No-touch icing

[chippa13 1844]

With Curtis Foster getting his leg broken after a race with Torey Mitchell, does the league revisit the question of no-touch icing?

[cxo 0]

Of course not.

[cbj05 0]

It should have been in place a loooong time ago. It's terrible to see injuries like this resulting from a stupid, unneccesary rule.

[Fire0nIce228 1]

I think there are enough instances where beating an icing call that turns into a scoring opportunity that there should not be a no touch rule.

[chippa13 1844]

I beg to differ on that. Those instances are so seldom that people wouldn't even notice that they were gone. I have yet to hear a color man say,"....and that right there is why they should not institute no-touch icing....."

[mrusse01 0]

Touch icing is the single dumbest rule in any sport. Period.

And what do you think the Vegas odds are on Cherry NOT mentioning this during Coach's Corner this weekend? Gotta be like +5000 at least right?

[chippa13 1844]

Touch icing is the single dumbest rule in any sport. Period.

And what do you think the Vegas odds are on Cherry NOT mentioning this during Coach's Corner this weekend? Gotta be like +5000 at least right?

Vegas won't even touch it.

[Rustpot 1]

They either need to go to no-touch or penalize heavily for contact made.

If a guy goes hard and is beating his opponent it should be called at the goal line by the linesman. Example if two guys are racing, when the defender gets to the red line yell ICE just before and blow the whistle to keep contact down.

If it's a dead heat, make a rule that the defending team gets the call.

The play is too valuable for a team to get a breakaway from icing as a penalty expires for the league to go to no-touch.

95 times in 100 no one gets hurt, but it also tires out the D-man that needs to chase it.

Maybe even adjust the rule that grants a no-touch if no one from the icing team is in the opposing neutral zone at the time of release.

[jeffw 1]

I think there are enough instances where beating an icing call that turns into a scoring opportunity that there should not be a no touch rule.

9 times out of 10 the rest of the line goes for a change on those & the one guy who chases the puck is all alone & usually gets stripped.

[chippa13 1844]

They either need to go to no-touch or penalize heavily for contact made.

If a guy goes hard and is beating his opponent it should be called at the goal line by the linesman. Example if two guys are racing, when the defender gets to the red line yell ICE just before and blow the whistle to keep contact down.

If it's a dead heat, make a rule that the defending team gets the call.

The play is too valuable for a team to get a breakaway from icing as a penalty expires for the league to go to no-touch.

95 times in 100 no one gets hurt, but it also tires out the D-man that needs to chase it.

Maybe even adjust the rule that grants a no-touch if no one from the icing team is in the opposing neutral zone at the time of release.

Maybe it is all the shots to the head over the years but I have no idea what you're trying to say here.

[Rustpot 1]

It was somewhat jumbled, thinking and writing, not thinking then writing.

Basically change the system entirely. Puck is in team A's end, they shoot it for icing in team B's end.

One idea I had was that icing is called when any non-goalie player crosses the team-B goal line. If it's a dead heat, the call goes for team-B as they didn't initiate the icing. This is to keep teams from going closer to the wall and needing to get the puck.

I also think that a no-touch rule can apply if no one from team-A is even on team-B's half of the ice. Doing this would mean no one from team-B needs to chase the puck and tire themselves needlessly, the goalie could just shoot it down after the whistle blows.

Icing the puck does have it's strategic advantage. The NHL tried to cut down by not allowing changes, but it still happens. Awarding team-B more by doing a no-touch if all of team-A is in their zone when the puck is released would help cut down the number of icings per game.

[chippa13 1844]

At the speed guys are going, making them race to the goal line is no better than making them race for the puck.

[Engine37 0]

Its a tough call. I think touch icing, as smart or dumb as it may be, is just as much a part of the game as anything. The instigator rule, the constant penalties (but it improves the flow of the game, right?)...these are things that I might not always agree with, but they just seem to be widely accepted as part of the game.

Nonetheless, after seeing Foster break his FEMUR (the biggest bone in your body), I think they need to look at a couple things. Why have touch icing in the first place? How many scoring opportunities does it create? How big of a risk is it for the players? Also, what is a "suspendable offense"? Who runs a guy, from BEHIND, going flat out for an ICING call? I realize that Mitchell expressed concern for Foster, but he also just gave him a cheap shot that took Foster out of the lineup for a long long time. Why only a 2 minute minor? I thought he'd get 5 for sure....maybe even a game or two. I think Mitchell was playing intense hockey, got carried away, and made a mistake. Maybe it was an honest mistake, but he still sent a guy into the wall, from behind, at full speed, for no reason at all.

[Platypus 0]

And what do you think the Vegas odds are on Cherry NOT mentioning this during Coach's Corner this weekend? Gotta be like +5000 at least right?

From pinnaclesports.com:

Will Don Cherry mention "no touch icing" on Coaches Corner March 22 2008?

Yes -10000

No +10000

Im throwing a unit on No just for the value

[mew1838 0]

Keep the touch icing. If there are 2 guys chasing the puck, it has to be a very close one. If it's pretty obvious that he is not going to beat the icing call, the player won't even bother racing in the 1st place.

[gxc999 7]

I don't generally like the rule of no-touch icing. There is what, one injury for every 50 to 100 icing battles? I think getting rid of icing sucks the fun out of ice hockey and makes it more like roller hockey... Beating out an icing call lets you change the whole momentum of the game, even if only for one shift.

If they feel like they have to institute it, I hope they use the whoever gets to the red line first idea, as mentioned above.

[RadioGaGa 162]

TSN had thoughts from the League...

2 D-Men (Redden & Foote) said they'd like to see No Touch. The Forward they asked (Alfredsson) said he like to be able to chase and keep the play alive with good hustle. So, I guess opinion is relative to how your position is affected by it.

[budro727 0]

Any one find a vid of it yet?

[chk hrd 164]

make it no touch icing at the ref's discretion.

[Penguinsfanatic 0]

make it no touch icing at the ref's discretion.

i could see the headlines now as a version of Hull's foot in the crease in the SC finals but with the no touch

[RadioGaGa 162]

make it no touch icing at the ref's discretion.

Speaking of Ref's discretion...wasn't the rule changed that an (obviously) intended pass that misses and goes the length wouldn't be called?

Or was that just talked about and shot down pre-season.

[Fire0nIce228 1]

Yeah ive wondered about that one too..

[WhiskeyTango19 0]

The no-touch icing really had nothing to do with Foster getting hurt if you think about it. Say the puck was dumped in from after the red line and the same play happens, then what is everyone going to cry about? Foster was hurt because the forward, whose name escapes me, knew he was beat, and instead of playing the puck, decided to be a douche about it and push/check Foster from behind. Would the injury have happened if there were more emphasis on playing the puck? No. It doesn't matter what level you play at, the unwritten rule is you DON'T push/shove/check a player from behind when they are a few feet from the boards.

This injury really has nothing to do with no-touch icing.

[RadioGaGa 162]

Was it even an icing play? The goalie didn't have his hand up or anything. He looked like he was watching the play as if it was live. I don't have a fresh mental image of it...saw it last night.

[chippa13 1844]

Yes, it was an icing play.