We have seen it in the NFL … looks like a touchdown, players jump around like its a touchdown, however after reviewing the play we find out by slow motion instant replay the players knee touched the grass 2 inches before the ball crossed the line.  Result – No Touchdown!

The only type of review process we have in the NHL is the War Room in Toronto.  A small room, only 12 x 36 feet, with TV’s, DVRs, Rosters, and every game being played in the NHL that night.  I KNOW – sounds like heaven to me too!!!  The job of the War Room is to be on hand for every game should there be a reviewable situation, usually a goal will be reviewed to verify the puck fully crossed the line.  Other duties are reviewing illegal hits (hits to the head and such) along with a review of how the on ice officials call the game, Yes – on ice officials are reviewed each game them officiate.  I found this video of the Toronto War Room to give you an idea of the layout and equipment …

On Tuesday Oct 26th … there was an instance in Toronto that has some GM’s thinking about adding a “coaches challenge” to the agenda for the November GM’s meeting.  Florida Panthers GM Dale Tallon appears to have the support of 14 other GM’s in the NHL that want to discuss adding this ability to the bench.

As in any fast paced sport, calls will be missed and with the magic of instant replay we as viewers have the advantage of seeing what was missed or not called.  Keep in mind, hockey is a sport that is non stop and always fast.  So, to have the War Room as a back up is a good thing … and most of the time, will slow things down to make sure the call on the ice was correct.  You see this when the referee skates to the side and puts on the headphones.

Dale Tallon and 14 other GM’s in the NHL would like to give the coaches the ability to call on Toronto to make a call.  Tallon is upset, and rightly so, because of the horrible interference from Colton Orr that resulted in a Toronto goal … you can see that play here!  Wait for it … you’ll see it.

So – what do you think.  The Referee missed that blatant call … and according to the rules, Toronto could not review it because it was clearly a goal, however, it was a goal that was the result of a penalty.  Tallon says because of mistakes like that – Coaches should have the ability to bring Toronto into the mix.

This will be an interesting discussion and an even interesting decision.  If it is allowed for Toronto to expand their reviewable guidelines, then where would they stop?  So many ways video review could be used … and one concern of mine is … how will this affect the play and flow of the game?  Would the challenging coach have repercussions if the challenge is lost.  A couple ideas were the forfeiture of a time out … or maybe even a bench minor 2 minute penalty assessed to the challenging coach.

Will coaches be able to challenge penalties or missed calls?  How far back would a challenge be allowed – If a hooking call which ended up as a turnover and on the odd man rush the team scored … would the challenge be able to rewind back to the hook?  I would be very easy for a coach to use this challenge as a tactical rest for his line.  If this does happen, I am sure there will be very strict guidelines on when and how coaches could use this.  We all have our issues with the on ice officals and the calls that they allow and do not allow.  If we are going to consider a Coaches Challenge … I would really like to see the guidelines

Anyway … check back now and then, and when you do, leave a comment and say hey!

Minor Penalty (2 minutes)
Any player, other than the goalie, will have to be off the ice for 2 minutes without a substitute player in their spot.

A “short-handed” situation happens when one team does not have the same amount of players as the other team on the ice.  The team with the least amount of players is “short handed.”

If the team with more players scores during the 2 minute penalty … the penalty is over and the player is allowed to return to the ice.  The “short handed” situation is over.

Bench Minor Penalty (2 minutes)
Same as a Minor Penalty – however, instead of the penalty being for a specific player.  It is usually called for a specific reason and any player can serve the penalty in the penalty box.

Double Minor Penalties (4 minutes)
Any player, other than the goalie, will have to be off the ice for 4 minutes without a substitute player in their spot.  The offending team is serving two, two minute penalties consecutively.

If the other team scores during the double minor, one of the penalties is canceled, however, the other 2 minute penalty will still need to be satisfied.

Coincidental Penalties (various times)
This happens when a player on each team receives a penalty resulting from one incident.  The two teams playing will then play 4 on 4 (4 players on the ice from each team).  Since neither team is short handed, if a goal is scored the penalty is not ended.  The players serving these penalties will also need to remain in the penalty box until the next stoppage of play after their penalty has been satisfied.

In this video you can see how there were many many many coincidental penalties called … mostly fighting and game misconduct, none the less, this is a good example of how coincidental penalties are ruled.

Major Penalty (5 minutes)
This is a more severe penalty and needs more severe circumstances to be awarded.  However, when a Major penalty is handed out – the offending player will be ruled off the ice for five minutes.  The player will remain in the penalty box for the full 5 minutes, even if a goal is scored.

When one player receives a Major and Minor penalty at the same time, the major penalty will be served first.

Misconduct Penalty (10 minutes)
Any player receiving a misconduct penalty will be ruled off the ice for 10 minutes.  The coach is able to replace that player with another player immediately.  This does not result in a short handed situation.  The player receiving the Misconduct penalty will remain in the penalty box until the first stoppage in play after the penalty has been satisfied.

Once we reach this level of penalties – the NHL introduces fines associated with each penalty.  According to the rules, any player receiving a misconduct penalty will also be fined one hundred dollars($100).  All fines are paid to the NHL Players Relief Fund.

Game Misconduct Penalty (Remainder of the game)
Any player receiving a Game Misconduct will immediately be removed from the ice and not allowed to play the rest of the game.  A substitute player will be allowed to replace the player at the same time.

The player will be fined $200 and the incident will be reviewed by the commissioner who will have the authority to levy further fines or suspensions.

For instance – Daniel Carcillio was given a cross checking penalty (2 min), instigating penalty (2 min), fighting penalty (5 min) and a Game Misconduct penalty in this video – after review, the league suspended him 4 games for his actions.

Match Penalty (Remainder of the game)
Just like Game Misconduct, a Match Penalty is ruled and the offending player must leave the ice immediately and report to the dressing room for the duration of the game.  A match penalty is ruled when a player deliberately attempts to injur or deliberately injurs an opponent during play.

Penalty Shot (One on One shot on goal)
A penalty shot is awarded when a scoring opportunity is lost due to a foul committed by the defending team.  If a player is carrying the puck into the offensive zone and there are no defensive players between him and the goalie – if a defending player causes the puck carrier to lose a shot because of a penalty (minor or major) – the player carrying the puck will get a penalty shot.

NHL Rules state:

There are four (4) specific conditions that must be met in order for the Referee to award a penalty shot for a player being fouled from behind.  They are:

(i)  The infraction must have taken place in the neutral zone or attacking zone, (i.e. over the puck carrier’s own blue line);

(ii)  The infraction must have been committed from behind;

(iii)  The player in possession and control (or, in the judgment of the Referee, clearly would have obtained possession and control of the puck) must have been denied a reasonable chance to score (the fact that he got a shot off does not automatically eliminate this play from the penalty shot consideration criteria. If the foul was from behind and he was denied a “more” reasonable scoring opportunity due to the foul, then the penalty shot should be awarded);

(iv)  The player in possession and control (or, in the judgment of the Referee, clearly would have obtained possession and control of the puck) must have had no opposing player between himself and the goalkeeper.

Gross Misconduct Penalty
This rule is exactly like the Game Misconduct penalty – however, this rule covers players, coaches, trainers and managers.  Anyone receiving this penalty will be suspended for the duration of the game and fined $200.  The case will also be referred to the NHL commissioner for further action.

Anything I miss … please, feel free to add your comments below.

Roughing is a punching motion with the hand or fist, with or without the glove on the hand, normally directed at the head or face of an opponent.  Roughing is a minor altercation that is not worthy of a major penalty to either participant. (An altercation is a situation involving two players, including goalkeepers, with at least one to be penalized).

Basically the roughing call is the “catch all” call for the NHL.  If the ref can not make out what has happened in an altercation – He’ll call roughing.  Mostly it will be when you see players get in a skirmish, but not really a “fight” … however, you will see roughing called when there is a “punching motion.”
*note – an actual punch can result in a Fighting call even if the player punching misses the opponent.

Roughing is another one of those fun “interpretation” calls.  In a game that encourages physical contact, this is a call that allows the refs to keep the game in control.  Ref’s use this call to set the boundaries in the level of hitting and physicality.  Once a Roughing call is made – the players on the ice take note of what happened and why and they use that as what the refs will call an “acceptable” level of physical play.

Now … all I need to do is make my wrist heal quicker!

Something Came In The Mail Today!

I am hoping that it just might be ...

MY NEW RBK 4K Acuflex STICK!!!

I am sure most of us remember the devastating hit Brandon Sutter took from Doug Weight (and recently the hit Richards hit on David Booth) … Here is an example of a horrendous hit to the head :

So … to get back to the topic of “Charging” … Here are a couple examples, watch how the players doing the hitting are adding a bit more emphasis on the hit, to give it a “degree of violence.”

Steve Downie charges Dean McAmmond

Steve Ott charges Gregory Campbell

NHL Rule book states:

A minor or major penalty shall be imposed on a player or goalkeeper who skates or jumps into, or charges an opponent in any manner.  Charging shall mean the actions of a player or goalkeeper who, as a result of distance traveled, shall violently check an opponent in any manner. A “charge” may be the result of a check into the boards, into the goal frame or in open ice.
Note: A goalkeeper is NOT “fair game” just because he is outside the goal crease area. The appropriate penalty should be assessed in every case where an opposing player makes unnecessary contact with a goalkeeper. However, incidental contact, at the discretion of the Referee, will be permitted when the goalkeeper is in the act of playing the puck outside his goal crease provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.

Hopefully the league and owners and GM’s will be able to come up with some type of guideline that will help the officials with these type of calls … however, when you are dealing with the “interpretation” of a rule, its hard to put something in writing.  I believe, what is needed to reduce these types of incidents, is a higher level of accountability between players.  I am not talking about goons mixing it up on the ice … but players being accountable to themselves and their team mates by playing a respectable game is the first step!  Then … if that does not work … the league should fine the player, Coach, GM and Owner – I think that will wake them up!

Boarding is a very serious penalty and can sometimes be missed or misscalled by an official.  “Boarding” is the action of any player who checks an opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to be thrown violently in the boards.  Now, if you have watched 5 minutes of hockey ever in your life, you are probably saying right now “But wait – they are ALWAYS crashing each other into the boards!”  Well – here are two videos you can watch that should show the difference between a good hard check into the boards and an illegal hit known as Boarding.

Darcy Tucker gets boarded by Jordin Tootoo

Milan Lucic checks Mike Van Ryn through the glass

The NHL Rulebook definition is:

A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player or goalkeeper who checks an opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to be thrown violently in the boards. The severity of the penalty, based upon the degree of violence of the impact with the boards, shall be at the discretion of the Referee.

There is an enormous amount of judgment involved in the application of this rule by the Referees. The onus is on the player (or goalkeeper) applying the check to ensure his opponent is not in a vulnerable position and if so, he must avoid the contact. However, there is also a responsibility on the player with the puck to avoid placing himself in a dangerous and vulnerable position. This balance must be considered by the Referees when applying this rule.

This is another one of those “soft” rules that rely on the position and judgement of the officials.  My general rule of thumb for this penalty is if one player is hit on the numbers (from behind) and thrown into the boards (which would mean he was at least a foot or two away from the boards) violently … then Boarding should be called.

The penalty for this could be a minor (2 minutes) or major (5 minutes) … a Match Penalty can also be handed down if the officials belive the action was a deliberate attempt to harm the one being hit.

I made my selections and emailed Schrembs the list … thinking it was fun and moving on with my life I received notice a few weeks ago that I WON!  After I picked myself up off the floor, I dusted off my shirt, thanked Schrembs (and the League) for my winnings and patiently awaited the arrival of my winnings!

TA DA … today, I signed for a box that was addressed to Bill Bristerzorz and it was sent to me from Brian Schremzorz!!!  IT WAS TRUE … I am a winner!

Here are the pictures to prove it … I would like to thank Brian Schrembs and everyone who LOST for this win … I would like to thank the NHL for being such a Kick Ass league providing us fans with a Kick Ass sport … and above all … I would like to thank ME … for being so Bad Ass, I picked where everyone was going!!! *smile*

Enjoy the pictures … I know I’ll be enjoying the jersey!

Opening the box - it was like Christmas in November!

Schrembs even included a hand written note - <3 Schrembszorz

He packed it with care ... and eco friendly plastic bags!

... and even more eco friendly bags - Happy Earf Day!

I even got MORE than I expected - Yay Me!

If you listen really close ... you can hear angels singing (and me laughing 'cause I WON)!!!

The man ... holding Lemieux's jersey ... ok, I think I am going a little overboard here!

Good To Go!!!

Thank You Schrembs ... THANK YOU!!!

Back in the Rangers locker room, Michael Del Zotto is the second youngest D-Man in the Rangers history and the youngest ever to play on opening night.  Michael has impressed everyone with his skill and passion – born in 1990, this kid has 3 goals and 5 assists in his first 8 games.  I am looking forward to watching him mature into a power house blueliner.

Marian Gaborik, the Ranger’s biggest offseason addition, has now recorded at least one point in all eight games this season.  Gaborik tied Dave Creighton for the longest point streak by a new Ranger to begin his first season with the club.  Creighton also notched a point in his first eight games to start the 1955-56 campaign.  Not a bad way to start out in with Torts on the bench.

Suggested Pairing : Brooklyn East India Pale Ale … for the smooth yet strong flavor of an IPA without the major hoppy bite!

Brooklyn East India Pale Ale