Swiss ice hockey must be on the books

class=”sc-3778e872-0 cKDKQr”>

Everyone is aware that goalkeeper disabilities are a gray area, but the league and referees should not use this rule to set up species protections for goalkeepers. During referee discussions during video reviews, you sometimes hear that the referees only analyze the behavior of the outfield players loitering in the keeper’s living room – but don’t pay attention to whether the keeper is actually being hindered or pretending to be.

The visual handicap. A bureaucratic blunder invented by Swiss bean counters. If you think about it, there is only one outcome – throw it in the trash.

“Lex Ajoie”? The successor to the «Lex Lakers». Once had to be introduced because the Lakers were not competitive and (felt) preparing for the play-outs from mid-November. What was right then wouldn’t be wrong now: a team that isn’t progressing shouldn’t be permanently protected from relegation. What about entering a points limit? A team that finishes bottom three times in a row and loses more than 10 points to 13th place in the third year is immediately relegated.

If the referees suspect a serious infringement, they can impose a 5-minute penalty and watch the whole thing on the replay. The crux: if they then find out there was nothing, they still have to serve a time penalty of at least 2 minutes. Again, because it is so absurd: the referees consult the TV images, discover no violation and still have to pronounce a penalty because it is so in the rules. Who comes up with such ideas?

There used to be an iron rule: only the captains talk to the referees. That was good, because: no constant chatter, no faxes, no howls of protest after every illegal long shot. Then the referees wanted to be more open and communicate with the players. The result: resembles football. Every decision is questioned, everything has to be explained. That takes time and nerves.

Speaking of time, games of almost three hours are no longer uncommon. Insanity. The reasons: too many interruptions due to video reviews, breaks rolled from 15 to 18 minutes, and the rulebook. What can you do? Shorten the breaks. Finally, punish the staged brawls during stoppages as the rulebook dictates and clean up the face-off rules: the pointless theater of the linesman before throw-ins is of no interest to anyone.

Did you feel like the Swallow Chasers were on vacation in the playoffs? Fines were only reluctantly handed out, you could almost get the idea that you don’t want to block a repeat offender under any circumstances. The clubs have to make a decision: they want to solve this problem or not. Lately you didn’t get the impression that the clubs really mean it.

If the case is clear, the case is clear: take action. But in the gray area, the minimum penalty should be reduced from three suspensions to one. Due to the speed and situation, a collision is often unavoidable – and it’s usually easy to tell if a player wanted to avoid contact or not.

When was this discussed? Whenever someone felt wronged. Nevertheless, a fundamental decision on this subject is missing. The sports strategists should cast a final vote: to do or not to do. If you let it go, this deal should be made: Shut up if you lose a game after offside couldn’t be verified due to insufficient shots.

Source : Blick