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:
Brian Morris <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Fri, 25 Feb 1994 10:26:20 EST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (43 lines)
     Like many of the posters I am not in favor of shoot-outs.  I agree with
Mike's comments that it bases an outcome on a single measure of a team's
strength--offensive firepower.  A better device would seek to integrate both
facets of the game, offense and defense.  Yet at the same time any measure
chosen must be able to actually decide the contest, otherwise the rationale
for using that tie-breaking mechanism is faulty.
 
Five minute overtimes, or even NHL-style overtimes, are IMHO a waste of time.
In the vast majority of cases a game which is tied at the end of regulation
remains tied at the end of the overtime period.  And if anything, overtime
play tends to favor defensive rather than offensive play.  Most teams will
play the OT "not to lose" rather than "to win".  For this same reason, the
implementation of a period of skating 3 on 3's to settle a contest would
also fail.  In my experience one rarely sees scores during 3 on 3's.  Despite
the availability of more ice on which to skate (or maybe the decreased risk of
interference) most teams are concerned with preventing the other team from
scoring rather than pressing their own attack.  In the 3 on 3's I have observed
teams usually send out 2 defensemen and 1 forward, or 1 defensemen, a
"defensive" forward and a scorer.  Teams seem to place emphasis on avoiding
those puck carrying accidents that can result in easy scores.
 
I would suggest a better mechanism to resolve games would be skating 2 on
2's, with the composition mandated to consist of 1 defensemen and 1 forward.
This scenario would include all the facets of good hockey: skating, passing,
checking, shooting, goaltending.  The center ice zone would remain uncluttered,
thus insuring end to end action.  And finally, rough play would result in the
ultimate penalty: the guilty skater would be taken off the ice with play then
resuming as a 2 on 1.   You could handle the 2 on 1 as a single opportunity or
as a short "power play", say 1 minute.  Play would be "sudden death" with each
team guaranteed one possession.
 
I believe this alternative has been tried before in international competition,
although I have never witnessed it.  But it would certainly provide an exciting
finish, to what may have been a boring game.
 
Any comment?
                    _
            "NYS   // Hockey"
        Go 'Gate  //   Brian Morris
          Go RPI //      Albany, NY
          ______// [log in to unmask]
         (______/

ATOM RSS1 RSS2