I’m sitting here watching the Pittsburgh Penguins and Philadelphia Flyers battle it out in the second period of a potential elimination game. (Pit leads the series 3-2).
Note: Sean Couturier with a breakaway goal and it’s 3-2 Flyers.
Earlier in the game, Rebecca — one of the writers here at the Sin Bin and new hockey fan herself — was watching and asked what the difference was between a penalty and delayed-penalty. I quickly responded with “there is no difference”.
Her response was simple yet justified. “Huh?”
This is one of the many reasons why I love having her on this team of writers. As someone who grew up around the game, it’s so easy to overlook these little details that may leave others scratching their head. I’m sure if she has this question, so do others.
So let me unpack my answer a little.
What I mean by “there is no difference” is that it’s not the penalty that causes the delay, it’s the context of it.
Say Sidney Crosby, a forward for the Penguins, is skating down the ice with the puck but is tripped by a player on the Flyers.
If Crosby loses possession and a Flyers player instantly grabs the puck, the whistle is blown and the play is stopped. The Flyers player will go to the penalty box and take some time to think about what they did while the Penguins have a player advantage (5 players vs 4 players) for the duration of the power-play.
So what happens if Crosby doesn’t lose possession of the puck or Jake Guentzel, another forward for the Penguins, grabs it before a Flyers player can touch it? Well, you have a delayed penalty.
The official isn’t going to stop play if the team that was tripped has possession of the puck, and instead will raise their hand to signal a “delayed penalty”.
Many times you will see the team which is not the offender (the Penguins here) pull their goalie for an extra attacker. They do this because it’s safe to leave the net empty during the game because the play is stopped as soon as a Flyers player takes possession of the puck.
There are some side notes that may help you understand what is happening on the ice.
If the official raises his arm for a delayed minor penalty (2-minutes) and the non-offending team manages to score a goal (Penguins in the above situation), the penalty is wiped out and nobody from the Flyers will be sent to the box.
If the offending team (the Flyers) commit another penalty while there is a delayed penalty, both players will go to the box. Only one will go to the box if a goal is scored with two delayed penalties.
The player will still go to the box and the non-offending team will be on the power play if a goal is scored during a delayed call for a 5-minute major.
There are plenty of other instances involved with delayed penalties such as when you can come out of the box, reviews, etc., but I will save that for another post. I just wanted to get this out while I sat here watching the game.
* Below is an interesting video of the Ottawa Senators using the delayed penalty to waste the remaining time of their own penalty. As a result the Senators were on a power-play instead of playing 4-on-4 hockey.
Comments
So...
is it similar to how they play advantage in soccer?
By Taylor Bartle on 04.24.18 5:04pm
Yes
if the team still has the ball when the foul is committed by the opposing team and the ref sees the foul he lets the team play on with an advantage. The advantage usually only exists for a certain bit of time.
If the ref sees that there wasn’t much of an advantage like the team turn over the ball really quickly after the foul then the center ref will call the foul and bring the back at the spot of the foul.
By gstommylee on 04.24.18 5:08pm
Its up to the ref to decide if the team had penty of time to have the advantage or not
By gstommylee on 04.24.18 5:12pm
Correct, except in the case of soccer, the advantage is only possession, where in hockey, the advantage is your goalie coming off and gaining an attacker.
Meaning, it’s basically a bigger advantage in hockey and can last a long time if the possession is kept by the 6 attackers.
By Throbert Bedford on 04.25.18 9:36am
I wish basketball had delayed penalties. Why should your team suffer if your team is the one who gets fouled. Keep playing if get fouled. If you lose possession you get your free throws. If make basket, get one foul shot. At least in last minute of game.
Works great in hockey. Also in football, team has option to decline penalty. My whole point being is you shouldn’t be penalized for being penalized.
By bosshogg18 on 04.25.18 11:11am
eh
That would be kinda lame. I don’t see that ever happening in the NBA.
By gstommylee on 04.25.18 11:19am
Kinda lame?
Getting fouled every 5 seconds in the last minute of a game, and that 1 minute of game clock takes 20 minutes. Now that is lame.
By bosshogg18 on 04.25.18 1:21pm
Exactly. Even the last minute in NFL is faster.
By Throbert Bedford on 04.25.18 3:46pm
what i do fine lame is
teams fouling every 5 seconds when the game is practically out of reach.
By gstommylee on 04.25.18 4:10pm
Intentional fouls are lame no matter how close the game is. If you need the ball back, play hard defense and get it back.
a large number of time outs per team and intentional fouling makes a decent sport unwatchable toward the end of regulation.
By Throbert Bedford on 04.25.18 4:33pm
An end of regulation reform in NBA would be awesome.
It would likely fix a lot of the reasons why I find the end of basketball games completely excruciating the watch. Basketball is a flow sport, like hockey, and shouldn’t try to be the kind of stop start sport that the NFL is. Football works as stop start because the plays are extremely complex and require time to set up, basketball does not. Yet, here we are with basketball teetering between flow and start stop. When basketball is flowing, it’s fine, but once the end of the regulation creeps in, it’s unwatchable. The intentional fouls, timeouts, and all that nonsense brings the game to a screeching halt.
If they changed it so each team only has one timeout in the last 2-3 minutes and they use delayed penalties, that would go a really long way to keeping the game flow at the end of regulation. It would make it exciting again rather than a bunch of free throws and timeouts while the clock stays still. Make the players actually do their job and think on their feet and run the plays that they practice, they don’t need pow-wows every 3 seconds to figure out what to do next. It’s ridiculous.
By Throbert Bedford on 04.25.18 12:12pm
I've never thought of that solution before..
Definitely have noticed that some kind of change had to occur, but delayed penalties would be the most benefit from the least changed. The foul shots wouldn’t be given until after a shot or a change in possession once the defending team is in the bonus or bonus+ Genius!
By OlyBrandon21 on 04.25.18 4:22pm