Short Handed Icing

[stxnpux]

Read an interesing article the latest USA hockey mag about a no icing rule. It sounds like the Massachusetts Hockey Assoc. is seeing some success with this rule @ the youth levels. I am curious what others think. Good, bad or indefferent. Essentially the rule forbids a short handed team from icing the puck.

1. Forces the short handed players to handle the puck under pressure and in a uncomfortable situation (makes them play outside their comfort zone).
2. Forces the short handed players to handle the puck more in traffic.
3. Forces the short handed team to use better puck control in and out of their zone.
4. Forces the power play team to use better puck control in the offensive zone.

All opinions are welcome!

[theref]

We used the no icing rule during the select 15 Nationals in St. Cloud this summer and the kids seem to have no problem with it.

Here is my personal feeling on the situation. Why should a team that is shorthanded be allowed to not follow a rule because of something that they did. A team is short handed because they took a penalty. You are now allowing them to do something that they cannot normally do, even though they did something wrong to put themselves in that position. Sorry, I realize that may be stated oddly for some or that it may be confusing. I guess to try to state it clearly

A team should not be allowed a different advantage just because they took a penalty.

You are just leveling the playing field a little, but then that defeats the purpose of having penalties.

[watchdog]

to me the way they hand out penalties these days it would just be more of a deciding factor. its already bad enough leave the icing in is my opinion.

[QuackerTracker]

I like the idea that it teaches kids to handle the puck more however my fear would be increased stopages due to the iceing.

[theref]

to me the way they hand out penalties these days it would just be more of a deciding factor. its already bad enough leave the icing in is my opinion.

If the kids played the game the way it was meant to be played, those penalties wouldn't be a problem.

Sorry, have to play devil's advocate on this one.

[NeilGuf-yb]

to me the way they hand out penalties these days it would just be more of a deciding factor. its already bad enough leave the icing in is my opinion.

If the kids played the game the way it was meant to be played, those penalties wouldn't be a problem.

Sorry, have to play devil's advocate on this one.

Refs also have to remember the fans are there to watch the kids...not the ref!

[theref]

to me the way they hand out penalties these days it would just be more of a deciding factor. its already bad enough leave the icing in is my opinion.

If the kids played the game the way it was meant to be played, those penalties wouldn't be a problem.

Sorry, have to play devil's advocate on this one.

Refs also have to remember the fans are there to watch the kids...not the ref!

Fans have to remember that we don't care if you are watching us or not and that we don't give a rats behind what your opinion is about our calls. If you don't like it then lace em up!

[stxnpux]

A team should not be allowed a different advantage just because they took a penalty.

This is a very good point.

I like the idea that it teaches kids to handle the puck more however my fear would be increased stopages due to the iceing.

But there wouldn't be any more stopages than if the teams were even strength.

To me the biggeset factor here would be to get the kids to play outside their comfort zone. I just don't think that this can be done in a practice situation. There is nothing like the pressure of a game to turn the heat up!

[hiptzech]

to me the way they hand out penalties these days it would just be more of a deciding factor. its already bad enough leave the icing in is my opinion.

If the kids played the game the way it was meant to be played, those penalties wouldn't be a problem.

Sorry, have to play devil's advocate on this one.

Refs also have to remember the fans are there to watch the kids...not the ref!

But the question then would be, “What players are they there to watch?”. The ones that are good at hindering play, or the skilled ones”. Kinda goes back to the posts that started last year with the new standards of play. It’s great to watch kids play, especially the skilled ones that don’t get interfered with by the less skilled players.

So, what players are you there to see play NeilGuf-yb?

IMHO, I would say keep the icing allowable. Yes, I agree with all of the good reasons to remove it, but I see more icings called, which results in more stoppages of play. Icing, creates the longest delay in games.

[RLStars]

I kind of like that idea. It would likely cut down on penalties in the long term after some adjustment period. A coach would have to stress playing within the rules more often as taking a bad penalty would be more costly, especially if the short handed team is not allowed to change players if they ice it.

The goons and the hot heads would be riding the pine more often.

[tomASS]

A team should not be allowed a different advantage just because they took a penalty.

This is a very good point.

I like the idea that it teaches kids to handle the puck more however my fear would be increased stopages due to the iceing.

But there wouldn't be any more stopages than if the teams were even strength.

To me the biggeset factor here would be to get the kids to play outside their comfort zone. I just don't think that this can be done in a practice situation. There is nothing like the pressure of a game to turn the heat up!

I agree here. If you need to relive pressure then go ahead and ice it, but pay the price of it coming back to your zone. The benefit is still the ability to switch the PK up and get organize again. I like the development factor of playing out under pressure.

[RLStars]

A team should not be allowed a different advantage just because they took a penalty.

This is a very good point.

I like the idea that it teaches kids to handle the puck more however my fear would be increased stopages due to the iceing.

But there wouldn't be any more stopages than if the teams were even strength.

To me the biggeset factor here would be to get the kids to play outside their comfort zone. I just don't think that this can be done in a practice situation. There is nothing like the pressure of a game to turn the heat up!

I agree here. If you need to relive pressure then go ahead and ice it, but pay the price of it coming back to your zone. The benefit is still the ability to switch the PK up and get organize again. I like the development factor of playing out under pressure.

AND, are not allowed to change players becuase they "iced" the puck.

[Can't Never Tried]

Fans have to remember that we don't care if you are watching us or not and that we don't give a rats behind what your opinion is about our calls. If you don't like it then lace em up!

OK OK geezzz !! but do me one favor would ya...stop skating like Richard Simmons on a treadmill will ya

[theref]

Fans have to remember that we don't care if you are watching us or not and that we don't give a rats behind what your opinion is about our calls. If you don't like it then lace em up!

OK OK geezzz !! but do me one favor would ya...stop skating like Richard Simmons on a treadmill will ya

C'mon, that's how I get the best work out while I'm out there! Hopefully you can't see my headphones playing the 80's.....

[skatehardordie]

Along those same lines, I would like to see a team that is about to benefit from the other team iceing the puck to be able to "decline" the iceing. you could have the netminder make a hand signal indicating that his team declines the iceing and the play continues. if football can handle such a hand signal for a fair catch, no reason that hockey can discern the same during live play in a hockey game.

a team might wanna decline in order to have a certain possession of the puck, rather than risk losing the faceoff at the other end.

[Bronc]

Along those same lines, I would like to see a team that is about to benefit from the other team iceing the puck to be able to "decline" the iceing. you could have the netminder make a hand signal indicating that his team declines the iceing and the play continues. if football can handle such a hand signal for a fair catch, no reason that hockey can discern the same during live play in a hockey game.

a team might wanna decline in order to have a certain possession of the puck, rather than risk losing the faceoff at the other end.

I like leaving the rule in place as it is, but giving the team the choice to decline as stipulated by the goalie, however we would need to start this any earlier than PW's to begin with.

[philip18]

I never thought of that before but I agree you should not be able to break the rules because you broke the rules! It would without question cut down on penalties because the number of PP goals would increase. Coaches then players would get it.

[hacker]

I like the idea. What a way to promote puck control and passing.

[hockeyparent11]

An interesting thought. I t occurs to me that I would still tell the kids to dump it out because it is safer out there.

The old WHA did this. Anyone know of any opinions from that era?

[hiptzech]

I still don't buy it....As I said previously, I like the points that have been made in favor. But, I still see more stoppages of play. At the lower level youth games, you will see more icing calls as a result. The game will have just as many penalties, these kids don't go out and intentionally get penalties, and I don't see a decrease in penalties as a result of this proposed rule change. At the youth level with all of the attempts at getting equal playing time, a line change is a line change even if you have to stay on the ice as a result of this icing call. Again, at the lower level youth games, these kids need the play continuous. Stopping for an icing call just eats up the hour game clock and decreases the amount of actual playing time. There are enough people out there saying that they go to a game to watch the kids play, not the refs. This rule will allow fans to watch the playing ability of the kids will ultimately get to see more officials skating the length of the ice to retrieve the puck for yet another face off. Resurrect the delayed off sides thread...

[philip18]

I don't think of the puck being shot all the way down the ice and then chased and carried all the way back up as continuous play. I see it as delaying the action by breaking a rule because the team broke a rule

[hiptzech]

I don't think of the puck being shot all the way down the ice and then chased and carried all the way back up as continuous play. I see it as delaying the action by breaking a rule because the team broke a rule

Good Point, but….As a ref, when you get multiple icing calls a couple things start to happen. When you have to continuously retrieve the puck for icings you do start to get slightly gassed, which ultimately adds to the delay. Calling 3 icings in a row slows the game down, and the bottom line is at the youth level a player is going to be likely to ice the puck when the line gets gassed or in trouble. I don’t see the coaches stressing puck control over taking an icing call. Yes, I do agree that it could not be completely considered continuous play if you are having to chase the puck and carry it back in but wouldn’t you rather see a lines of skaters do it vs. the ref? Additionally, the players do get the opportunity see the ice, find the lanes and further develop their skill. If a player ices the puck because the line is gassed there will likely be a line change, which can create an opportunity.

The point continues to get made regarding breaking a rule, and getting the opportunity to break and icing rule. That’s a good viewpoint if you are more focused on wins and losses over skill development and ice time. There are plenty of games that expire right around the same time the hour clock expires. Let the fair play point process take it’s course to decrease penalties, not reduce and stop play.

That’s my opinion; keep pushing it and fans will ultimately have something else to complain about. I am not interested in having yet another reason to stop play.

[theref]

I don't think of the puck being shot all the way down the ice and then chased and carried all the way back up as continuous play. I see it as delaying the action by breaking a rule because the team broke a rule

Good Point, but….As a ref, when you get multiple icing calls a couple things start to happen. When you have to continuously retrieve the puck for icings you do start to get slightly gassed, which ultimately adds to the delay. Calling 3 icings in a row slows the game down, and the bottom line is at the youth level a player is going to be likely to ice the puck when the line gets gassed or in trouble. I don’t see the coaches stressing puck control over taking an icing call. Yes, I do agree that it could not be completely considered continuous play if you are having to chase the puck and carry it back in but wouldn’t you rather see a lines of skaters do it vs. the ref? Additionally, the players do get the opportunity see the ice, find the lanes and further develop their skill. If a player ices the puck because the line is gassed there will likely be a line change, which can create an opportunity.

The point continues to get made regarding breaking a rule, and getting the opportunity to break and icing rule. That’s a good viewpoint if you are more focused on wins and losses over skill development and ice time. There are plenty of games that expire right around the same time the hour clock expires. Let the fair play point process take it’s course to decrease penalties, not reduce and stop play.

That’s my opinion; keep pushing it and fans will ultimately have something else to complain about. I am not interested in having yet another reason to stop play.

Just like the new standard of play, the kids would learn to adjust and handle the puck without just shooting it down. Like I said, when we used it at the Select 15 National camp, we had no problems with it.

[RLStars]

Why do youth players at the lower level "ice the puck" when short handed? It's because they are taught to do that.

If the icing rule while on the penalty kill was changed, you would have some adjustment time for the players that have been taught to "ice the puck" rather then control it and pass or skate it over center ice, then throw it to the corner. Once these kids and coaches are taught that icing while short handed is no longer acceptable, I believe you will see that flow of the game would increase and stoppages lessen.

[wannagototherink]

All that would happen is the coaches would have yet another reason to shorten the bench. If a coach was afraid a weaker group of penalty killers couldn't get the puck out than he/she may limit who gets to kill penalties.

...or everyone keeps icing the puck anyway and the number of whistles increases and games end up taking 2 hours. How about adding time to the length of games and put longer games to good use.