What Hockey Thing Took You an Embarrassing Length of Time to "Get"?

[NYRangers92]

But isnt the point of embellishment to fake a penalty? If the penalty is real then why bother penalizing the embellishment?

And has a goalie ever been penalized for embellishing an interference call?

[Future]

But isnt the point of embellishment to fake a penalty? If the penalty is real then why bother penalizing the embellishment?

And has a goalie ever been penalized for embellishing an interference call?

I hope they don't start that, b/c Hank would be in the box 10 times a game.

[Mike]

I hope they don't start that, b/c Hank would be in the box 10 times a game.

 

Yeah, when did he start that bullshit ? I hate that shit.

[Future]

Yeah, when did he start that bullshit ? I hate that shit.

Idk, it's probably been longer tahn I think.

[SaveByRichter35]

I hope they don't start that, b/c Hank would be in the box 10 times a game.

 

lol

[Phil]

I interpret embellishment as making something look worse than it is. Not faking something that didn't happen. Though it can also apply there. Players who snap their head back and grab their face, for example, when a stick swings by. Especially when it never makes contact.

 

As to why you penalize it? Because it embarrasses the refs? LOL.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

[NYRangers92]

So in that hypothetical wouldnt/shouldnt only the embellishment be called? Has that ever happened?

[Phil]

In that case, yes, only the embellishment should be called, but I'm not sure if it's ever occurred.

[fletch]

Why the boards at Joe Louis arena are so bouncy... and why other teams don't make lively boards for a home-ice advantage.

http://blog.mlive.com/snapshots/2009/06/wood_you_believe_that_joe_loui.html

[Mike]

Why the boards at Joe Louis arena are so bouncy... and why other teams don't make lively boards for a home-ice advantage.

http://blog.mlive.com/snapshots/2009/06/wood_you_believe_that_joe_loui.html

 

If everyone did it the same way there wouldn't be an advantage.

[fletch]

Right, but Detroit had such an advantage because they were the only one or one of the few. If everybody did it, no advantage, but a couple other teams could install to their advantage.

[Greenday4537]

But isnt the point of embellishment to fake a penalty? If the penalty is real then why bother penalizing the embellishment?

And has a goalie ever been penalized for embellishing an interference call?

 

Well, if someone gets hurt as a result of a penalty, like high sticking, wouldn't it be a double minor? So then players might try to embellish on an opponent's penalty to try to get a double minor.

 

I don't get why the rest of the NHL puts up with Crybaby Crosby's BS. They all need to call him out on the jerk he is. Constantly embellishing, constantly whining. Gets away with everything.

 

Icing took me a little bit to figure out when I first got into hockey. None of my family watches hockey so no one explained the rules to me.

 

Why secondary assists are a thing. I still don't get it and think it inflates stats. If you are in your own end, pass the puck to a teammate a couple feet away, then he goes end to end dodging a bunch of defenders then passes it to someone who backdoors the goalie, why does the first guy deserve an assist? Did he REALLY contribute to that goal?

[Mike]

Well, if someone gets hurt as a result of a penalty, like high sticking, wouldn't it be a double minor? So then players might try to embellish on an opponent's penalty to try to get a double minor.

 

I don't get why the rest of the NHL puts up with Crybaby Crosby's BS. They all need to call him out on the jerk he is. Constantly embellishing, constantly whining. Gets away with everything.

 

Icing took me a little bit to figure out when I first got into hockey. None of my family watches hockey so no one explained the rules to me.

 

Why secondary assists are a thing. I still don't get it and think it inflates stats. If you are in your own end, pass the puck to a teammate a couple feet away, then he goes end to end dodging a bunch of defenders then passes it to someone who backdoors the goalie, why does the first guy deserve an assist? Did he REALLY contribute to that goal?

 

You get a double minor for drawing blood, it's not a judgement call. Are you dead but not bleeding? 2 minutes. Did you nick your lip and leak a drop of blood? 4 minutes.

 

 

And yes, by feeding the puck to a teammate who in turn makes something happen by creating a goal, you should absolutely get credit for an assist. Are some more deserving and prettier than others? Absolutely, but they all count.

1. You completed the pass no matter the difficulty.

2. You didn't ice the puck or turn it over.

[Greenday4537]

You get a double minor for drawing blood, it's not a judgement call. Are you dead but not bleeding? 2 minutes. Did you nick your lip and leak a drop of blood? 4 minutes.

 

 

And yes, by feeding the puck to a teammate who in turn makes something happen by creating a goal, you should absolutely get credit for an assist. Are some more deserving and prettier than others? Absolutely, but they all count.

1. You completed the pass no matter the difficulty.

2. You didn't ice the puck or turn it over.

 

Meh, an assist to me should just be you passed the puck in a way that helped create the goal. Getting a point for other people making great plays and you just happened to pass it to the guy who passed it to the guy who made a great play shouldn't result in large point totals.

[NYRangers92]

Not necessarily a hockey specific thing, but I'm always fascinated when teams hand fans white towels to wave during big games, given the obvious connotations of such a symbol/action

[The Dude]

Still don't get why goalies aren't fair game when they venture behind the net to play the puck. Broduer and Snow used to use the rule as an advantage as they would somewhat set a pick after playing the puck.

 

Never got and I fucking HATE the Meatheads in the crowd who pound on the glass, especially when there isn't anything going on along the glass.. There's always one of the dipshits in Columbus.

[SaveByRichter35]

Still don't get why goalies aren't fair game when they venture behind the net to play the puck. Broduer and Snow used to use the rule as an advantage as they would somewhat set a pick after playing the puck.

 

Never got and I fucking HATE the Meatheads in the crowd who pound on the glass, especially when there isn't anything going on along the glass.. There's always one of the dipshits in Columbus.

 

I fucking hate people who bang on the glass during game play. Unless there was a goal scored keep your hands off the glass.

[ThirtyONE]

Somehow rules has become more blurred over the past few years:

 

What is goalie interference?

Why does the "intent to blow the whistle" exist? If they want more goals scored and a puck goes in before the whistle is blown, seems idiotic not to count it.

How can you review a goal, have one outcome, have a coaching challenge, and have a different outcome? Just get it right the first time.

Are you allowed to stand in the crease or not? Sometimes it matters and sometimes it doesn't.

If player A blocks a shot with his legs and two teammates go on a 2-0 the other way and score, how does player A record an assist?

If Soccer and tennis can have the technology that tells you if the ball is over the line, why can't hockey?

[SaveByRichter35]

Somehow rules has become more blurred over the past few years:

 

What is goalie interference?

Why does the "intent to blow the whistle" exist? If they want more goals scored and a puck goes in before the whistle is blown, seems idiotic not to count it.

How can you review a goal, have one outcome, have a coaching challenge, and have a different outcome? Just get it right the first time.

Are you allowed to stand in the crease or not? Sometimes it matters and sometimes it doesn't.

If player A blocks a shot with his legs and two teammates go on a 2-0 the other way and score, how does player A record an assist?

If Soccer and tennis can have the technology that tells you if the ball is over the line, why can't hockey?

 

My answer to this one is that its human delay. The officials don't skate around with the whistle in their mouth just waiting to blow. For example, if there is a scramble in front of the net and the ref is behind looking over top and looses sight of the puck he could come to the decision to blow the whistle and the puck could cross as he was bringing the whistle up to his mouth to blow it. That is my understanding of that rule.

 

As for the crease rule you're allowed to be in the crease so long as you don't interfere with the goalie. The blocked puck assist I have no problem giving that guy an assist. Everything else I am right there with you.

[phillyb]

The fucking reviews...

I think there was a weird one earlier in the season.

It was something like:

Call on ice: goal.

Toronto involvement: no goal.

Coach's challenge: goal.

 

It was really strange. I wish I remembered who was playing; I don't think it was the Rangers.

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

Changing lines on the fly. Never quite understood how players managed to do this without incurring too-many-men penalties and players on the bench knowing when they're up for a shift.

 

I still dont get this lol.

 

Is AV screaming like "okey - Nash, Step, vesey, you're next" every minute for what lines coming on?

 

As a guy who have never played hockey, there's a lot of things I dont understand.

[Vodka Drunkenski]

How you can be onside just because you have possession while really being offside

 

 

#MakeBSBHGreatAgain

[Mike]

I still dont get this lol.

 

Is AV screaming like "okey - Nash, Step, vesey, you're next" every minute for what lines coming on?

 

As a guy who have never played hockey, there's a lot of things I dont understand.

 

Usually you just call out the center's name of the next line you want out, unless you're making personnel changes for whatever reason.

Everyone knows who they have coming off the ice in every situation. If you're a LW, you always take the LW, or sometimes you can have an order, like player A takes the 1st guy off, B takes the 2nd, C takes the 3rd.

[Zuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuc]

Ah, that makes sense. I wonder how much impact a player have on this. Like if he is gassed as hell he could sometimes say that he needs an extra minute or two.

 

A rule I never understood is why a goalie cant cross the redline. Annoys the hell out of me when Im playing goalie mode on NHL17 lol.

[Guest]

Somehow rules has become more blurred over the past few years:

 

What is goalie interference?

Why does the "intent to blow the whistle" exist? If they want more goals scored and a puck goes in before the whistle is blown, seems idiotic not to count it.

How can you review a goal, have one outcome, have a coaching challenge, and have a different outcome? Just get it right the first time.

Are you allowed to stand in the crease or not? Sometimes it matters and sometimes it doesn't.

If player A blocks a shot with his legs and two teammates go on a 2-0 the other way and score, how does player A record an assist?

If Soccer and tennis can have the technology that tells you if the ball is over the line, why can't hockey?

 

Goalie Interference:

Goalie interference is when an attacking player prevents the opposing goalie from a full range of movement to make a save attempt. This typically has to occur within the crease (blue paint). At any time, an attacking player needs to make an effort to not come into contact with the goalie, so even if the contact comes outside of the crease, it can be goalie interference. If an attacking player is physically pushed into the goalie in some way, then there is no interference on the play. If the interference is incidental (caused by the normal course of a hockey play) then the play gets whistled dead and the face off comes outside of the attacking zone. If a player comes into contact with the goalie without an attempt to avoid them and not through a normal hockey play (think an attacking player trying to screen the goalie who makes significant contact) a penalty for goaltender interference can be called. If an attacking player pushes a defending player into the goalie, this too can be considered goaltender interference. If a goal is scored after incidental or intentional contact, it is waved off, either during play or if it is missed when either a coach challenges the goal result, or within the final minute of regulation or any time in over time, a "booth review" is initiated. A reviewed play can not result in a penalty being called. If a goal is waved off during normal play for goalie interference, a coach's challenge (or the booth in the final minute or in OT) can review the play and determine there was no goaltender interference. In that case, the goal will stand.

 

Intent to blow the whistle:

The blowing of the whistle signals the stoppage of play, however, it's the intent to stop play that matters. This is rarely an issue because the difference in time is slight, however, there are some times when it's important. If the ref loses sight of the puck around the goalie, they stop play. However, it's their intention rather than the actual whistle that stops the play. So for instance, if a ref loses sight of the puck, he blows the whistle but before he does that, an attacking player whacks at the goalie pushing the puck in the net, then the play was already dead even though the whistle hadn't yet blown. Video review can show this, as the ref knows when he intended to stop play. It's more evident on delayed penalties. Most of the time when we wonder why the ref stopped play while our team was fouled and still had possession of the puck, it's because they noticed an infraction and it took them a moment to process the situation, but after the infraction or as a result of it, the infracting team controlled the puck first so the play should have been dead prior to the whistle being blown.

 

Goal review:

Some situations get reviewed automatically, others require a coaches challenge. So lets take the goal the Rangers scored the other night where Anderson's glove was fully in the net when he made the catch. On ice this was called no goal, video review showed the puck had fully crossed the line, so they called down and said it was a good goal. But what if there had been an off sides prior to all of this? That requires a coaches challenge by the defending team. Boucher wouldn't use that challenge until he knew for sure the puck was ruled to cross the line. There are a number of simultaneous situations like this that work both for and against a goal being scored.

 

Crease:

You can stand in the crease as long as you don't impede the ability of the goalie to make the save. When the puck is lose in the crease, an attacking player has the right to be there. As long as they don't intentionally interfere with the goalie, any incidental contact should be allowed.

 

Blocked shot:

I agree here, an assist should be the result of possession and intent. Blocking a shot is incidental to me.

 

Chip in puck:

I believe they experimented with this but rejected it. I'm not sure if it threw off the weight of the puck or if they had some problem with freezing the chipped pucks, but it got rejected.