AJgoal Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 The Joe Malone thread got me thinking about some of the things that have changed over the years that might have made Hockey "purists" scream about. Found a neat article http://www.rauzulusstreet.com/hockey/nhlhistory/nhlrules.html which detailed some of the changes. I, for one, didn't know that the game started out with seven players on a side. Some other interesting rules: Originally, a goalie served his own penalties. In 1939, the substitute player was granted the use of the goalie's gloves and stick. In 1933, they restricted the number of players in the defensive zone to three, including the goaltender. Lots of neat stuff showing how the game has morphed over the years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 I, for one, didn't know that the game started out with seven players on a side. The 7th man was called a rover. He basically went wherever on the ice he saw fit to go in the current situation on the ice. I've seen the play of the rover compared somewhat to an extra attacker. The NHA/NHL did away with the position when they concluded it was slowing down the games. When the NHL removed the rover, the PCHA/PCHL still had it. The PCHA allowed goalies to leave their feet before the NHL did too. That kind of thing made for some interesting rules for the Stanley Cup Finals matchups of those days. When a game was played in an NHL arena, they used NHL rules, and when it was played in a PCHA arena, they used PCHA rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted August 28, 2014 Author Share Posted August 28, 2014 The 7th man was called a rover. He basically went wherever on the ice he saw fit to go in the current situation on the ice. I've seen the play of the rover compared somewhat to an extra attacker. The NHA/NHL did away with the position when they concluded it was slowing down the games. When the NHL removed the rover, the PCHA/PCHL still had it. The PCHA allowed goalies to leave their feet before the NHL did too. That kind of thing made for some interesting rules for the Stanley Cup Finals matchups of those days. When a game was played in an NHL arena, they used NHL rules, and when it was played in a PCHA arena, they used PCHA rules. So kind of like the World Series and interleague baseball. Huh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JR Ewing Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Rover: the position currently played by Justin Schultz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 So kind of like the World Series and interleague baseball. Huh. That's a pretty accurate comparison. There was even some controversy over which rules should be used in game 5 of the 1919 Finals thanks to a tie in game 4. Interestingly enough, the fact that a tie was allowed helped play a role in the Cup not being awarded that year. No playoff ties is another rule change that I didn't see mentioned in that list. I'd like to know when that was done away with once and for all. In 1927, the first year that the Stanley Cup was the NHL championship trophy, the Senators defeated the Bruins 2-0 in a best of 3 series that went 4 games because of 2 ties. There haven't been any Finals ties since then, but I haven't researched enough yet to know if playoff ties were still possible after that year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted August 28, 2014 Author Share Posted August 28, 2014 It's there: 1947-48 - Goal awarded when a player with the puck has an open net to shoot at and a thrown stick prevents the shot on goal. Major penalty to any player who throws his stick in any zone other than defending zone. If a stick is thrown by a player in his defending zone but the thrown stick is not considered to have prevented a goal, a penalty shot is awarded. All playoff games played until a winner determined, with 20-minute sudden-death overtime periods separated by 10-minute intermissions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted August 28, 2014 Author Share Posted August 28, 2014 Rover: the position currently played by Justin Schultz. So back in the day, the Rover brought the other guys popcorn? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 It's there: 1947-48 - Goal awarded when a player with the puck has an open net to shoot at and a thrown stick prevents the shot on goal. Major penalty to any player who throws his stick in any zone other than defending zone. If a stick is thrown by a player in his defending zone but the thrown stick is not considered to have prevented a goal, a penalty shot is awarded. All playoff games played until a winner determined, with 20-minute sudden-death overtime periods separated by 10-minute intermissions. Okay, my bad. I don't know how I missed that since I searched the page for overtime... Another Dr Pepper, please! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Interesting on this whole Rover thing - isn't that really, originally at least, a football term?Anyway, it reminds me of the similarity between a faceoff specialist (aka a "centre") and a long-snapper... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaGreatGazoo Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 2014: The Warning Track. How long until this becomes a "No-hit" zone in youth hockey? 1 year, maybe 2? http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/does-hockey-need--warning-track--to-prevent-devastating-injuries-130606231.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammer2 Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 @DaGreatGazoo I'm usually against anything that leads to the pussification of our sport, but in this instance, if it stops one kid from dying or being in a wheel chair for life, I'm more than ok with it. The can learn how to finish the checks when they get into the more competitive leagues when they get older. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 @DaGreatGazoo I'm usually against anything that leads to the pussification of our sport, but in this instance, if it stops one kid from dying or being in a wheel chair for life, I'm more than ok with it. The can learn how to finish the checks when they get into the more competitive leagues when they get older. They're already removing checking from the youth game: http://unitedstatesofhockey.com/2013/05/31/peewee-body-checking-ban-why-hockey-canada-usa-hockey-are-getting-it-right/http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/eye-on-hockey/22302086/hockey-canada-votes-to-ban-body-checking-at-pee-wee-level Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaGreatGazoo Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 This is gonna sound bad. And with respects to Jack Jablonski-and others-, they could be changing a basic principal of the sport because a few people got hurt. And yes-it could be my kids. They've both gotten smoked plenty of times. And several were into the boards from behind. Then again, how many thousands of kids play hockey a year and DON'T get hurt. To me this is NOT about those kids, or preventing injuries--it's about preventing lawsuits, and as I type this I realize that's probably why I hate the change and the possibilities it opens up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaGreatGazoo Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 They're already removing checking from the youth game: http://unitedstatesofhockey.com/2013/05/31/peewee-body-checking-ban-why-hockey-canada-usa-hockey-are-getting-it-right/http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/eye-on-hockey/22302086/hockey-canada-votes-to-ban-body-checking-at-pee-wee-levelSlight correction-they've already removed it. My kids played at those levels when those rules were implemented. I didn't like the change then-I don't like them now. What creates force in a hit? Speed and mass, correct? I failed Physics but I think that's basically correct. So--let's put off checking until kids are bigger and faster and way more likely to cause injury when delivering a hit. I propose going the other way. Introduce hitting gradually at a much younger age so kids learn it properly. How to give a hit and how to TAKE a hit-even more specifically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Slight correction-they've already removed it. My kids played at those levels when those rules were implemented. I didn't like the change then-I don't like them now.What creates force in a hit? Speed and mass, correct? I failed Physics but I think that's basically correct.So--let's put off checking until kids are bigger and faster and way more likely to cause injury when delivering a hit. I propose going the other way. Introduce hitting gradually at a much younger age so kids learn it properly. How to give a hit and how to TAKE a hit-even more specifically. The U.S., Canada, or both? I agree. It don't think it should be a part of the game in the very earliest years, but your plan to graduate it in is, in my mind, an excellent one. It's always going to be a physical game at higher levels, and they should be prepared for it. I don't want to see kids get hurt, and teaching them how to give and take hits a little at a time could be a great way to avoid those injuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Btw, as an aside, does anyone know what the current Hockey Canada regulations are for checking in youth hockey? I may need to know that for my books at some point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 To me this is NOT about those kids, or preventing injuries--it's about preventing lawsuits, and as I type this I realize that's probably why I hate the change and the possibilities it opens up You might be right, although I do think a lot of what is happening around the concussion issue and hitting is being driven by parents who genuinely want to prevent little Billy from getting his noggin lodged loose. I'm ok with the warning track idea I guess - at least they got the colour right But much of the discourse around hitting - especially the move to raise the age when hitting is allowed - is based on a false economy. Delaying the age at which point you can hit (and be hit) just ensures that the first time you get your block knocked off, it will be a doozy. I think of Eric Lindros (I blame him, actually), because Eric basically played in a de facto no hitting game as a kid. He was so much bigger that he never had to worry about being hit, so he didn't. He skated around with his head down. And we know where that predictably lead. It is utter lunacy.Maybe at lesser levels this is fine, but no hitting at elite levels will only lead to more stretchers on the ice later, not less./rant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaGreatGazoo Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 US--they banned checking below the bantam level several years ago. Not sure on Canada--one of our northern friends can jump in. I don't think they made any changes, but I could be wrong--See my Nashville in East comment. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 If one of our northern US--they banned checking below the bantam level several years ago.Not sure on Canada--one of our northern friends can jump in. I don't think they made any changes, but I could be wrong--See my Nashville in East comment. LOL LOL! If one of our "northern friends" can chime in, that would be great. My characters are from Saskatchewan, and the boy main character is a physical shutdown defenseman. In a scene in my current work, he dramatically blocks a shot as time expires to save a win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammer2 Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Yep, Hockey Canada made the changes more than a year ago. They really had no choice, (although I do agree) political correctness did some actual good this time out. http://www.hockeycanada.ca/en-ca/news/agm-concludes-in-charlottetown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojo1917 Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 Slight correction-they've already removed it. My kids played at those levels when those rules were implemented. I didn't like the change then-I don't like them now.What creates force in a hit? Speed and mass, correct? I failed Physics but I think that's basically correct.So--let's put off checking until kids are bigger and faster and way more likely to cause injury when delivering a hit. I propose going the other way. Introduce hitting gradually at a much younger age so kids learn it properly. How to give a hit and how to TAKE a hit-even more specifically.I think the physiology of the developing brain needs to be (and has been ) taken into consideration with regard to hitting.the brain isn't really done cooking until we're 25ish. even though the physics of mite players may not seem like a lot of force comparatively the coup contrecoup injury can still occur. So that kind of internal injury (it is the brain getting whipped around the skull cavity ) will create areas in a young brain that may never develop or worse may lead to CTE. It is why there is also a movement to keep kids from heading the ball (soccer/futbal) until they are older. I to do not want to see the contact taken from the sport, i also don't want to see kids / people suffer from these kinds of injuries when they can be avoided or greatly reduced by adding some common sense precautions and PPE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 the brain isn't really done cooking until we're 25ish Clearly you were using the wrong drugs as a teenager Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.