Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site cmu-cs-k.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!rochester!cmu-cs-pt!cmu-cs-k!msc
From: msc@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Murray Campbell)
Newsgroups: net.sport.hockey
Subject: Re: Offence vs Defence
Message-ID: <392@cmu-cs-k.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 9-May-85 10:17:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: cmu-cs-k.392
Posted: Thu May  9 10:17:00 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 11-May-85 08:13:52 EDT
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI
Lines: 41

Jeff,
  It seems that you have two (and maybe more) criteria for 'good'
hockey games:

1.  The game should be close.

I am sure that everyone would agree that 'close' games have
more excitement value.  'Close' is, of course, a relative term.
If, for example, the Penguins were down two goals to the Flyers,
we no longer have a close game.  If the Oilers were down two
goals to the Penguins, we still have a close game.  

2.  The teams should play at least competently (and hopefully brilliantly),
    both offensively and defensively.

Again, who would argue?

If you think the Oilers are in general boring because they are
better than almost all the other teams, and the games are rarely close,
then I cannot find fault with your reasoning.  Dominating teams are
usually interesting to watch, and are to be admired, but if they
are too dominating the excitement of competition is lost.

If, however, you find the Oilers boring because they choose to emphasize
offence over defence, then I suggest you you are unreasonably
prejudiced.  Saying that the *real* way to play hockey is to
play defence like in the old days comes off sounding like some
bitter old guy from the 'old league' who is jealous of the huge
salaries of today.

I admit that I tend to get bored by teams that always shoot the
puck in, never send more than one man in deep, line up 4 or 5 guys
on the blue line, force the other team to shoot it in (and
immediately clear it to center ice), and only really try to
score on power plays.  Especially when they play each other.
Obviously there must be a balance between offence and defence.
But saying that the balance must tip towards the defensive side
is dogmatic.  I think there is a range on both sides for good
hockey.

		Murray Campbell (msc@cmu-cs-k)