NHL announces rules changes for 2014-15 season

[DevilMinder]

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=730165&cmpid=nhl-twt

 

NEW YORK -- The National Hockey League announced today a series of rules changes for the 2014-15 season, following approval earlier in the summer by the League's Board of Governors and the National Hockey League Players' Association:

Rule 1.8 – Rink - Goalkeeper's Restricted Area

The trapezoid will be expanded by two feet from the goal post on both sides of the net.

Rule 23 – Game Misconduct Penalties

A new Game Misconduct category will be created. Clipping, charging, elbowing, interference, kneeing, head-butting and butt-ending move from the general category into the same category as boarding and checking from behind ("Physical Fouls"), whereby a player who incurs two such game misconducts in this category would now be automatically suspended for one game.

Rule 24 – Penalty Shot

The 'Spin-O-Rama' move, as described in Section 24.2 of the 2013-14 NHL Rule Book, will no longer be permitted either in Penalty Shot situations or in the Shootout.

Rule 38 – Video Goal Judge

Video review will be expanded in the following areas:

* Rule 38.4 (viii) has been modified to allow broader discretion to Hockey Operations to assist the referees in determining the legitimacy of all potential goals (e.g., to ensure they are "good hockey goals"). The revised Rule will allow Hockey Operations to correct a broader array of situations where video review clearly establishes that a "goal" or "no goal" call on the ice has been made in error. The new expanded rule will also allow Hockey Operations to provide guidance to referees on goal and potential goal plays where the referee has blown his whistle (or intended to blow his whistle) after having lost sight of the puck.

* In reviewing "Kicked in Goals," Hockey Operations will require more demonstrable video evidence of a "distinct kicking motion" in order to overrule a "goal" call on the ice, or to uphold a "no goal" call on the ice.

Rule 57 – Tripping

The rule relating to "Tripping" will be revised to specifically provide that a two minute minor penalty will be assessed when a defending player "dives" and trips an attacking player with his body/arm/shoulder, regardless of whether the defending player is able to make initial contact with the puck.

But, in situations where a penalty shot might otherwise be appropriate, if the defending player "dives" and touches the puck first (before the trip), no penalty shot will be awarded. (In such cases, the resulting penalty will be limited to a two-minute minor penalty for tripping.)

Rule 64 – Diving / Embellishment

The supplementary discipline penalties associated with Rule 64.3 (Diving/Embellishment) will be revised to bring attention to and more seriously penalize players (and teams) who repeatedly dive and embellish in an attempt to draw penalties. Fines will be assessed to players and head coaches on a graduated scale outlined below.

 

Incident # Player Fine(s) Head Coach Fine(s) 1 Warning N/A 2 $2,000 N/A 3 $3,000 N/A 4 $4,000 $2,000 5 $5,000 $3,000 6 $5,000 $4,000 7 $5,000 $5,000 8 $5,000 $5,000

Rule 76 – Face-offs

To curb delay tactics on face-offs after icing infractions, in situations where the defending team is guilty of a face-off violation, following an icing, the defending player who is initially lined up for the face-off will be given a warning, but will be required to remain in the circle to take the face-off. A second face-off violation by the defending team in such situation will result in a two minute minor bench penalty.

Rule 84 – Overtime

* Teams will switch ends prior to the start of overtime in the regular season.

* The entire ice surface will undergo a "dry scrape" prior to the start of overtime in the regular season.

* The procedure requiring the head coach to submit a list of the first three shooters in the shoot-out has been eliminated.

Rule 85 – Puck Out of Bounds

There have been further rule changes made relating to face-off location to avoid penalizing teams for plays intended to create bona fide scoring opportunities. Specifically, the following are "categories of plays" where face-offs will remain in the attacking zone despite the fact that the attacking team was technically responsible for the stoppage in play: Shots at the net by a player on the attacking team where: (i) the shot breaks the glass; (ii) the shot goes off the side of the net and deflects out of play; (iii) the shot goes off the dasher boards or glass and deflects out of play; (iv) the shot is tipped or deflected out of play by a teammate; and (v) the shot becomes wedged in or on the exterior of the goal net.

In addition, the following rule change will be enacted for the 2014 preseason and may be continued for the 2014/15 regular season if approved by the League and the NHLPA.

Rule 1.9 – Rink – Face-off Spots and Circles – Ice Markings/Hash Marks

The hash marks at the end zone circles will be moved from three feet apart to five feet, seven inches apart (international markings).

 

[2ELIAS6]

further review of questionable goals is a good move!

[DevsMan84]

Funny how now they are deciding to expand the trapezoid.

[Triumph]

Cory Schneider will still get called for playing the puck outside the trapezoid.

 

Nah, most of these are good.  Glad to see the shootout spin-o-rama go away, glad to see intentional faceoff violations go, trapezoid can go away forever, who cares, and the offensive zone thing will help the Devils much more than it does other teams.

[BostonNala370]

The refs have difficulty calling the game under the old rule what makes us them they will adjust to the new rulrs?

[Colin226]

Cory Schneider will still get called for playing the puck outside the trapezoid.

 

Nah, most of these are good.  Glad to see the shootout spin-o-rama go away, glad to see intentional faceoff violations go, trapezoid can go away forever, who cares, and the offensive zone thing will help the Devils much more than it does other teams.

 

Not that I think we were going to come back in that game but wow that some a BS call.. The ref was behind Cory!!

[Satans Hockey]

The switching sides of the ice for overtime makes sense to try to catch some teams with the long changes but the selfish part of me is annoyed cause I liked being on the attack side and seeing the overtime goals and shootout goals.... Well shootout goal.

[BlueSkirt]

I think both the 1st & 2nd periods should beplayed with the long change.  If I remember right, most goals are scored in the second

[msweet]

"* Teams will switch ends prior to the start of overtime in the regular season."

 

This is terrible for the fans who have picked particular seat in the arena. They just lowered the value of my seats. 

 

​...and now there is a long change in the 4-4 overtime

[Satans Hockey]

I don't really like it either but how many fans are really going to buy seats in the defending zone for a chance to see overtime and maybe see the Devils score an overtime goal.

Most likely fans will still prefer the attack side because it guarantees the Devils will be on that side attacking twice.

That being said I understand the reasoning to create more offense in overtime so we hopefully have less shootouts. So I am happy with that aspect at least.

Edited September 11, 2014 by Satans Hockey

[msweet]

I don't really like it either but how many fans are really going to buy seats in the defending zone for a chance to see overtime and maybe see the Devils score an overtime goal.

Most likely fans will still prefer the attack side because it guarantees the Devils will be on that side attacking twice.

That being said I understand the reasoning to create more offense in overtime so we hopefully have less shootouts. So I am happy with that aspect at least.

 

It's not a major factor but it is one. I am behind the goal on the attacking twice side and now OT winners are on the other side of the ice. I didn't get that choice since I already bought the seats.

[Satans Hockey]

It's not a major factor but it is one. I am behind the goal on the attacking twice side and now OT winners are on the other side of the ice. I didn't get that choice since I already bought the seats.

I'm in the same boat cause my seats are on the attack side too, I'm not happy about it but I even if they announced it early I still wouldn't have moved for just a chance to see ot goals, plus they have already been doing this for playoff overtime for a while now.

[msweet]

I'm in the same boat cause my seats are on the attack side too, I'm not happy about it but I even if they announced it early I still wouldn't have moved for just a chance to see ot goals, plus they have already been doing this for playoff overtime for a while now.

agreed

[Triumph]

They did announce this change back in July.  Lou's been pushing for it for a while.

[NJDEVS1730]

Same boat here, section 21...nice view of that Zidlicky OT goal with a second left..oh well.

[Legion15]

Not a fan of fining players for diving, just give a 5 min major if it's that big of a problem.

The trapezoid was a stupid invention and doesn't need to be made bigger.

Obviously blatant puck over the glass - yes, penalty. Incidental, no, just get a new puck and have a face off from the circle if need be.

 

 

I am a huge fan of the no spin-o-rama, no more of these stupid tricks taking a penalty shot, just take the damn shot already, though I'm an avid hater of the shootout altogether anyway...

 

They've come up with pretty stupid rules lately...

['7']

Trapezoid is on its way out.

 

The entire ice surface undergoing a dry scrape before OT is a momentum kill. They're not going to bring the Zamboni's out AGAIN before the shoot out are they? Still, the better ice will help with OT quality of play. It's just OT/Shootout can take some time with all the ice manicuring they do.

Edited September 12, 2014 by '7'

[CarpathianForest]

The tripping a player even if the defending player made initial contact with the puck is bs.

 

So I chase down a breakaway, dive, hit the puck off the attackers stick, but if I follow through, even if I got the puck first, and trip the attacker I'm called on a penalty for tripping. WTF?!!?!

[Steadevils]

The tripping a player even if the defending player made initial contact with the puck is bs.

 

So I chase down a breakaway, dive, hit the puck off the attackers stick, but if I follow through, even if I got the puck first, and trip the attacker I'm called on a penalty for tripping. WTF?!!?!

 

 

This is the one that I see as the biggest change too. Not sure if I am just misinterpreting it, but this would seem to be a massive change to breakaways and even odd man rushes. 

[ATLL765]

This is the one that I see as the biggest change too. Not sure if I am just misinterpreting it, but this would seem to be a massive change to breakaways and even odd man rushes.

All but guarantees either a shot on goal or a penalty if there's a breakaway. League wants more offense and this will give them a little bit. I'll wait to see how much it affects the game before I decide if I like it or not though.

I will say that seeing a defender chase down an attacking player on a breakaway and poke check the puck off their stick is a pretty exciting play that we won't see nearly as much of due to this rule change.

[Triumph]

All but guarantees either a shot on goal or a penalty if there's a breakaway. League wants more offense and this will give them a little bit. I'll wait to see how much it affects the game before I decide if I like it or not though.

I will say that seeing a defender chase down an attacking player on a breakaway and poke check the puck off their stick is a pretty exciting play that we won't see nearly as much of due to this rule change.

 

I don't agree.  Defensemen will still try this play because it's not a guarantee that there will be a penalty called and if they do get the puck first there won't be a penalty shot - that's part of the rule.  I agree that poke-checks like this are exciting, but so are breakaway goals.

[Onddeck]

All but guarantees either a shot on goal or a penalty if there's a breakaway. League wants more offense and this will give them a little bit. I'll wait to see how much it affects the game before I decide if I like it or not though.

I will say that seeing a defender chase down an attacking player on a breakaway and poke check the puck off their stick is a pretty exciting play that we won't see nearly as much of due to this rule change.

yea I remember this last year, Fayne made a diving poke check like you just described, really illustrates the beauty of Defense

[devilsfan26]

Trapezoid is on its way out.

 

The entire ice surface undergoing a dry scrape before OT is a momentum kill. They're not going to bring the Zamboni's out AGAIN before the shoot out are they? Still, the better ice will help with OT quality of play. It's just OT/Shootout can take some time with all the ice manicuring they do.

I think this is a good move.  Without having to wait for the water to freeze, this can be done in about five minutes.  They already break for a minute or so between the third and overtime anyway.  Freshly-cut ice means faster action and fewer botched passes and mishandled pucks, which should hopefully mean fewer games decided by the abhorrent carnival game of chance.

 

The tripping a player even if the defending player made initial contact with the puck is bs.

 

So I chase down a breakaway, dive, hit the puck off the attackers stick, but if I follow through, even if I got the puck first, and trip the attacker I'm called on a penalty for tripping. WTF?!!?!

This is how the rule has been in many leagues for a long time.  Why should a defender who was caught out of position and left himself with no option but to dive be given the benefit of the doubt?

[devilsfan26]

Not a fan of fining players for diving, just give a 5 min major if it's that big of a problem.

The trapezoid was a stupid invention and doesn't need to be made bigger.

Obviously blatant puck over the glass - yes, penalty. Incidental, no, just get a new puck and have a face off from the circle if need be.

 

 

I am a huge fan of the no spin-o-rama, no more of these stupid tricks taking a penalty shot, just take the damn shot already, though I'm an avid hater of the shootout altogether anyway...

 

They've come up with pretty stupid rules lately...

A five minute major for diving is too strict of a punishment to be made without having a chance to review it.  They have a hard enough time confidently giving out minors for this, there's no way they'd give out majors.  The referees will never risk making that call, so diving would often go unpunished.  I think they are on the right track here, but the fines might be too low to have any real impact.

The trapezoid is stupid, but making it bigger lowers its impact.  I'd rather they just get rid of it completely, but making it bigger is at least a small improvement.

Edited September 12, 2014 by devilsfan26

[David Puddy]

I don't agree.  Defensemen will still try this play because it's not a guarantee that there will be a penalty called and if they do get the puck first there won't be a penalty shot - that's part of the rule.  I agree that poke-checks like this are exciting, but so are breakaway goals.

 

I concur with Triumph. This is a high risk play that in the past where the punishment has not been enough to deter it. Now if you're a defensemen, you have to be SURE you will get the puck and only the puck if you're going to make a desperation dive. IMO the rules should reward skill over luck.

 

Also players will tend to try to physically punish the opposing player as much as possible, so even if you got the puck in the past, why not follow through and trip the man if you're not going to get a penalty for it?

Edited September 12, 2014 by David Puddy