In a message dated 96-12-31 06:23:53 EST, John writes:
 
> Perhaps it was just an attempt to get the thing over with quickly. I'm
>  going to assume that the first OT was played without resurfacing. If the
>  game had ended within the first 5 minutes then the OT would only have
>  added 5-10 minutes to the game, and not delayed the next game (if this
>  was the first game). Once you flood the ice, you're adding 15 minutes to
>  the game time, and definitely delaying the second game.
>
He's right-  they have a 5 min OT period without resurfacing the ice to keep
the game moving.  The three(5?) minutes in between periods is basically just
a chance for people to rehydrate(especially the goalies).  They can't play
much longer than 5 minutes(I believe HE talked about having a 10 min OT
period during the time they tried the shootouts) because the ice gets really
bad.  The ice tends to deteriorate at the end of a game anyway(depending on
where you are)- 5 min is about all it can take without resurfacing.
 Sometimes even that is a lot.  It also keeps the momentum going for both
teams and helps prevent cramping(not to mention giving statisticians a break
from running down into the locker room).
 
Rob Grover
Umaine 1996
Go Bears!!!!!
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.