but not scenario 2.

[@Marixa1979]

Goalies being able to play the puck in the corner was a big factor in the dead puck era. Goalies being able to clear the puck out of the zone all the time kills offense.

[@colatrl.damg3167]

I think that was more correlation than causation. It was the clutching and grabbing that let defenders slow down the dump and chase and goalies had time to get it. Guys are getting in so fast now that you can't do that, a goalie would be crazy to come out and try to play it unless the other team was changing. Then, so what, let him pass it back up. More action.

[@xtraplayer7281]

And goalies now just stop it behind the net. The Trap still exists thanks to this.

[@OtherBrotherDaryl]

Offside after a goal: time limit. I would also add that if the player who was deemed Offside does not interact/impact during the goal, the Offside will be waived.

[@PP-rr1gz]

Can imagine an entire debate on what constitutes as an “impact” on the play. A lot of grey area there, so what used to be a clear-cut call will become a judgment call.

[@jimmyzarkis6276]

a player in the zone impacts the play regardless. If you have two dmen and two guys in the zone, you have to account for both. You have already affected the position of those two players. Half a step, 2 steps, left to right etc. They had to react sooner because the player was off sides. Its not like the d man is going to go, wait he was offsides I don't have to react in real time and at full speed of the game.

[@kilagorila]

Trapezoid gotta go. Dumbest thing they've brought in in modern times. Exactly ZERO benefits and it simply removes a whole exciting dimension from the game.

[@heathclark318]

Would Marty Broduer have been as good if he had played with that rule

[@smithryansmith]

If you allow the goalies to handle the puck outside the trapezoid, you have to let them be vulnerable to checking. Otherwise, we get what Ed Belfour used to do, where he would skate into the corner, use his body to block out the forecheckers, who could do nothing against him. It really sucked because you basically had an untouchable 3rd defenseman. It sucked, trust me I remember Belfour and it hurt the game.

[@heathclark318]

@@smithryansmith adjust the role accordingly. The players will sort out the rest on the ice. Takes to much away from the game now IMHO. But again I do agree that if it is allowed like it was in the 80's and 90's then it can hurt the game

[@smithryansmith]

@@heathclark318 I just remember watching Belfour skate way over, put his back to the forecheckers, who just had to stand around and wait for him to do whatever he wanted with the puck. Trapezoid rule got rid of that crap. One of the few rule changes that made the game better as defensemen (who could get checked) had to step up, instead of an untouchable goalie who became a cheat code defenseman. IMHO.

[@heathclark318]

@@smithryansmith agreed. No regression. If changes are made it should be balanced and enhance the game.

[@plantex625]

Back to back icing is a delay of game - cant ice the puck twice in a 15 second time period or something like that

[@maxfish4270]

Defensive team must clear the zone or there is a regular stoppage such as goalie freeze.

[@sideshowbob3211]

Don’t forget how boring tied games got within the last 10 minutes and into overtime as teams tried to preserve the point. It was almost unwatchable. What about getting rid of points altogether? You mentioned baseball, they go by win percentage and so does football.

[@OldRustySteele]

My changes: 1) Agree on goalie interference. Make it clear. Offensive player in crease when puck goes in = GI. Offensive player bumps defensive player into his goalie = GI. Don’t use the premise “It’s not GI because we don’t think the goalie would have stopped it anyway”. That requires too much judgment. 2) Keep the blood criteria for double minors, too much judgment to determine if the blood is OK blood or severe blood. However, allow ref to assess double minor if the hit causes injury or looks severe, even without blood. 3). Definitely agree w/ Shannon. Get rid of the trapezoid. It punishes goalies who can skate and stick handle. 4). Disagree w/ Shannon. No challenges on penalties. Too much judgement involved and would slow down the game. 5). 5 minute, 4 on 4 OT. No loser points. No shootouts. If it’s a tie, each team gets a point. 6) Disagree. Icing should be OK in the penalty kill. 7) Agree. Offside review time limit. Also, if goal is scored more than 20 seconds after the alleged offside, it should stand. 8) Penalty shots - player must stay between the faceoff dots. No weaving way out towards the boards. Maybe even have a 5 second time limit. 9) Reduce the amount of thigh rise on goalie pads. It’s ridiculous how even the worst goalies can close off the 5-hole these days. I’d even go so far as to eliminate the medial knee pad/lift. Make goalies have to wear the pads tight against the leg and skate in and out to cut down the angles. 10) Go back to wooden sticks. (If you do 9, you gotta do 10 to even out the shooter-goalie war). I’d like to see 9&10 done to get hockey back to 1980’s style. Athletic goalies, 2-pad stacks, rather than the current ginormous robotic goalies (walrus, anyone?). And, best of all, Shannon could get more “I love the ‘80’s magnets”.

[@wxdogs]

I'm old school. The "Michigan" is an abomination. My new rule, you can't carry the puck on your stick. [old man shaking his fist]

[@angiebee2225]

It feels like traveling in basketball to me. I also don't like how often they make contact with the goalie's mask doing it.

[@icedo1013]

The only difference between a michigan and a deflection goal is how the puck got there in the first place. It's clever, it's innovative, and it's perfectly legal within the rules. There's a reason only two or three guys even really try it, it's a high risk play.

[@jimmyzarkis6276]

have you tried carrying a puck on your stick before standing still? Skating? with 3 guys slapping at your hands, arms, feet, and stick while doing it? Its not easy to do and that's why its rare. Technically when you pull back for a wrist shot many times you are holding the puck on your blade until you are taking your shot, kind of a cradle.

[@DCBMetalsInc]

I’d take away the trapezoids for the goalies. And a left field idea. If team has iced the puck and can’t change, if they use their timeout they can then change lines

[@Psalm136HisMercyEnduresForever]

I would make three icings within 90 seconds a penalty.

[@CanadianChiGuy23]

At that point, it is the most obvious Delay of Game penalty that you could award.

[@maxfish4270]

Better version is consecutive icings without the team on defense clearing the zone or a regular stop[age.

[@derekashworth5884]

Related to offside challenges: if the defense has an opportunity to get all 5 skaters in the zone and make normal defensive moves, and a goal is then scored, then it shouldn't matter if the puck was brought in offsides or not. There has to be a limit to when an offsides play actually impacts whether or not a goal was scored.

[@Xerdoz]

Remove the stupid "Brodeur" lines. Those do not belong in ice hockey. Remove the stupid commercial breaks. Those do not belong in ice hockey.

[@MbisonBalrog]

Without commercial NHL loses money players make less.

[@Ben.Mangels]

The commercial breaks aren't stupid

[@Xerdoz]

@@MbisonBalrog Kinda strange the NHL was around for 80 or so years without commercial breaks if they were hemorrhaging money.

[@MbisonBalrog]

@@Xerdoz players and teams never made as much

[@Xerdoz]

@@MbisonBalrog You're right. It's all about maximising the players' profit. We should put mandatory line changes every 2 minutes like in the juniors and have a 1 minute commercial break in between. I have seen the error of my ways and the only thing that matters in ice hockey is to maximise the profit for the players and the franchise owners. They should also make it mandatory that the spectators must watch an ad every time they use the toilet facilities and if they want a beverage or some food, well then they should absolutely watch a couple of ads before being provided with said refreshments. I was such a fool to think the spectators' enjoyment of watching the sport would matter.

[@Dariusknight]

Truthfully, one rule change I'd like to see is that the only way a goal can be scored is by your stick or by unintentional deflection off of a body part. Remove all language to do with distinct kicking motions and make the rule be if you direct the puck into the net with anything other than your stick intentionally, then no goal.

[@TDG4L1F3]

No views in 36 seconds bro fell off

[@davidwhidden9337]

Bot or Clown? Either way enjoy getting dunked on.

[@TDG4L1F3]

@@davidwhidden9337 joke clearly flew right over your head 🤡

[@Tbiblaine23]

7:00 the only issue I may see with that is it could also be extremely subjective and player who is okay might just go to the tunnel to try and get a 4 minute. I think blood makes the call very objective and makes it easy to understand for new fans

[@angiebee2225]

Or the player injured can't play on the PP unless there was blood.

[@zippydayglow]

time limit on challenges.... TOTALLY agree. I would even agree that you cannot challenge an offside call if the play in the zone extends more than 60 seconds of zone time unless it is a power play or if the call is horrifically wrong (and yes, I know that would need to be defined). SO agree with overtime. 20 minutes might be too long now. Make OT 10 minutes and back to a 2 point game. if there is a winner, they get two points. Tied after 70 minutes of total play. Each team gets a point. Not sure if I agree on the icing on a PK. I would agree to icing on a PK if you get rid of icing if the opposing team pulls their goalie. If you want the advantage of an extra skater, then their should be a disadvantage too, because the other team did NOT have a penalty called on them. And I know this is old school, but make the RED line mean something again. I know people think the two line pass slows the pace of the game, but with the new rinks making the ice all but universal in size, bring back the red line. Their is plenty of talent in the league to adjust to this... and maybe increase the space between the lines... how about making the red and blue lines thinner?? just my two cents. Enjoy the videos Shannon!

[@jeremykraenzlein5975]

One change I think would both speed up the game and increase scoring: On a possible icing call, if an offensive player is trying to beat out the icing, and any defensive player does anything to slow them down (including blocking them, or a brief hold which is enough to force them to break stride but not enough for a two-minute penalty), then the potential icing should be waived off. If you want the other team called for icing, then you should need to reach the hybrid-icing line before the opposing player, without slowing down that opposing player in any way.

[@scottjacoby2594]

My biggest rule changes are not so much pertaining to game rules, but more so pertaining to how power play and penalty kill stats are counted. 1) PPGs scored after a penalty expires but before the penalized player crosses the blue line into their defensive zone should still be considered a power play goal. The penalized player was clearly not yet in the play to effectively give their team even strength in that situation. 2) PP% and PK% should be changed to PPGF/2mins (power play goals for per 2 minutes) and PPGA/2mins (power play goals against per 2 minutes). To clarify, that’s per 2 minutes of PP time. I’m tired of teams being penalized for failing to score on a 15 second long power play because the first penalty of a 4on4 expired. Or a team being rewarded for killing a penalty that was only 15 seconds. Possible other alternatives can be average PP time between PPGF/PPGA.