2020-2021 NHL Thread

[CarltonTheBear]

Isn't this onside? Skate doesn't have to be one the ice, does his shoulder count as being onside?

The position of the players skates is still what decides it, the skate just doesn't have to be on the ice anymore.

 

[cabber24]

Isn't this onside? Skate doesn't have to be one the ice, does his shoulder count as being onside?

The position of the players skates is still what decides it, the skate just doesn't have to be on the ice anymore.

So only skates being behind the "offside plane" off the ice count as being onside but not other body parts? Very confusing.

 

[bustaheims]

So only skates being behind the "offside plane" off the ice count as being onside but not other body parts? Very confusing.

It's not that different from what it was previously. It's always been about the position of the skates. The only thing that changed was the requirement that they be touching the ice.

 

[bustaheims]

Without seeing the video, it's not 100% clear to that the puck hasn't crossed the line completely. It looks like it might be touching the edge of the line, but that could be a bit of an optical illusion. Still image doesn't really show us when the skate crossed vs the puck. Based on where the attacking Carolina player is, I suspect he crossed before, but it's not conclusive from that image.

 

[cabber24]

So only skates being behind the "offside plane" off the ice count as being onside but not other body parts? Very confusing.

It's not that different from what it was previously. It's always been about the position of the skates. The only thing that changed was the requirement that they be touching the ice.

A guy lying on the blue line with his feet in the offensive zone is still onside? It's not just about feet position. Anyway, it's totally ridiculous how it played out.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

A guy lying on the blue line with his feet in the offensive zone is still onside? It's not just about feet position.

This is the updated rule:

NHL Rule 83 (Off-side)

Beginning in the 2020-21 regular season, a player's skate will not have to be in contact with the blue line in order to be on-side. The updated language for NHL Rule 83.1 follows.

83.1 Off-side - Players of the attacking team must not precede the puck into the attacking zone.

The position of the player's skates and not that of his stick shall be the determining factor in all instances in deciding an off-side. A player is off-side when both skates are completely over the leading edge of the blue line involved in the play.

(NEW) - A player is on-side when either of his skates are in contact with the blue line, or on his own side of the line, at the instant the puck completely crosses the leading edge of the blue line. On his own side of the line shall be defined by a "plane" of the blue line which shall extend from the leading edge of the blue line upwards. If a player's skate has yet to break the "plane" prior to the puck crossing the leading edge, he is deemed to be on-side for the purpose of the off-side rule.

Again, the skate is the only thing they talk about here. So yeah theoretically if a player was lying on his stomach but if his skates were on his own side of the line it would be deemed onside.

Video explaining it too if it's helpful: https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/video/need-know-nhls-2020-21-off-side-rule-change/

 

[bustaheims]

A guy lying on the blue line with his feet in the offensive zone is still onside? It's not just about feet position. Anyway, it's totally ridiculous how it played out.

No, I imagine skate placement would play into things there, too. When did the player fall? Did they fall backwards so upper body ended up out of the zone while the puck was being brought it? Then, the play was most likely offside. Were they already on the ice or were they sliding forward from outside the zone skate first? Then it's onside. 

And, for the record, this would have been the case before the rule change.

 

[cabber24]

A guy lying on the blue line with his feet in the offensive zone is still onside? It's not just about feet position.

This is the updated rule:

NHL Rule 83 (Off-side)

Beginning in the 2020-21 regular season, a player's skate will not have to be in contact with the blue line in order to be on-side. The updated language for NHL Rule 83.1 follows.

83.1 Off-side - Players of the attacking team must not precede the puck into the attacking zone.

The position of the player's skates and not that of his stick shall be the determining factor in all instances in deciding an off-side. A player is off-side when both skates are completely over the leading edge of the blue line involved in the play.

(NEW) - A player is on-side when either of his skates are in contact with the blue line, or on his own side of the line, at the instant the puck completely crosses the leading edge of the blue line. On his own side of the line shall be defined by a "plane" of the blue line which shall extend from the leading edge of the blue line upwards. If a player's skate has yet to break the "plane" prior to the puck crossing the leading edge, he is deemed to be on-side for the purpose of the off-side rule.

Again, the skate is the only thing they talk about here. So yeah theoretically if a player was lying on his stomach but if his skates were on his own side of the line it would be deemed onside.

Video explaining it too if it's helpful: https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/video/need-know-nhls-2020-21-off-side-rule-change/

He still hasn't cleared the blue line plane with his entire body. I am not sure why a skate versus other body parts matter. Kind of screwy being specific about the skates.

 

[Bullfrog]

If it's not the skates, a playing trying to get on-side could do a superman dive and have his fingertip "break the plan" and be back on-side. While that'd be totally rad and hilarious to see, I think it makes sense to tie the rule to the standard mode of transport, which is skating.

 

[herman]

https://nypost.com/2021/02/08/rangers-must-prioritize-kids-amid-hazy-tony-deangelo-aftermath/

There is no movement at all in the Blueshirts? effort to move DeAngelo. Following a spate of early inquiries and conversations, some of them advanced, interest in the 25-year-old, who a year ago was tied for the NHL?s fourth highest-scoring defenseman, has dried up.

That is less for hockey and hockey-trade reasons than because of apparent ownership/management fear of fan backlash in acquiring No. 77. Thursday, an immediate onslaught of vituperative responses from Flames? fans followed our tweet confirming Calgary?s interest in DeAngelo. The interest has since evaporated. It may not be an overstatement to suggest that DeAngelo?s career is on the line.

a) cyber bullying is an extremely effective double-edged sword
b) this is the first time I've seen the word vituperative before, let alone in a hockey column.

 

[herman]

https://twitter.com/BuffaloVogl/status/1358878287200718855
I'm kind of curious what data/science the NHL was basing their 'no on-ice transmission' belief on. No way could a respiratory virus that is transmitted through droplets going to affect 14 hard-breathing bodies skating through each others breath clouds in an enclosed space going to spread during a game, no siree.

 

[cabber24]

https://twitter.com/BuffaloVogl/status/1358878287200718855
I'm kind of curious what data/science the NHL was basing their 'no on-ice transmission' belief on. No way could a respiratory virus that is transmitted through droplets going to affect 14 hard-breathing bodies skating through each others breath clouds in an enclosed space going to spread during a game, no siree.

I agree, evidence not required.

 

[cabber24]

https://nypost.com/2021/02/08/rangers-must-prioritize-kids-amid-hazy-tony-deangelo-aftermath/

There is no movement at all in the Blueshirts? effort to move DeAngelo. Following a spate of early inquiries and conversations, some of them advanced, interest in the 25-year-old, who a year ago was tied for the NHL?s fourth highest-scoring defenseman, has dried up.

That is less for hockey and hockey-trade reasons than because of apparent ownership/management fear of fan backlash in acquiring No. 77. Thursday, an immediate onslaught of vituperative responses from Flames? fans followed our tweet confirming Calgary?s interest in DeAngelo. The interest has since evaporated. It may not be an overstatement to suggest that DeAngelo?s career is on the line.

a) cyber bullying is an extremely effective double-edged sword
b) this is the first time I've seen the word vituperative before, let alone in a hockey column.

Why trade when he could have been claimed for nothing? I guess teams need to send salary back?

 

[CarltonTheBear]

https://twitter.com/zjlaing/status/1358954122238586881

Hey, NHL, should be two minutes for breaking COVID protocol here.

 

[Guilt Trip]

https://nypost.com/2021/02/08/rangers-must-prioritize-kids-amid-hazy-tony-deangelo-aftermath/

There is no movement at all in the Blueshirts? effort to move DeAngelo. Following a spate of early inquiries and conversations, some of them advanced, interest in the 25-year-old, who a year ago was tied for the NHL?s fourth highest-scoring defenseman, has dried up.

That is less for hockey and hockey-trade reasons than because of apparent ownership/management fear of fan backlash in acquiring No. 77. Thursday, an immediate onslaught of vituperative responses from Flames? fans followed our tweet confirming Calgary?s interest in DeAngelo. The interest has since evaporated. It may not be an overstatement to suggest that DeAngelo?s career is on the line.

a) cyber bullying is an extremely effective double-edged sword
b) this is the first time I've seen the word vituperative before, let alone in a hockey column.

Why trade when he could have been claimed for nothing? I guess teams need to send salary back?

I think the Rangers will have to eat salary.

 

[Bender]

https://nypost.com/2021/02/08/rangers-must-prioritize-kids-amid-hazy-tony-deangelo-aftermath/

There is no movement at all in the Blueshirts? effort to move DeAngelo. Following a spate of early inquiries and conversations, some of them advanced, interest in the 25-year-old, who a year ago was tied for the NHL?s fourth highest-scoring defenseman, has dried up.

That is less for hockey and hockey-trade reasons than because of apparent ownership/management fear of fan backlash in acquiring No. 77. Thursday, an immediate onslaught of vituperative responses from Flames? fans followed our tweet confirming Calgary?s interest in DeAngelo. The interest has since evaporated. It may not be an overstatement to suggest that DeAngelo?s career is on the line.

a) cyber bullying is an extremely effective double-edged sword
b) this is the first time I've seen the word vituperative before, let alone in a hockey column.

Why trade when he could have been claimed for nothing? I guess teams need to send salary back?

I think the Rangers will have to eat salary.

I wonder if a guy like him either cleans up his act or he's not in the league. My employer wouldn't accept the kind of shit he pulls.

 

[L K]

Laine  got benched in the 2nd period and didnt play the rest of the game

 

[CarltonTheBear]

https://twitter.com/EverydaySens/status/1358967315681968128

It probably says a lot about how I just expect refs to ignore cross checks now that I'm more blown away that they decided to put the face-off after this OUTSIDE the offensive zone.

 

[Guilt Trip]

https://twitter.com/EverydaySens/status/1358967315681968128

It probably says a lot about how I just expect refs to ignore cross checks now that I'm more blown away that they decided to put the face-off after this OUTSIDE the offensive zone.

Cross checks are ok in the NHL..

 

[L K]

https://twitter.com/EverydaySens/status/1358967315681968128

It probably says a lot about how I just expect refs to ignore cross checks now that I'm more blown away that they decided to put the face-off after this OUTSIDE the offensive zone.

Cross checks are ok in the NHL..

I think every time a player gets cross checked they should go over to the ref and do it to them.  See if they think it?s no big deal