Rule Changes

[Claret & Blue Army]

What if any rule changes would you make and why?

[dave12]

Don't change them at all the officials already get confused.......
One to change would be the 'touch the puck' for icing, one day someone will get really badly hurt!!

[thfnick]

Automatic icing. Touch icing is stupid. Players hate it, it slows the game down and can lead to serious injuries.

I'd also like to know what rules the EIHL play to. The lack of rulebook/suspension tariffs/competition rules for the fans consumption shows a complete lack of respect for the us mere customers.

[Angie]

I don't think the refs actually know the rules! So other than touch icing I'd leave well alone

Time and time again this year I have been abosolutely dismayed and astounded at the random calls, and lack of consistantcey from the refs. It makes me question why I bother paying for my family to watch when on many occasions bad reffing causes alterations in the game that may have otherwise had a completely diffrent out come. I don't mind Blaze loosing but I mind it being because of bad calls from the ref.

[Claret & Blue Army]

Would the proposed two ref system have made a difference?

[dgudgeon]

I have to say that I thought the 2 ref rule would have worked well.

However....

The only change I can think of would be adopting the 4th official like they do in the sport I used to follow before ice hockey, rugby league. I notice when we went to Cardiff on Boxing Day that they are almost in a position to offer this, having a monitor system for showing replies so this could probably be easily modified. Other clubs like the Blaze would have to invest in such a system so there is a financial implication.

After the recent run of bad ref decisions would it be money well spent? Possibly.

Would it slow the game down too much? More than likely.

To be quite honest I think a new bigger venue is more important because we'd need more bums on seats to pay for all this.

Anyway I'm waffling on, so I best get back to work. Come on you Blaze !!!!

[captainjack]

One thing I think should change is the points allocations.

The present system give a team a bit of credit for at least taking the game to overtime (1 point), but why should a team who needs overtime or a shootout to win a game receive the same points as a team who finishes the job in normal time? I also think its stupid how you can't have a draw in the league but you can in the Challenge Cup groups.

I think the game would benefit by moving to a three points for a win system, as they did with football a few years back.

I suggest the following:
Win in normal time: 3 points winner, 0 loser
Win in overtime or shootout: 2 points winner, 1 point loser

OR

Introduce a system for drawing a game and forget the idea of overtime and shootouts (except for knockout competitions)
Win in normal time: 2 points winner, 0 loser
Draw: 1 point winner, 1 point loser

Does anyone else think the current points system could be improved???

Up the Blaze!!!

[Claret & Blue Army]

Liking the idea of bonus points for a regular time win. Using them as standings deciders make uneasy categorisations at times. Straight points and goals are the best measure.

[captainjack]

Take for example the Blaze and the Steelers last weekend. We won both games and they lost both games but they still picked up half as many points as us! Barmy!

With my system, we would have got 6 points and Sheffield 2 points - a little credit for taking their games to OT but nothing like the 50% they get compared to teams who won both games.

Ironically, with my "3-2-1 point" system the order of the table would be almost the same, save for the fact that we would only be two wins and an OT defeat away from the leaders as opposed to the fours wins we currently need.