What part of no do they not understand? (more on the NCAA rules)

I really think hockey fans and coaches need to stand up against the rule change that penalizes a team for icing the puck during a penalty kill. What part of "NO" do they not understand? We do not want them to come back to this rule in the future not in 2012-2013 or 2015-2016. A team skating down a man or two (5-4 or 5-3 or 4-3) is being penalized enough. Hockey fans and coaches don't want this rule. I also think we need to put a face to this proposal. I think Hockey fans have a right to know who is pushing for this stupid rule change.

The NCAA Ice Hockey Rules Committee’s proposal met with largely negative reaction from coaches, so it will be used in exhibition games only during the two-year cycle of the next rule book, which starts with the coming season.

The committee will then have experience to work with in determining whether the rule will be implemented starting with the 2012-13 season.
[Read more]

Icing Rule Rescinded and College Hockey Rumors (RW77)

Today word came down that the biggest idiot suggestion of the last 100 years of hockey will not be implemented whole scale after all.

Forest Karr, the outgoing Rules Committee Stooge, lamented that, despite some support for it (aka, the idiots who know nothing of the sport) the icing rule will not be implemented.

For those who have been hiding under a rock, let me explain. The NCAA Ice Hockey Rules Committee, headed by UAF AD Forest Karr, proposed a list of 22 rules to be put into "law" starting the 2010-2011 season. These laws would be in the books for a minimum of two years. Most of the rules were good. Some were so-so. One was bad. One was downright disastrous.

I won't go into the good or so so rule changes because who cares. They either do good for the game or don't hurt the game. The bad rule apparently will be adopted. This rule is when a team gets called for a penalty, and the team not penalized scores with the extra attacker on the ice, they still get a power play. This is a bad rule but this happens so rarely that I feel that it won't make much of a difference.

The disastrous rule was the rule that, when killing a penalty, icing is still in play. And, like in the NHL, a team that ices the puck cannot change players. This is ridiculously bad.

Forest Karr insists that the outcry wasn't unanimously opposed to it, but all of the DI Men's coaches were opposed to it (except for Rules committee Super Stooge John Hill. Apparently ruining the Minnesota Hockey Program and pulling the carpet out from under Lucia isn't enough for that ***hole). Therefore, there are some seriously stupid coaches in DII/DIII Hockey and the Women's Hockey coaches, by supporting this rule, aren't legitimizing the sport any either.

Anyways, the pressure was so great that Forest Karr decided to go back to what he should have done to begin with: Talk to those who directly interact with the game and its players. The coaches said "HELL NO" and the rule was dropped.

Doesn't stop Karr from lamenting the fact though. He did manage to request that the rule be required in exhibition games.

Anyways.... it didn't pass. Thank GOD.

===========

In other news: UW drew a breath of relief as Jake Gardiner decided not to leave college yet. Then again.... McDonagh said he was coming back too.

Oh yeah, Jordy Murray might pull a Brady Murray. At the time Brady left, rumor had it that Brady and father Andy, weren't overly impressed with UND. Maybe that was a hater at the time, because I can't find any proof anymore of such a thing, but... Jordy may bolt for Europe.

If he does, UW would lose their top returning scorer. Looks like Boredom Central is on its way back. I can already feel the snores coming on when thinking of UW's hockey. Too bad. Just when they were getting interesting. At least Gudbranson will be happy. Trap style hockey will make him look like an amazing goaltender rather than a mediocre one that got lucky until the NC game last year.