Connect with us

Penguins

Molinari: Enforce the Rules … and Improve Them, Too

Published

on

Pittsburgh Penguins Sidney Crosby

Just a few days ago, the Pittsburgh Penguins might have been heartily in favor of a major rule change that absolutely no one has proposed.

Or ever will.

You know, the rule that says the team that wins a game is the one that gets the most points in the standings.

Given that the Penguins were in a 0-6-1 skid when they ventured into Washington last Wednesday, it’s understandable if they’d lobbied hard for that one to be tweaked. Or abandoned.

But now that their situation has stabilized a bit — they took five of a possible six points out of the three-game road trip that ended with a 5-4 overtime loss in Montreal Saturday — it isn’t likely to come up in conversations around the team offices. (Not that it ever did, of course.)

The league does, however, have some rules and practices that should be revisited, and adjusted. Or discarded. Among them:

Don’t punish victims

At first blush, immediately punishing a player for an egregious act — especially one that targets and injures an opponent — seems perfectly logical. Justice delayed is justice denied, and all of that.

That makes a lot of sense in general society. It does not necessarily do the same in hockey.

Consider this hypothetical: It’s mid-March, and the New York Rangers, who are challenging for first place in the Metropolitan Division, are playing the Penguins.

In the second period, Sidney Crosby launches a forearm into the head of unsuspecting New York defenseman Jacob Trouba. No penalty is called (not that such a thing ever would go unpunished in real time, of course), but Trouba is unable to finish the game, and actually has to sit out the following one.

Because the league never would let any player, especially one with a reputation as a head-hunter, get away with such a grievous hit, Crosby is suspended for three games.

Trouble is, two of those are against Carolina and New Jersey, teams the Rangers are competing with for the top spot in the Metro. Without Crosby, the Pittsburgh Penguins’ chances of beating either drop significantly, indirectly hurting New York.

Doesn’t really seem fair, does it?

Here’s a simple solution: Give the team whose player was targeted by the suspension-worthy hit the option of determining when the league-imposed penalty takes effect. The punishment must be served in consecutive games, but otherwise, the aggrieved club can dispense justice as it sees fit, whether that’s to benefit itself or hurt the club whose player caused the issue.

One other possibility: Compel him to serve his entire suspension against the team whose player he assaulted. In the example above, make Crosby sit out the next three Penguins-Rangers games, even if some are in the playoffs or don’t happen until the following season.

Use your head

Executives, coaches and players talk about the importance of eliminating head shots from the game, especially with the growing body of evidence about the potential long-term impact of concussions on an individual’s quality of life.

But while hits to the head aren’t necessarily encouraged, there does seem to be widespread acceptance of them as, at least at times, an unfortunate byproduct of a game played at high speeds that requires participants to make split-second decisions about things like where and how to deliver a check.

Simple solution to getting rid of them: Make them all illegal.

It doesn’t matter if one is completely accidental, like when a shoulder driven into the sternum of an opponent rides up his chest and strikes his chin, or maliciously intentional.

The severity of the punishment, anything from a minor penalty to a long suspension, can be tailored to the details of the situation, but players have to learn that hits to the head will not be accepted.

They’ve adapted to countless rules (and cultural) adjustments over the years — remember when bench-clearing brawls and stoppages for two-line passes were integral parts of the game? — and they’d get accustomed to a ban on all hits to the head, too.

Radical? Perhaps. So is being unable to dress yourself or remember your kids’ names when you’re 45.

Do what the good book says

This has been suggested one or two (billion) times over the years, but referees should enforce the rulebook the way it is written. Period.

It shouldn’t matter if it’s the first shift of the preseason opener or overtime of Game 7 in the Stanley Cup final. If there’s a clear infraction, call it.

An official who decides he doesn’t want to possibly determine the outcome of a game by assessing a penalty in a particular situation is doing exactly that by not making the call.

Allowing a guy to get away with a hook or hold or trip isn’t “letting them play;” it’s letting one team gain an advantage by operating outside the rules.

Make up your mind … quickly

There are video reviews in almost every sport that seem to last longer than some celebrity marriages, and taking three or four or five minutes to determine whether an official’s call (or non-call) was correct disrupts the flow of the competition and gives TV viewers incentive to see what might be on another channel.

Of course, the whole point of such reviews is to make sure that the official in question got things right, but if reaching that conclusion requires a frame-by-frame examination of the video that drags on much more than a minute — if that — the original call should stand and play should resume.

Sure, that might mean that an incorrect call might stand occasionally, but if someone scores a goal despite being offside by the width of an ice chip or a receiver is deemed to be out of bounds even though there actually was a blade of grass between his foot and the sideline, the sport in question isn’t going to be shaken to its foundation.

Besides, if a player is upset with a replay ruling of that sort, he can always take it out on an opponent. Perhaps with a head shot that likely will go unpunished.