With 1:11 remaining in the third period of Game 7 against Buffalo, Darius Kasparitis did something unexpected to halt the Sabres' momentum. The defenseman for the Pittsburgh Penguins tossed a caught puck into the crowd, blatantly delaying the game. The Penguins should have been assessed a minor penalty that would have carried into overtime, giving Buffalo a strong opportunity to finish the series in their favor. Instead, on-ice officials simply grabbed another puck and, with 13:01 remaining in the extra period, Kasparitis notched the game winner for Pittsburgh.
That was 2001. Fifteen years later, things are a bit different in the NHL. After the 2004-05 lockout season, the league decided to revisit a number of rules, including the then-current Delay of Game call. The rule now assessed an automatic penalty to any team that shot the puck over the glass from their own defensive zone. It's unlikely that the league's new rule came about as a result of the Kasparitis play, but it's the type of action that the NHL should have been more concerned with preventing. Instead, ten seasons after its implementation, the "Puck-over-the-Glass" penalty continues to unfairly plague teams, critically impacting important games.
The problem with the current version of the rule is that it penalizes players for something that's incidental more often than not. While other incidental penalties exist (like high-sticking), those calls are centered on player safety. For fans, it can be frustrating to see a player called for high-sticking because they didn't have control over their stick, but it's at least understandable from a safety standpoint. The Puck-over-the-Glass penalty tends to punish a team simply for the sake of punishing them.
The worst part about the rule is that
a sudden bad break can completely turn the tide of a game in one team's favor.
Since the 2005-06 season, teams have often found themselves down two players,
after an attempted zone clear goes awry. Too many games have unfortunately been
decided by a two-man-advantage that resulted from that call.
Unfortunately, these types of situations have affected the post-season as well. On paper, Game 4 of the series this season between the San Jose Sharks and the St. Louis Blues looked like a lopsided 6-3 affair. The reality is a bit different, however. Shortly after San Jose scored their first goal, putting them down 4-1, the Sharks accidentally fired the puck over the glass, resulting in a penalty. The Blues scored just seconds into that power play, robbing the Sharks of their momentum and giving St. Louis a nearly insurmountable 5-1 lead. Take away the goal scored on the Sharks' Delay of Game penalty and the final score looks like a bit less of a blow-out. San Jose still went on to win that particular series, but the point remains that an unintentional action may have tipped the scales in that particular playoff contest. And it's far from the first time.
Like this year's Coach's Challenge addition, there's good intention behind the Delay of Game rule. Kasparitis' actions back in 2001 prove that the league should have an extra check in place. What the league should do is make the Puck-over-the-Glass call discretionary to the officials. Rather than automatically penalize players for an accident that harms no one, the officials should make a determination regarding whether or not there was intent to delay the game. Since play has been stopped anyway, this would likely have a minor impact on the flow of the game.
If the NHL wanted to avoid situations like Kasparitis' play in the 2001 Stanley Cup playoffs, the Puck-over-the-Glass rule wasn't the way to go about it. It's a well-intentioned rule, but one that has hurt teams far more than it has helped. This season's Stanley Cup Playoffs have been directly impacted by the penalty. After ten years, it's time to take a good look at how the rule does and doesn't work, rather than allow it to continue to impact the flow of the game.
Unfortunately, these types of situations have affected the post-season as well. On paper, Game 4 of the series this season between the San Jose Sharks and the St. Louis Blues looked like a lopsided 6-3 affair. The reality is a bit different, however. Shortly after San Jose scored their first goal, putting them down 4-1, the Sharks accidentally fired the puck over the glass, resulting in a penalty. The Blues scored just seconds into that power play, robbing the Sharks of their momentum and giving St. Louis a nearly insurmountable 5-1 lead. Take away the goal scored on the Sharks' Delay of Game penalty and the final score looks like a bit less of a blow-out. San Jose still went on to win that particular series, but the point remains that an unintentional action may have tipped the scales in that particular playoff contest. And it's far from the first time.
Like this year's Coach's Challenge addition, there's good intention behind the Delay of Game rule. Kasparitis' actions back in 2001 prove that the league should have an extra check in place. What the league should do is make the Puck-over-the-Glass call discretionary to the officials. Rather than automatically penalize players for an accident that harms no one, the officials should make a determination regarding whether or not there was intent to delay the game. Since play has been stopped anyway, this would likely have a minor impact on the flow of the game.
If the NHL wanted to avoid situations like Kasparitis' play in the 2001 Stanley Cup playoffs, the Puck-over-the-Glass rule wasn't the way to go about it. It's a well-intentioned rule, but one that has hurt teams far more than it has helped. This season's Stanley Cup Playoffs have been directly impacted by the penalty. After ten years, it's time to take a good look at how the rule does and doesn't work, rather than allow it to continue to impact the flow of the game.
No comments:
Post a Comment