Got a question on rule clarification, comments on rule enforcements or some memorable NHL stories? Kerry wants to answer your emails at cmonref@tsn.ca. Kerry, Thanks for the blog, always a great read. I was just wondering about the something that happened in the Leafs/Canes game. So in the second period, Paul Ranger and Alex Semin took minors at the same stoppage. The game then went to 4-on-4, until Dion Phaneuf took a hooking penalty. This made it 4-on-3 for the Canes, which they proceeded to score on and Phaneuf came out of the box. My question is why did Phaneuf come out of the box instead of Ranger? And why does the NHL go to 4-on-4 instead of keeping it 5 on 5 and having the players wait for a whistle? Thanks again, look forward to continuing to read your blog. Thanks,Alex Gane Hey Alex: I hope everyone celebrated a wonderful Christmas with family and friends. CMon Ref is thrilled to return after a break for the holiday week. Thanks also to those that visited me @kfraserthecall on twitter with your questions from games during that period! The answer to your specific question Alex is found in Rule 19 (coincidental penalties) which states, "When one minor penalty is assessed to one player of each team at the same stoppage in play, these penalties will be served without substitution provided there are no other penalties in effect and visible on the penalty clocks. Both teams will therefore play four skaters against four skaters for the duration of the minor penalties." In your example, one minor penalty was assessed to one player of each team (Paul Ranger of the Leafs and Alex Semin of the Hurricanes) with no other previous penalties visible on the time clock. Semin and Rangers minor penalty times were therefore placed on the clock and served as per the rule. It is important to note the while the teams play 4 on 4 as a result of the one minor penalty to each player at the same stoppage it does not create a short-handed situation. From Rule 16, short-handed means that the team must be below the numerical strength of its opponent on the ice at the time the goal was scored. The minor or bench minor penalty which terminates is the one with the least amount of time on the clock. Thus coincident minor penalties to both Teams do not cause either side to be "short-handed." The formula used to determine minor penalty expiration when goals are scored against a short-handed team is as follows: i) Is the team scored against short-handed? ii) Is the team scored against serving a minor penalty on the clock? If both criteria are satisfied, the minor penalty with the least amount of time on the clock shall terminate except when coincidental penalties are being served. The penalty that caused the Leafs to become short-handed was the subsequent minor penalty assessed to Dion Phaneuf. Once the Canes power-play goal was scored the Leafs were entitled to relief by virtue of Phaneufs minor penalty. Why does the NHL not treat the minor penalties to Paul Ranger and Alex Semin as coincidental and play 5 on 5 you ask? The coincidental minor penalty rule has in fact changed back a forth since the mid 1980s. The Edmonton Oiler young guns led by Wayne Gretzky, Mark Messier and the cast of future Hall of Fame players were primarily responsible for the initial change from minor penalties being served (4 on 4 hockey) to being treated as coincidental (5-on-5). In late stages of a game with the score either tied or close, a huge advantage resulted for the skilled Oiler players when more ice space was created by a 4 on 4 situation. No one recognized this more than Oiler coach Glen Sather. One of his players would intelligently initiate an altercation or scrum with an opponent where punches were exchanged and a minor penalty to each player was assessed by the referee. The Oiler stars were even more difficult to contain with the extra ice afforded them which often resulted in the scoring of a goal. Eventually the rule was changed to its present form. We also see the entertaining benefits derived from 4 on 4 hockey during overtime in the regular season. Referees have also been instructed to penalize the instigator or aggressor in a scrum wherever possible to act as a deterrent.
Cheap Jerseys Free Shipping . The Buffalo Sabres forward was suspended 10 games for his actions in a game against Columbus on October 10 before appealing the ruling to NHL commissioner Gary Bettman.
Cheap Stitched Jerseys . A question that was repeatedly posed last season, and the season before that and in the 2011 campaign before that.
http://www.wholesalenflJerseyssupply.cc/ . Remember the Titans (2000)Sure this plot has been done to death.
China Jerseys . The four-time Grand Slam champion has beaten Hantuchova nine straight times, with the Slovaks only win coming when they first played 10 years ago. "I had a tough first opponent who can play extremely good tennis," Sharapova said.
Wholesale Jerseys From China . -- Kyrie Irvings last-minute 3-pointer helped seal another victory for Cleveland -- and the Cavaliers longest winning streak since LeBron James left.Less than a day after talks broke down between the Canadian Football League and the CFL Players Association for a new collective bargaining agreement, the CFL issued a memo to the media stating that even their own CBA proposal would lead to three of their nine teams losing money. "We want CFL players and fans to have the facts," read the statement, written in a fiction vs. fact format. "Fiction: The CFL offer would set the salary cap at $5 million and the players want it set at $5.8 million, so they could just saw off the difference a little and get a deal. Fact: The players unions ask is actually much, much bigger. You see, a lot of player compensation does not fall under the cap. Things like benefits, pensions, pre-season and post-season pay, plus any bonus to be paid for ratifying a new agreement. If you look at everything in our offer and everything in their offer, you find that the CFL is offering to increase player compensation by $850,000 per team in the first year of a deal, and the union is asking us to increase player compensation by $2.4 million per team in the first year of a deal. Their ask is not realistic. Under their proposal, six of nine teaams would lose money.dddddddddddd" The league also reiterated that it made its best offer to the union, a response to what it calls fiction - that all the CFL has to do is add a little more to its offer to get a deal done. "Its the most we can pay," read the statement. "It was put forward knowing that under the CFLs best offer, three of nine teams would still lose money this year, even with the new TV deal in place." After almost two days of talks at a Toronto airport hotel, the league eventually did increase its financial offer and the union removed any revenue-sharing percentages from its own proposal, but talks between both sides broke down Thursday afternoon. The current CBA expired Thursday at Midnight et. "The players gave up revenue sharing last time because the CFL promised back then to put it back in this round of bargaining," added the league statement under the fiction heading. "Thats not true. That was never agreed to." Theres been no update on if or when the two sides will meet again at the bargaining table, but the league and the union said it wont stop players from reporting when training camps open Sunday.
cheap nfl Jerseys Cheap Jerseys Cheap Jerseys Cheap Jerseys cheap nfl Jerseys wholesale Jerseys ' ' '
Topic: proposal would lead to three (Read 2451 times)
