PIHA OT Clock Clarification

[ref'n'roll]

To clear up any confusion about Overtime:

After a conversation with National RIC Rick Pohlig this evening---we want to clarify that all time in PIHA is STOP-TIME.

The rule book doesn't specifically state that OT is stop-time, it was just implied through the fact that all the previous time in the game is stop-time. This was an oversight when the rule book was originally written.

The 2008 rule book will be changed to clarify this oversight.

All time in PIHA is STOP-TIME, including all Overtime periods.

Thank you.

Rick Pohlig, PIHA National Referee-In-Chief
Don FRank, PIHA Head Referee, Mason Dixon Division

[minutemen]

How about changing the OT penalty shot rule? Just wondering if that is in consideration as well. I know alot of teams do not like the rule.

[ref'n'roll]

The Penalty Shot rule for OT was put in because we were running into trouble in situations where a penalty would take you below 2 skaters on the surface. If you are at 2-on-2 in OT any penalty assessed could not be served or even "stacked" because our rules do not allow less than 2 skaters on the surface due to penalty.

The options are to change the OT rule entirely (play 4-on-4 for five minutes followed by a shootout), or change the rule allowing no less than 2 skaters on the surface. Neither one of those options are being considered at this time.

Don Frank, PIHA Head Referee, Mason Dixon Division

[GROWL]

In the NHL they dont go below the 3 player minimum and still manage to do play without penalty shots. In case of two penalties, they add a player back to the non offending team and play 5 on 3. Why dont we do the same and play 4 on 2 instead of 3 on 1 or penalty shots.

[alex]

I agree, if the problem is that our rules don't 'allow' us to...why don't we change them?

Personally, I'd be in favor of implementing NHL style rules with regular season games being a 4 on 4 OT period then a shootout, and playoffs being OT until game is decided. I don't think what I suggest is too radical, I'm not advocating putting in offsides and icing and making this ice hockey on roller skates.
But I think its ridiculous that these rules leave the possibility, even the likelihood of, scenarioes like...a big playoff or championship game going into triple OT and being decided by two players going 1 on 1, or even on a penalty shot awarded in OT.

And it doesn't seem to make much sense to me if one is against the penalty shot in OT rule that they also support the rule of eliminating one player from each team each OT. It seems to be enough of an open, exciting, and offensive game to me without the need to consistently reduce it to a one-on-one competition in key situations.

[GROWL]

You make a good arguement, however as I have stated before... The PIHA OT format is a staple of the league and is not likely to change. The penalty/shoot out rule is obviously unpopular and I am suggesting my opinion of a good alternative for future consideration. It is also unlikely that it will change mid-season, so just make your objections noted to your division heads and it will be addressed in the appropriate manner.

[Maskman00]

As great as i feel the reg season PIHA rule is, I really think that the playoffs should be pure sudden death. It is really unfair for a team to be eliminated in a 1v1 situation. I was curious what other people thought of this.

[ref'n'roll]

In my previous post I did propose the same options you are all speaking of:

The options are to change the OT rule entirely (play 4-on-4 for five minutes followed by a shootout), or change the rule allowing no less than 2 skaters on the surface. Neither one of those options are being considered at this time. I never considered the option of adding a skater as proposed by Growl, but that is also an option.

The problem is that there would have to be a huge outcry or some sort of petition from a vast majority of the teams for the Executive Board to consider a change mid-season. I don't think the continuos sudden-death option for playoff games would be out of the question of being looked at if there was the same type of majority heard ahead of time and in a timely manner (soon). I don't think it would happen if presented too close to the end of the season or start of the playoffs.

There is a process to change a rule (Rule 70). Each year there are those that complain about certain rules. The OT rule is usually at the top of the list, yet we have never received a proposed rule change within 60 days of the conclusion of the season as outlined in Rule 70 (or at all for that matter).

This process was put in place to give teams the chance to propose changes and to allow the Executive Board and Rules Committee a chance to review the requested change(s). The next step in the process allows teams to review the changes for 30 days before the rule is presented at the pre-season League Meeting for a vote.

The intent of this rule is to discourage us from being too quick to change something without a review. Exceptions to this process are housekeeping changes to the rule book that have been enacted by the Executive Board or Referee-In-Chief mid-season (i.e. the amendment to Rule 28 this year).

Don Frank, PIHA Head Referee, Mason Dixon Division

[icehog]

It is an interesting OT in PIHA, but it's possible that with the growth of the league a more standard format should be adopted.

My local league has gone from a 3 on 3 OT to a shootout right away when the NHL did. Perhaps that is the way to go. Though I don't have any problems giving the current set up a a try.

dave gardner
PIHA NE Div.