Originally Posted by Oilers89
I'm really undecided on this. If you take away the touch-icing, what incentive would there be for a player to try and keep the play alive and creating a scoring opportunity?
Yes
No
Undecided
With recent injuries to Marc Savard (ankle) and Marty Reasoner (ankle and knee), should the NHL consider No Touch Icing? Both Savard and Reasoner were racing for the puck when they got injured.
Marc Savard was injured on November 2 and Marty Reasoner was injured on November 8. Both Savard and Reasoner are out indefinitely for their respective teams.
"You don't make decisions for five years of your life on your own." - Sheldon Souray
Originally Posted by Oilers89
I'm really undecided on this. If you take away the touch-icing, what incentive would there be for a player to try and keep the play alive and creating a scoring opportunity?
Chris Frezza / Sys Admin
Hockeytown USA
The problem I have is injuries. Is it really worth the risk of having players injured in a race for the puck. I really don't think so. With the recent injuries to both Savard and Reasoner and both players undergoing surgery as a result of getting injured while racing for the puck. It's not really worth it IMO.Originally Posted by ChrisFrez
"You don't make decisions for five years of your life on your own." - Sheldon Souray
Originally Posted by Oilers89
Bad idea, The game gets lets exciting each year because of more and more rules.![]()
The NHL is worried about too many injuries. There are injuries that are avoidable and crashing into the boards in a race for the puck is avoidable. That's why I like the No Touch Icing. The Savard and Reasoner injuries would not have happened if there had been No Touch Icing. Even the Ryan Smyth injury a couple of seasons ago could have been avoided. The linesman waved off an icing call and Smyth got injured.Originally Posted by PhantomTA
"You don't make decisions for five years of your life on your own." - Sheldon Souray
Bookmarks