Hockey and No Touch Icing

[Salty Dog]

Don Cherry may be outspoken, and a good part of Coach's Corner might be for entertainment purposes only, but he is absolutely right when it comes to no touch icing!!! The recent Kurtis Foster injury is proof positive. For what the current race for the puck adds to the game, compared to potential career ending injuries...it is difficult to understand why the change has not occurred already. You would think the fact that these players are all million or multi-million dollar assets would be sufficient in itself to force the change. I guess we are going to have to lose a young defenceman like Phaneuf or Weber or a superstar forward like Crosby or Lecavalier to paralysis before the powers that be figure out that, a year after such a change, it would be a non issue with real hockey fans. The problem is, the players DO have the courage, but the owner's and NHL decision makers DON'T have the brains!

[ktowner]

Kurtis Foster with the broken leg after one of these plays - What is it seriously going to take to get the league to change this?????

I think no touch icing would speed the game up a bit too.

[Salty Dog]

Kurtis Foster with the broken leg after one of these plays - What is it seriously going to take to get the league to change this?????

I think no touch icing would speed the game up a bit too.

You bet it wouldn't hurt the game one bit....take a look at the CHL. No touch icing in the WHL doesn't distract from the quality of the game one bit. The no line change on the icing calls is a good rule too that keeps icing from occurring too frequently.

[The Bronze]

My opinion on this went back and forth, but I really don't think taking no touch icing out is going to improve the game. I think the problem isn't no touch icing, it's an overall lack of respect towards other people on the ice. Had the San Jose player not tried to shove Foster into the boards, he wouldn't have broken his leg.

On the third angle of the Foster hit, in my opinion, you can clearly see the San Jose player isn't going for the puck at all, he wants to hit Foster. There was no penalty on the play and no suspension.

Unfortunately it's going to take a big money player getting run into the boards and being paralyzed before owners start to speak up because they don't like losing money.

The problem with hockey is two fold in my opinion. Number one, lack of respect for other players on the ice, and number two (and a big number two if you catch my drift) is the NHL bending over backwards to protect people that injure. If the NHL were to ever actually hand out a suspension that's equal to the crime commited, perhaps people would stop gooning other hockey players. My best example of that would be, when did you last see a bench clearing brawl? It's been a while, because the NHL put in a rule that states if you leave the bench it's an automatic 10 game suspension. The NHL has the ability to make their rules work, they just don't want to.

Pronger gets 8 games for his 8th suspension in the NHL. Do you think that's going to send any sort of lesson to him? No, it'll just give him time off to rest up before 'accidentally' elbowing someone else in the head in the playoffs.

As long as the NHL condones gooning and refuses to properly punish people for illegal actions on the ice, changing the rules isn't going to change anything.

[Salty Dog]

My opinion on this went back and forth, but I really don't think taking no touch icing out is going to improve the game. I think the problem isn't no touch icing, it's an overall lack of respect towards other people on the ice. Had the San Jose player not tried to shove Foster into the boards, he wouldn't have broken his leg.

On the third angle of the Foster hit, in my opinion, you can clearly see the San Jose player isn't going for the puck at all, he wants to hit Foster. There was no penalty on the play and no suspension.

Unfortunately it's going to take a big money player getting run into the boards and being paralyzed before owners start to speak up because they don't like losing money.

The problem with hockey is two fold in my opinion. Number one, lack of respect for other players on the ice, and number two (and a big number two if you catch my drift) is the NHL bending over backwards to protect people that injure. If the NHL were to ever actually hand out a suspension that's equal to the crime commited, perhaps people would stop gooning other hockey players. My best example of that would be, when did you last see a bench clearing brawl? It's been a while, because the NHL put in a rule that states if you leave the bench it's an automatic 10 game suspension. The NHL has the ability to make their rules work, they just don't want to.

Pronger gets 8 games for his 8th suspension in the NHL. Do you think that's going to send any sort of lesson to him? No, it'll just give him time off to rest up before 'accidentally' elbowing someone else in the head in the playoffs.

As long as the NHL condones gooning and refuses to properly punish people for illegal actions on the ice, changing the rules isn't going to change anything.

Can't argue with a thing you say on this one. It comes down to the NHL having the guts to make rules that carry stiff enough punishments to preclude dangerous actions by players.....Personally, I don't see any difference between the dangers presented through checking from behind and the dangers presented through "unnecessary" breakneck races for the puck on icing plays. It does not add enough to the game to warrant the risk involved. It is pretty easy to slide a stick blade slightly under the skate of an opponent preceding a forechecker into the end boards....and the damage is done. It doesn't have to be a case of "running" someone into the boards in order to have a catastrophic injury occur! The lesser infraction of tripping would be much more difficult to declare "intent to injure" which would warrant the big time penalty/sanction.

[shoo]

Hi guys,

I am a hockey fan but need some help understanding the no-touch icing rule. I would really appreciate a little info on it. TIA

shoo

[Salty Dog]

Hi guys,

I am a hockey fan but need some help understanding the no-touch icing rule. I would really appreciate a little info on it. TIA

shoo

Simply means that when the puck is "iced", played from behind the centre ice line, over the icing line in the opposing team's zone (even strength), the whistle would be blown to stop the play as soon as the puck crosses the icing line. Currently, the puck must be touched by a player from the defending team before the play is stopped by the linesmen. The current rule provides for a chance for a player from the attacking team to win the race to the icing zone and touch the puck before the defender can, which negates the icing call. Thus, the current rule sets up the situation where the defending player must race to his end zone to beat the attacking player to the puck, setting up the situation that results in serious player injuries.

[shoo]

Dog,

Thank you!

I guess that would make for fewer injuries on the boards. When the puck crosses the icing line, and the player on the attack gets to it first(a situation I can't recall seeing in the WHL)the play would continue as usual,right? When it's a Power play situation,icing is used alot by the defenders. Would this change the flow of the game at all,or have no effect?
I've been a hockey fan for a long time,and now realizing there is a lot I don't really understand about the game,probably because I've never played.

Now,anyone want to educate me a little more on the off side rules?

[Salty Dog]

Dog,

Thank you!

I guess that would make for fewer injuries on the boards. When the puck crosses the icing line, and the player on the attack gets to it first(a situation I can't recall seeing in the WHL)the play would continue as usual,right? When it's a Power play situation,icing is used alot by the defenders. Would this change the flow of the game at all,or have no effect?
I've been a hockey fan for a long time,and now realizing there is a lot I don't really understand about the game,probably because I've never played.

Now,anyone want to educate me a little more on the off side rules?

WHL already has the NO TOUCH icing rule, so you wouldn't see the attacking player winning the race and negating an icing call. Whistle blows when puck crosses icing line. When short handed, the penalized team can ice the puck without any stoppage of play. If both teams are penalized, and and there is no man advantage, the icing rule is in effect. Another recent change that was made to the "icing rule" was that a team who ices the puck (usually because the skaters are tired and cannot get the puck out of their own zone) cannot change players on the resulting stoppage of play for the icing infraction. They must complete a face-off in their own zone with the same players as were on the ice when the icing occurred. This change places the team who ices the puck at a much larger disadvantage, since the opposition CAN put fresh players on the ice or their scoring line or whoever they want.

[zzontar]

I remember the first time I heard about "no touch icing" ... I was a kid... my mom was making a chocolate cake...