Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site dciem.UUCP Path: utzoo!dciem!jeff From: jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) Newsgroups: net.sport.hockey Subject: Re: shootouts and other rule changes Message-ID: <1569@dciem.UUCP> Date: Thu, 6-Jun-85 11:45:25 EDT Article-I.D.: dciem.1569 Posted: Thu Jun 6 11:45:25 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 6-Jun-85 14:04:20 EDT References: Reply-To: jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) Organization: D.C.I.E.M., Toronto, Canada Lines: 39 Summary: > Shootouts (as proposed by Marcel Aubut (sp?) ) or rules changes > are NOT going to attract USA fans. Media attention will. > > Tim Newman I agree. The only rule changes that might help are those that might decrease the amount of time it takes to play a game without decreasing the amount of hockey action, like shortening the intermissions (it takes less than 10 minutes to flood the ice) or cutting one of them out completely. Anyway, back to shootouts, I'd like to know if anyone shares my opinion on shootouts and another suggested rule change or two. There are few things I feel more strongly about than my opposition to shootouts. Whenever somebody suggests that the NHL (or any hockey league, for that matter) should adopt shootouts, I have to really restrain myself from punching him in the face (and I'm not a violent person) because I feel he is trying to ruin my favourite sport. Hockey is a team game and should be kept that way. Shootouts place too much importance on goaltending, which is important enough already. Shootouts are a stupid, bush-league way of deciding a winner. They don't tell you anything about which is the better team; you might as well toss a coin. People argue in favour of them by saying that the penalty shot is the most exciting play in hockey. Personally, I find overtime much more exciting. Penalty shots make sense in the context in which they are used now, but not for breaking ties, and I think part of their excitement is due to the fact that they are so rare. Another rule change that is almost as stupid is Lou Nanne's (North Stars GM) suggestion of not allowing players to be changed while play is stopped. He figures it would speed up the game because these changes take time. That's certainly a reasonable thing to try to do, but not if it means decreasing the amount of hockey action, which it would do because when teams have to change on the fly, they break up what could be an interesting rush by just shooting the puck into the other team's zone and skating to the bench. There are several other things they can do to try to speed up the game, like cutting out those stupid commercial breaks in the middle of periods. -- Jeff Richardson, DCIEM, Toronto (416) 635-2073 {linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd}!utcsri!dciem!jeff {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!dciem!jeff