Welcome back to Rules Court, where we’re fixing the NHL, one new rule at a time.
Usually, that means considering your suggestions. But occasionally, we like to look elsewhere for inspiration, such as stealing ideas form other leagues. We’re doing that again today, because as you may have heard, there’s an international tournament going on. It’s called the Olympics, and the NHL was kind enough to send its players over for a change.
That NHL participation has meant that the rulebook used in the Olympics is almost identical to the one we all know and love. Almost, but not quite. As Pierre LeBrun reported last week, the “blended” approach to officiating still left a few differences between the IIHF and the NHL. And that got us wondering: Could the NHL learn something from international hockey?
Let’s see. Pierre’s article included nine differences between the two rulebooks. We’re going to put seven of them on trial today. (We cut the ones about switching ends for overtime and players losing their helmets during play, since they’re relatively minor and we don’t have a “meh” option for our rulings.)
We convened the usual jurors – Sean Gentille, Shayna Goldman and Sean McIndoe – and cut-and-pasted Pierre’s description of the differences. If at least two of us approve the change, it becomes a new NHL rule, effective immediately. (Editor’s note: That’s not true.) (McIndoe’s note: OK, but it should be.)
While most hockey fans agree that the NHL is a perfectly run league with zero room for improvement, could we still find some inspiration from elsewhere? Let’s find out.
>> Read the full post at The Athletic
(Want to read this post on The Athletic for free? Sign up for a free trial.)
