HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Date:
Thu, 26 Jan 1995 13:33:18 EST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (55 lines)
        I received a dozen responses to my query.   Most said around 45 s.
with circumstances often dictating extension to around a minute.   Some said
that defensemen often were forced to extend their shift to 75 s.
 
        Many asked for an explanation of the circumstances of my request.
This will be long-winded,  but it will also be germane.   Some years ago
when my kids had been playing hockey for a year or two,  Dorothy and I
decided to go out to UConn for a game.   Up until that time I didn't even
know UConn played hockey.   My lasting recollection of college hockey was from
years before when Clarkson went 20-2 in the regular season (including a 6-3
win over MSU in E. Lansing) only to lose MSU 6-2 in the NC$$ final.   I
thought that all those hours spent at Walker qualified me as a fair judge
of the sport.
 
        I was *absolutely* shocked!   Here was a D-3 team (I think they were
5-18-2 that year) playing at a speed which was twice that I had ever seen
in college hockey.   And of course Bowdoin was playing that way too.   It
turned out that night we were sitting next to Mr. and Mrs. Ashe of Springfield,
MA,  who had a son on the Bowdoin team (or perhaps their son was considering
Bowdoin).   This was the same Ashe family that had a son at Clarkson,  one at
Trinity,  one at Plattsburg,  and now one at BC.   We got to talking,  and
the point was made that ever since the 70's,  when the Russians really showed
the world what fast hockey was all about,  the game had completely changed.  It
was also pointed out that on-ice shifts were now much shorter than the 2 min.
for forwards and 3 min. for defensemen that I remembered.   (If you don't
believe me,  watch the Stanley Cup finals from the early '70's.   They were
in *slow* motion.)
 
        Fast forward to a few years later and quite a few NESN broadcasts
later,  and after observing the best youth hockey in the area like the Junior
Pic's,  I thought I had a fairly up to date viewpoint.   A shift is nominally
40 s. which has to do with the limit of anaerobic activity  --  which anyone
who has run the 400 meter "dash" will tell you is about it.   After 40 s. or
so,  the body starts to pay back your oxygen debt whether you want it to or
not.
 
        Unfortunately,  neither one of my kids' coaches has bought into the
short shift theory.   The coach for my younger son is very approachable,
and we have been having a good-natured running debate on the topic for a
couple of months.   I needed ammunition to use against him which is why
I made the request.:-)
 
        My older son's coach is *not* approachable,  so I wouldn't
even try.   His position can be summarized by the following incident.   In a
game against Holderness,  my son's team was killing a penalty and managed
to ice the puck at about the one minute mark of the short-handed situation.
At that point a loud whistle was heard from the bench area and the Holderness
team promptly changed its powerplay unit.  My son's coach ... left the penalty
killers out there!   I needed several stitches for my tongue:-)   [Head
tilted upward,  eyes rolled back into the head.]   Oh,  well.
 
        Thanks for the response folks.
 
        -- Dick Tuthill

ATOM RSS1 RSS2