I do remember Peter Puck and it was great. I’ve actually been involved in an attempt to buy the rights to Peter Puck, but sadly his creator Brian McFarlane is now a drunk with no interest in making money by re-releasing Peter Puck (think about all the Sun Belt teams) or by selling the rights.
Oh, that’s alright Zoff. I think I’ve decided that ignorance is bliss. I loved hockey before I understood it all…if I try and sit around and figure out every nuance of every rule it’ll just turn into a project.
Go Hawks.
jarbaby
Okay - The two line pass Vs. Icing
Always, we must understand what the rule is trying to do to understand the rule.
Two line pass: How can we prevent players from “cherry picking” or “net hanging”. i.e. How can we prevent a player from standing down near the other team’s blue line, just waiting for the puck so he can go a short distance to the goalie, likely unchallenged?
Answer: it is illegal to pass across two lines (you’re blue line and the red line). So, if you’re stuck in your end and you look up and see your teammate (likely to be Lemiuex or Bure or that type of player) wayyyy down the other end waiting at the far blue line, you can’t pass it to him, because we’ve made it illegal to do so (it would cross two lines). The best a net hanger like Lemieux or Bure can do is head up to the red line.
If you are ahead of your own blue line, bringing the puck out of your zone, and you dump it in before you cross the red line, one of your teammates better bust ass and get down there and make a play of it or it’s icing. The game should not break down into clearings that aren’t true plays. It’s not a two or three line pass because it didn’t cross three lines, it didn’t cross YOUR blue line and the red line, or your guy wasn’t offsides at the far blue line.
"Icing’ rules prevent wasteful clearings and encourages play making.
“Offsides” rules, two line and regular, prevent cherry picking/nethanging.
See how the rules help prevent this? Helps make sense of the rules.
There is some discussion about removing the ‘two line pass’ rule to create more offense. Imagine the break-aways possible if someone could hang down the far blue line and get a clearing pass legally. Two Line offsides prevents this, but to boost offense, it might be removed as a rule.
Not to be more confusing, but perhaps somebody can clarify this:
This hasn’t been mentioned, but I’ve always thought that 2 line pass had to have an element of intent. In other words, one has to define “pass” as a player throwing the puck to another player’s stick with the intent of giving possession of the puck to this player. Why is this important? If a defenseman throws the puck into or around the boards and it just happens to cross the blue and red line right onto Wayne Gretzky’s stick as he heads for the goal, this is not a 2 line pass, as it is not a pass.
Am I off base here? Have I been mis-led?
I have heard talk of eliminating the red line altogether to open up play. I don’t think that this is serious. I rarely see two line passes anyway. I’ve also heard talk of widening the rink to European dimensions to open up play. I would love to see this. We might see more wide open games like the Penguins 9-4 rout of the Flyers last night and less of the boring “As soon as it looks like the puck might leave our offensive zone, lets all back up and stand on the blue line and not let anybody pass us without dumping the puck and wait until the other team makes a mistake” hockey. Ugh.
Knowing the rules makes hockey much more fun to watch. You get to jump up and yell at the t.v. “There’s no way he was offside!”, “How could that possibly have been icing! It hit a defenseman before it crossed the blue line!” and “That should have been a penalty shot!”. Things like that.
Just a couple of things about icing I don’t think have been mentioned:
-
In the NHL, if the goalie leaves the crease to make like he will play the puck, then icing is waived, even if he does not touch it.
-
If the puck passes through the crease (the marked-off area in front of the goal) then icing is waived. And yes, it is possible for the puck to pass through the crease but not go in the goal.
-
A team which is short-handed may legally ice the puck all they want.
No no no. My husband taught me that Hockey is so confusing that the only way to root for it is to jump up and down and yell,
“hockeyhockeyhockey!”
I understand most of the rules…but figuring out what exactly a two line pass is and what it isn’t is like trying to find the exact moment the ‘holding’ call occurred in football. I’d rather just move on with the game.
BUT! I have a firmer grasp on the subject now…I’ll learn with experience I suppose.
jarbaby
LateComer, intent doesn’t matter.
It’s a 2 line pass regardless of what the defenseman is actually trying to do (as long as Gretzky crossed the centre line before the puck). The play will be whistled down in this case.
Actually, I think they tried this out at a WJC game or some international game. It didn’t work like you’d think. I used to be in favor of abolishing the two line pass, but then I read what happened when they tried it out. The defensemen were hesitant to join the play fearing getting burned. Instead of pinching to try to keep the puck in the zone they’d retreat. So it didn’t really lead to more breakaways, just less exciting play.
Dignan, good catch. I would expect the defense to not join the play and cover those net hangers, which could hurt things. The defensemen is more in the play if the cherry pickers can only get to the red line.
On another note, I think the bigger, faster players of today need more room like the euro sized rinks, but it doesn’t look like it’s gonna happen - That’s serious construction at many arenas that are just a few years old, and what owner would remove seats ($$) to do this!
Philster & Dignan, the point of removing the centre line is to open up the ice, not create more breakaways. It forces the defensemen to be speedy if they want to be effective. It makes the neutral zone trap less effective by allowing speedy offensive forwards more room to spread out the defense. In the long term, it results in less “Pat Quinn” type defensemen - big, lumbering pylons.
I believe the no 2-line pass rule is now standard in most international hockey (it definitely is at the World Junior Championships), and most US college hockey. Watch the WJHC some time - it’s some of the most exciting hockey you’ll ever see, IMO.
Thanks for the clarification on delayed off-sides, RickJay.
The league I play in has no blue lines and no red line, and it’s annoying. I play D, and I can’t tell you how boring it is to guard a potential cherry picker instead of getting into the play in the opponent’s zone. Of course, no one’s proposing to eliminate off-sides, but I think eliminating the two-line pass is a step in the same direction.
Of course, I’m a freak. I like tight-checking, low scoring hockey games. I don’t mind watching a neutral zone trap. I’m perfectly happy to see a well-played tie game.
So many people seem to want to “open up the ice” and turn hockey into a freewheeling goalfest. To them, I say, we already have a basketball league, we don’t need another.
It might be exciting, but I think a lot of that has to do with the fact that those players are hungry. The kids in Juniors know they’re replaceable, that’s not always the case in the pros. So I don’t think you can really say that because there isn’t a two line pass rule is the reason it’s exciting. If you need an example, watch a Florida Panthers game sometime. I think Pavel Bure is a very exciting player, but he rarely plays defense and is often trying to cherry-pick. If you take away the red line he’ll just set up camp on the far blueline, it’ll take a defenseman out of the play and the game won’t be nearly as exciting.
NCAA hockey does not have a 2-line pass rule. They also have automatic icing (crosses the goal line, it’s icing).
Jman
If after all that, you still don’t get icing, the only thing I can say to help is this:
A - keep watching hockey and actively look for icing to occur, after awhile you’ll get it
B - pretend it’s an “offsides” until then 
punk snot dead,
broccoli!