NHL announces rules changes for 2014-15 season

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,536
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).
 
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=730165&cmpid=nhl-twt
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,254
306, row 14
I'll believe the diving thing when I see it. We go through this every few years.

Julien is quietly weeping at the league foiling the "let's put Marchand on the draw to get intentionally tossed so we get a longer breather, then have Bergy win us the draw!" strategy after icings.
 

McDrew

Set Adrift on Memory Bliss
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2006
4,075
Portland, OR
Until they change fines to be %'s of a game check, they're going to be wrong.  5k is a lot more to Jordan Caron than David Krecji
 

TFP

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2007
20,391
I don't like the new tripping rule, to be honest, I can see it leading to some more judgement calls. Other than that, I like all the changes, especially switching ends in OT and keeping the faceoff in the zone when shots are taken.
 
FL4WL3SS said:
Ugh, get rid of the trapezoid, don't expand it.
 
Can't argue with anything else.
 
Well I want it gone too, but expanding it is at least a step in the right direction. There's more space for the goalie to play the puck now, which is a good thing.
 

Catcher Block

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 7, 2006
5,867
St. Louis
At first glance, I thought Rule 85 was going to curb the puck-over-glass minor penalty, which is right up there in my mind with the trapezoid.
 
I really like that the long-shift OT with a slightly cleaner ice surface should help avoid shootout more often.
 

Dummy Hoy

Angry Pissbum
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2006
8,250
Falmouth
I don't like the tripping one at all and think that the diving fines are useless and just for show ("look! We did something about diving") unless the refs actually start calling it. I'm fine with rest of the rules, despite the face off penalty directly hurting the Bruins.
 

Red Right Ankle

Formerly the Story of Your Red Right Ankle
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
12,004
Multivac
cshea said:
I'll believe the diving thing when I see it. We go through this every few years.

Julien is quietly weeping at the league foiling the "let's put Marchand on the draw to get intentionally tossed so we get a longer breather, then have Bergy win us the draw!" strategy after icings.
 

AMcGhie said:
Until they change fines to be %'s of a game check, they're going to be wrong.  5k is a lot more to Jordan Caron than David Krecji
The main problem with diving isn't the penalty or the fine (though I agree a % of game check fine is a better way to handle it), it's the enforcement of the rule.  They need to start there and make it stick with the refs.
 
The "distinct kicking motion" change shows they want to go in the right direction, but results will be highly dependent on what the hell "more demonstrable evidence" really means and how they demo that to the reviewers.
 
Agree with Fl4W re: fuck the trapezoid.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,937
Beating the shit out of your girlfriend still ok, much to the delight of the Avalanche.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,254
306, row 14
The max they can fine is $5K. Can't go higher. The strategy at this point is essentially the public shaming of the player.

The correct way to combat the diving problem is to simply call the penalty as it is written in the rule book. Make it an isolated penalty and don't match-up. Why they have refused to do this for years and years is a great mystery. The answer is simple and staring them in tight face, yet they seem to try and re-invent the wheel every time diving crops up as an issue. I've given up hope in them ever fixing the problem. It is what it is now.
 

ngruz25

Bibby
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
19,062
Pittsburgh, PA
I'm predicting that the tripping change will be big. Diving to dislodge the puck is incredibly common, and lauded as a good pay when it works.
 

Jettisoned

Member
SoSH Member
May 6, 2008
1,059
cshea said:
The max they can fine is $5K. Can't go higher. The strategy at this point is essentially the public shaming of the player.

The correct way to combat the diving problem is to simply call the penalty as it is written in the rule book. Make it an isolated penalty and don't match-up. Why they have refused to do this for years and years is a great mystery. The answer is simple and staring them in tight face, yet they seem to try and re-invent the wheel every time diving crops up as an issue. I've given up hope in them ever fixing the problem. It is what it is now.
 
It is apparently too difficult for referees to judge this in real time.
 

RIFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,091
Rhode Island
Agree with everyone on the trapezoid, but at least they are expanding it and allow a goalie a little more room to use his skills to play the puck. The ironic thing about by changing the tripping call it will lead to more embellishment. There should be some onus on the offensive player to at least attempt to avoid the defensive player if the puck was played first. Diving at the puck will be virtually an automatic penalty as most offensive players have the incentive to go down if any contact is made.
 

Dummy Hoy

Angry Pissbum
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2006
8,250
Falmouth
RIFan said:
Agree with everyone on the trapezoid, but at least they are expanding it and allow a goalie a little more room to use his skills to play the puck. The ironic thing about by changing the tripping call it will lead to more embellishment. There should be some onus on the offensive player to at least attempt to avoid the defensive player if the puck was played first. Diving at the puck will be virtually an automatic penalty as most offensive players have the incentive to go down if any contact is made.
This is my issue with it. The situation I hate is when a D goes down, knocks the puck away, and then two strides later the F  trips over the player or their stick. That's on the offensive player in that case, but now it's going to be on the D every time. I don't understand the need for this rule...were people getting hurt all over the place from sliding defensemen?
 

TSC

SoSH's Doug Neidermeyer
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2007
12,339
Between here and everywhere.
Monbo Jumbo said:
Good to see the spin-o-rama gone. It was always against the original letter of the rule, imho,
 
I mean, yes.
 
But at the same time, the shootout is a stupid gimmick anyways - why not allow some creativity? Hell, if a player in the shootout wants to attempt a wraparound, why not allow it? Make the rule the second the player attempts any kind of shot, the play is over and the result of said attempt stands. Let Chara skate in, stop between the dots, and fire a slapper. Who fucking cares? 
 

Silverdude2167

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 9, 2006
4,717
Amstredam
I want post game reviews by a league official and diving fines are given out then, like player safety. Even if it is not called in the game they can still get caught. It will never happen though.
 

Monbo Jumbo

Hates the crockpot
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 5, 2003
25,235
the other Athens
TheShynessClinic said:
 
I mean, yes.
 
But at the same time, the shootout is a stupid gimmick anyways - why not allow some creativity? Hell, if a player in the shootout wants to attempt a wraparound, why not allow it? Make the rule the second the player attempts any kind of shot, the play is over and the result of said attempt stands. Let Chara skate in, stop between the dots, and fire a slapper. Who fucking cares? 
 
In theory, one could do the spin move AND keep the puck moving forward. That should be legal. No squelching of creativity - you just can't move the puck backwards. 
 

timlinin8th

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2009
1,521
Monbo Jumbo said:
In theory, one could do the spin move AND keep the puck moving forward. That should be legal. No squelching of creativity - you just can't move the puck backwards. 
And that was why the spin-o-rama was a valid move before. Technically if a player attempted the spin and the puck stopped or traveled backwards the attempt was supposed to be blown dead. Lemme tell you how many times THAT happened. Its the same problem with the dives now - the problem isnt the rule so much as the rule isnt being enforced, so to that point im glad to see the spin-o-rama gone since the refs can't be trusted to call it right.