Видео

You said a whole lot of garbage. A 1 minute power play? Shut uppppp

No

Just dropping in to say fuck Tampa <3

I mean I've got no issue with EBUGs, if they're selected to play and choose to do it then aye, let them. Besides, ya it might end up being an issue but it also might end up being an amazing situation for the team and the random who got picked.

Why it took you 14:53 to say “yes, absolutely”?.. Cronin is a disgrace to the team, the only progress there is Jackson LaCombe.

I generally am against rule changes but total agreement on the offside review and shooting the puck out of the rink. Control your stick and don't do that.

Amazing analysis, factual, visual, digestable.

Killer breakdown!

I wish you had checked +/- ratings for left and right shooters. I always wondered why I shoot left. It's weird because if I pick up a golf club, I shoot right. I felt like the right shooters were the most aggressive offensive players, less team-minded, and completely focused on scoring.

I know you said NO private sections but you do have to remember Dylan Larkin.........The top speed ever recorded by an NHL player was set by Dylan Larkin, who achieved a speed of 44.7 miles per hour during the NHL All-Star Game in 2011, This incredible feat broke the previous record of 44 miles per hour, held by Andrew Cogliano.

You earned a like for asking to allow the Sean Avery play 😂

5- Now you talking! --- I would go for they can't ice the puck on the PK. It makes no sense that a team who just got a penalty and couldn't ice the puck at 5v5, now can just ice the puck at 4v5. It would bring goals up and it would not take away anything from the game. Can't turn off icings for the special teams, it would change the game and the PPs too much. Turning on icings for PK teams is WINNER! 6- I don't like it, it's the NHL not a beer league. --- I don't think this would work. It's hockey, not football. The pace of the game and action is 10x that of football. It doesn't matter if it starts in the center after each period because the puck can cross the ice twice under 5-6 seconds. I love the traditional center ice face-offs at the beginning of each period. There's only 3 per game (when there's no OT), and I want to keep it that way. HARD NO. 7- Here I almost agree. --- Personally, it would be W-L-T, but that is not what we're speaking about here. I would give a penalty shot if the penalty is a major or the kind of penalty that someone intentionally gets because there's no time left. Those should be a penalty shot, but not added PP time on the clock. IT'S HOCKEY NOT SOCCER! If there's an accidental tripping and there's 30 seconds left to the game, just too bad. I don't think we should start playing with the clock at all. Either penalties are penalty shots in OT, or don't touch it. The real problem in OT is the boring 3v3 but that's another debate. 8- Hard no. --- The goalie's face is below the cross-bar, so it's not a high stick. The intention of the player who's doing the Michigan is to score a goal not to hurt the goalie. He's doing the move when the goalie's face isn't there, so if the goalie chooses his face rather than his shoulder or blocker to stop the Michigan, that's on the goalie. Unless the goalie already has his face there before the swipe of the movement happens I wouldn't punish it. HOWEVER, if a player attempts the Michigan and there's a defender close by, I would allow them to hack at the player's stick, (which is probably already allowed), as long as the D doesn't hit the player on the gloves. Fair is fair, don't goof bouncing the puck on your stick too many times because I think the other team has every right to try to hack your stick down or puck, THOUGH like I've said, at their risk of hitting your gloves and getting a penalty. 9- Hmm it depends. --- HOWEVER, don't make it an automatic. This one of the few ambiguous elements that you can leave to the refs. They will make mistakes, but they are on the ice, so they can assess the strength and intention of the player way better than people in the crowd or on TV. As a player, I can tell you the best angle for that is on the ice. They can keep the automatic penalty in defensive zone and add referee's call in the offensive zone when it's intentional. Ambiguous but perfect. We have referees, might as well use them since they're the ones who are in the best position (being on the ice) to assess intentional from non-intentional. The irony is you want to get rid of ambiguous calls when this one here doesn't take away from the game, but the other one earlier did. It is what it is. 10- Well, yes and no. --- All healthy scratched players are usually present with their team in the arena, so if a player is injured and cannot return, I suppose they could tell one of them to get dressed up rather than having them already dressed up. That way it gives time to the player who's injured to 100% confirm that he isn't returning, and you don't have a guy that will sit there and not play for the whole game like the back-up goalie. We don't want a star getting injured, and then a healthy scratch replacing him only to learn that the star returned and couldn't return to the game because they put the healthy scratch in too early. We agree I hope that we don't want that F up to happen! And of course, if a player gets suspended, the team can't replace him. We agree on that.

1- Too garage league-ish. --- What's the pros, giving the HC a choice? All I see here is cons. It would be terrible if a HC chose a PP and his team didn't score even if it would be fairly rare. Everyone would complain that they should have chosen the penalty shot, and on the the flip if the HC chose the penalty shot like he should and the player doesn't score, then it's going to fool people that the HC should've chosen the PP. If you give 2 options, it means both of them can be better than the other depending on circumstances. Picking the PP would be a bad choice 99% of the time, because except when the HC makes a mistake, no HC would ever choose the PP unless his team is winning by a few or several goals with still a lot of time on the clock only to use the opportunity to kill time or something like that. What's the point of making a choice between A and B? The point is always to get an edge! This is the classic example of if it isn't broken don't fix it. 2- Your take here is reasonable. --- However, I disagree, I think that the reason why there's 2mins and 4mins is because sometimes you really just graze the player and virtually 100% of those cases end up in 2mins. I understand that you're asking yourself what's the difference between blood or no blood it's still a high stick, well the difference is what I've just told you. They made it that way because almost all one-handed soft grazing accidents all end up in 2mins whereas the majority of 2-handed sloppy accidents are more reckless and result 3x out of 4 with some blood. If you think it doesn't make sense, or that I don't actually address the> what's the difference between blood or no blood it's still a high stick, I will say it again. It's not a blood or no blood penalty, it's technically a one-handed soft high stick and a two-handed sharp high stick which both of them have a high % of blood or no blood respectively. I would personally change the rule though that it doesn't say blood so it wouldn't be so ambiguous and big hits with no bloods who give the receiving player a bruise would be counted as a major 4mins. I would even let the referees choose between what is a half-reckless too hard attempt and hit and what is a complete almost unharmful accidental graze. 3- Hard no here for me. --- What is a clean hit is too ambiguous to be called by the referee. It will amplify the drama when they make mistakes, and they'll make more of them because they do not have access to all the camera angles. That would just put oil on fire. If the teams want to scrap, let them scrap, they'll pay the price by giving the other team a PP. If player A hits player B, and someone wants to fight with player A, then maybe there are players who would disagree with you and the ref. They're going to lose the control of a game and you'll get a brawl. I'm going to love it, but you won't, so come to think of it, why not? I mean, I am kidding of course. I'd rather have a brawl pop up for something else than the referees losing the game. You're trying to punish everything, put down your leash, they are not dogs, let the boys play hockey. You cannot judge if a hit is clean by all standards and metrics, there will always have ambiguous elements. The lesser the refs have to deal with stuff like that the better. 4- This I used to agree. --- For a long time I thought it was a stupid rule, though I understood why people felt like it was misconduct. I just personally felt like it was a bit excessive. If you have Chara do that, then what's the other team going to do? They stopped it right away before it became a problem. For once, their ruling was perfect. I wouldn't be saying that if we had seen players being called when they got their back towards in front of the goalie because they have their arms up for a second. It directly eliminating the type of view blocking they didn't want. Blocking the view of the goalie is part of the game, but you have to do it fairly, and what Avery did wasn't fair. So the NHL did the right thing, it did not take anything away from the game.

Being short is f-ing depressing man

They need to fix the goalie interference. Seems that the video reviews always gets it wrong. Players let themselves pushed into goalies, push defenceman into goalies, crash the net and argue they ran out of room. The instigator rule is not used except to get the call wrong. So many players get jumped now for clean hits. Should make one of the team roster player dress up for emergency goalie.

lmao this video is terrible you left out the panthers

you cant blame Chicago for getting the first by tanking. They werent even the worst team. You can blame Bettman for sure if he rigged it though.

13:24

I hate watching powerplays in overtime - I think all penalties in OT should be an automatic penalty shot. Double-minors and majors could be 2 or 3 shots if necessary.

a lot of these are dogwater, but 13 is good.

When I played college, Ovechkin was in his prime scoring 60 goals a season. Even when he was doing that, it wasn't even in conversation that anyone could break Gretzky's record because it wasn't even worth considering. And here we are, 10 years after I played my last college game, Ovi is 16 away from doing what was considered, even until very recently, impossible.

Bring back the Blackout Ovi visor. A total blackout fit (visor, helmet, screaming eagles) night would be menacing and insane

Wow! The story, the editing, the stats… that was all put together so beautifully Glad I’ve subscribed Almost in tears. I paused and replayed multiple parts of the video… just hit so hard Well done, Sir!

Great video!!!!

The Avery Rule needs to stay the way it is.

Right handed right shot here. Same as wielding a bat or golf clubs. Admittedly I run chainsaws with dominant hans on throttle. ..

For your suggestion regarding offside challenges, 20 seconds of zone time seems more like an arbitrary cutoff than any sort of happy anything. Make it so if the defending team gains possession of the puck any challenges are nullified -- much more black and white.

Disagree on the michigan one. If a goalie blocks the net with his face then why would that be a penalty? If a goalie tries to freeze the puck by laying on it with his head you arent gonna penalize the player for hitting his helmet trying to dislodge the puck

3:45 if penalties extended regulation as well it would sure change the landscape of the league. Garland wouldn't have been tackling McDavid

I love when uneducated people with failed RUclips channels think they are better at creating rules tan the major sports leagues.

Boarding should be a 5 minute major minimum

For what it’s worth. I started playing in the 80’s as a right shooting right winger. (I am right hand dominant) As I got older in college I moved to defense and felt way more comfortable as a right hand shooting defenseman play LEFT SIDE. I felt my angle to the net was better shooting from the blue line.

Nah most of these are L takes. Only change id do is get rid of shootouts, and change how standings points are awarded to incentivize scoring and loser points. And completely tinted visors arent fair to the goalies

Nah most of these are L takes. Only change id do is get rid of shootouts, and change how standings points are awarded to incentivize scoring and loser points. And completely tinted visors arent fair to the goalies

Nah most of these are L takes. Only change id do is get rid of shootouts, and change how standings points are awarded to incentivize scoring and loser points

Rule 13: AGREE 100%!!!!!!!!! It is the most annoying rule rn, imo.

I would get rid of the trapezoid. That’s been pissing me off from the start. Let the skilled puck handling goalies shine. Let the one who suck at it learn the hard way.

Bro has something wrong with statistics since you should still have a representation of the whole population in Hockey you'd expect the exact amount of left handed ppl in the nhl

Bruh.

The payoff at 13:24 is just chefskiss. Not to mention, in his age 39 season, while suffering the worst (by far) injury of his career, is scoring at a 56-goal pace. With all the pressure surrounding the goal chase, it's unbelievable. There's a very small number of truly unique players in the history of this game, and he most definitely is on that list.

I can't stand the draft lottery it's so stupid to me that the worst team in the NHL can be screwed over from getting the 1st pick from random chance is stupid it makes the worst teams stay the worse longer in my opinion because they don't get the best picks they should get

How much of this was based upon outgrowing ones stick (or stealing your little brother's)? Dave Keon had a hockey card with Shoots L + R. He also had a shorter stick which enabled him to shift sides without the buttend bumping into his stomach.

As an IIHF hockey fan, here are some things about the international game that might interest you... #1 - if a team is awarded a penalty shot, anyone from the team can be elected to take the shot; it does not have to be the fouled player. #7 - the only thing I don't like about this is that it sounds like a team can just keep taking penalties to extend a game. #11 - in IIHF play, you can have 3 goalies on your roster. However, whoever you list as the third one for a given game, can only dress and come into the game if your starter and backup are both injured. #12 - this is legal as long as you didn't use your head to propel the puck into the net. Based on 8:54, the first goal shown wouldn't count, but it looks like the second one would.

I’m right handed… but shoot left handed. With skateboarding I pushed Mongo, until I taught myself to push regular

Potential rule change: Goalies must go to the bench and swap with a bk up goalie if they commit a penalty. They can then return to the net after the next stoppage of play after the penalty expires or is scored on. A substitute will still sit in the box to avoid two goalies on the ice at the same time at the expiring of said penalty time when the box opens.

Great moment at 2:54, Hamilton new what was coming

I’m left-handed and shoot with my dominant on the bottom. Opposite than what is being said here. And i’m ambidextrous but in sports I throw lefty. Lefty-handed hitters (most of them) have their dominant hand on top. Right?

great video

with 13, I would go further and suggest judging it by the spirit over the law, if a player is offside and it's not called, and they never actually got involved with the play, it shouldn't count as offside. like if they were to skate in offside but just sit at the point and the goal is scored 5 seconds later, they shouldn't be counted as part of the play. Same with players getting off the ice in the second period when they can technically put the play offside if they still have a skate on the ice.

Adopt the PWHL jailbreak rule (a shorthanded goal terminates the penalty), and "no escape rule" (when a penalty is called against a team their players on the ice must stay on the ice at the puck drop, similar to an icing)