Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucla-cs.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!whuxl!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!trwrb!cepu!ucla-cs!rick From: rick@ucla-cs.UUCP Newsgroups: net.sport.hockey Subject: Re: shootouts and other rule changes Message-ID: <5982@ucla-cs.ARPA> Date: Wed, 12-Jun-85 16:18:40 EDT Article-I.D.: ucla-cs.5982 Posted: Wed Jun 12 16:18:40 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 17-Jun-85 04:28:16 EDT References: <1569@dciem.UUCP> Reply-To: rick@ucla-cs.UUCP (Richard Gillespie) Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Lines: 53 Summary: > 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. The players might object to having rest time taken away from them. They need the full two intermissions to prevent exhaustion. Can you imagine someone like Gretzky or Langway playing as much as they do now without that rest? >Anyway, back to shootouts, I'd like to know if anyone shares my opinion >on shootouts and another suggested rule change or two. > ... > Hockey is a team game and should be kept that way. >Shootouts place too much importance on goaltending, which is important >enough already. Okay, I agree. However, how about running a series of 3-on-3's, or 3-on-2's? That might give us the "best" of both worlds. It is still a team game but would actually decide something. HOWEVER, I would still give the losing team a point in the standings for playing to a tie in overtime (the shootout has been proposed for breaking ties after overtime). > 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. The reason penalty shots are exciting is that they are so rare. It would get boring to watch (I think) if we got them in 30% (or whatever percent of games end in ties) of the games played. As for 5 minutes of overtime I have to agree with Bill Torrey when he said "5 minutes of overtime is like 5 seconds of sex." >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 is the dumbest suggestion I have ever heard. I think old Louie has gone crackers. If they want to speed up the game then they should reduce the number of stoppages, right? Well, I remember an old WHA suggestion (I think it was Billy Harris' idea): curve the blue line so that it is equidistant from the center of the net. Then the wingers could keep up with the center (carrying the puck) more easily and not go offside so much. You think hockey has high scoring games now? >Jeff Richardson, DCIEM, Toronto (416) 635-2073 -- Rick Gillespie ARPANET: rick@ucla-locus.ARPA or (soon) rick@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU UUCP: ...!{cepu|ihnp4|sdcrdcf|ucbvax}!ucla-cs!rick SPUDNET: ...eye%rick@russet.spud