Why I hope the NHL ditches the Olympics

[daver]

You may not like the shootout but it's still "playing hockey".

I don't see a natural reason for the shootout to emerge into a "hockey" game other than forcing the game to be concluded by a specified time.

 

[Canuckistani]

You may not like the shootout but it's still "playing hockey".

Shootouts are "playing hockey" as much as taking part in a home-run derby or a game of catch is "playing baseball."

 

[Theokritos]

I'm not high on shootouts either, but I'm sure the NHL or Hockey Canada could work something out with the IOC/IIHF to change it if they felt strongly about it, without ditching the Olympics altogether.

 

[Jussi]

Who was Finland playing back in the day against in that 102 minute or so international game that went on until someone shot the GWG? Because that had an awesome sports event feel to it. "I'm so watching how this ends, sleep be damned!"

I have no idea what game you're referring to. We haven't gone to OT in any non-IIHF tournament and the IIHF tournaments have the standard OT times already established. Unless you're thinking of the 1996 Stanley Cup Final game 4 which was aired on free tv but cut off due to morning tv shows.

 

[Jussi]

Then schedule the games to allow for at least one 20-minute OT. Not an ideal arrangement, but it would allow the vast majority of games to be decided without a shootout.

World Championships are usually held in two cities in one land with two arenas used. With multiple games played in the same arena the same day, you can't risk ruining the schedule, hence the 10 minute ot.

With World Cup it was easier because of the fractured nature of the tournament.

 

[Lempo]

I have no idea what game you're referring to. We haven't gone to OT in any non-IIHF tournament and the IIHF tournaments have the standard OT times already established. Unless you're thinking of the 1996 Stanley Cup Final game 4 which was aired on free tv but cut off due to morning tv shows.

Hmh. It's possible it was not a Finland game after all... has there been a finale or some other important game in an international tournament where they went madly overtime and played a couple of overtime periods before someone finally scored? Sometime in the nineties I think?

 

[Epsilon]

The Olympics need a way to ensure a game ends in finite time because they are a multi-sport even that uses the same venues for multiple events, and the schedule can't just be up-ended for hockey games because some fans don't like the method chosen to break ties.

 

[Canuck21t]

Shootouts exist due to tv contracts. Games are on from afternoon to early evening or prime time in European countries and games have a certain time allotted in the tv schedules. Not every tv station can keep bumping programs due to a hockey game running "too long". Remember you're dealing with multiple countries. The shootout is not going away, period. To suggest otherwise shows complete lack of understanding on how international tv contracts work.

I can understand the World Championships using shootouts in the final games, but I don't think it is necessary at the Olympics since TV stations dedicate consecutive hours on different events already. They can decide to bump some events they deem less important.

Not only is the IIHF allow a skill contest to decide supremacy, but on top of that after 3 tries, they allow one player to do it over and over again. That's throwing away all team concept out of the water. I still favour the Olympics run by the IIHF, but I think someone could really lobby for a change concerning this matter.

 

[Jussi]

Hmh. It's possible it was not a Finland game after all... has there been a finale or some other important game in an international tournament where they went madly overtime and played a couple of overtime periods before someone finally scored? Sometime in the nineties I think?

Nope. There's only domestic league playoffs (HIFK-Ilves?) or NHL SC playoffs. World Cup semifinals involving Canada went to OT but those ended in 2nd and 1st OT periods respectively.

I can understand the World Championships using shootouts in the final games, but I don't think it is necessary at the Olympics since TV stations dedicate consecutive hours on different events already. They can decide to bump some events they deem less important.

Already explained by Epsilon.

The Olympics need a way to ensure a game ends in finite time because they are a multi-sport even that uses the same venues for multiple events, and the schedule can't just be up-ended for hockey games because some fans don't like the method chosen to break ties.

 

[jekoh]

but on top of that after 3 tries, they allow one player to do it over and over again.

I've never understood why they went from 5 shooters to just 3. The only reason I can think of is 'to mimic the NHL'.

 

[Xokkeu]

If the entire argument about pulling out of the Olympics is about shootouts, I find that hard to take seriously.

If the argument is about who should organize the tournament, the IIHF or the NHL, then I don't see anything that makes me think that the amateurs in Toronto would do a better job than those in Zurich.

 

[fedfed]

QF/SF games need to end quicker because there's always the next game coming up in the same arena. Would you want your team's game to be delayed a couple hours because the previous guys can't decided in time?

And you can't start one game after another, you need to empty the building and fill it again. If you'r talking about 10 or more thousand people, it can take quite some time.

 

[UsernameWasTaken]

whatever. i hope the NHL is in s. korea...and if accepting the current rules means they'll be there, i'm fine with that.

 

[fedfed]

I can understand the World Championships using shootouts in the final games, but I don't think it is necessary at the Olympics since TV stations dedicate consecutive hours on different events already. They can decide to bump some events they deem less important.

Not only is the IIHF allow a skill contest to decide supremacy, but on top of that after 3 tries, they allow one player to do it over and over again. That's throwing away all team concept out of the water. I still favour the Olympics run by the IIHF, but I think someone could really lobby for a change concerning this matter.

A 3OT game would ruin a day of national TV network nicely, at least in Russia. Would go well beyond the time dedicated for the rest of Olympics.

 

[CanadienShark]

Shootouts exist due to tv contracts. Games are on from afternoon to early evening or prime time in European countries and games have a certain time allotted in the tv schedules. Not every tv station can keep bumping programs due to a hockey game running "too long". Remember you're dealing with multiple countries. The shootout is not going away, period. To suggest otherwise shows complete lack of understanding on how international tv contracts work.

Admittedly (perhaps dumbly) I'd never thought about TV contracts like that before. I'm surprised more people haven't said this kind of thing before, as I don't think I've ever seen someone mention this.

 

[member 202355]

I don't really mind not having NHL players in the Olympics or ice hockey in general, but I do prefer it.

 

[Lempo]

Nope. There's only domestic league playoffs (HIFK-Ilves?) or NHL SC playoffs. World Cup semifinals involving Canada went to OT but those ended in 2nd and 1st OT periods respectively.

Ah, it was that one, World Cup 1996 semifinal Canada-Sweden that I was thinking about. Full overtime periods and they played a full one and had just started the second when Canada scored, ending the game at 80 and something minutes. The longest game in the international hockey ever, Wikipedia knows to tell me.

Yes. That was a fun one. Other than the time and the teams, I was spot on.

 

[Jacques Trap*]

One problem with ditching Olympics is that most euros won't accept a canada/world cup as a true best on best.

 

[DoyleG]

I wouldn't be so sure of that. It was a different era back then. But I hope we have both.

Not a chance.

The Canada Cup worked because of the politics of the era where we rarely saw the Soviets and the Czechs and when Swedes and Finns were still few in the NHL. That isn't the case now, especially since the NHL wants to have it both ways.

 

[Canuck21t]

One problem with ditching Olympics is that most euros won't accept a canada/world cup as a true best on best.

Whether we like the IIHF or not, it is logical that a sport federation is in control of an international event. That's how it is in other sports, I don't know why hockey should be different. North Americans are just being selfish wanting everything our way.

 

[Jacques Trap*]

Whether we like the IIHF or not, it is logical that a sport federation is in control of an international event. That's how it is in other sports, I don't know why hockey should be different. North Americans are just being selfish wanting everything our way.

You may be right be generalizing North Americans like that. However, if the Finns or the Czechs or someone one else organized an international tournament that facilitated the the very best players from each country being able to participate, I for one would consider it a "best on best".

 

[Epsilon]

I can understand the World Championships using shootouts in the final games, but I don't think it is necessary at the Olympics since TV stations dedicate consecutive hours on different events already. They can decide to bump some events they deem less important.

Not only is the IIHF allow a skill contest to decide supremacy, but on top of that after 3 tries, they allow one player to do it over and over again. That's throwing away all team concept out of the water. I still favour the Olympics run by the IIHF, but I think someone could really lobby for a change concerning this matter.

Agree completely with this, I have no idea why they changed it to this format. The strategy in choosing 5 shooters (and who to go after them, if it goes longer) is far more interesting than having two specialists go up against the goaltender over and over again. I can't believe there are people who actually favor introducing that format in the NHL.

 

[Theokritos]

Agree completely with this, I have no idea why they changed it to this format. The strategy in choosing 5 shooters (and who to go after them, if it goes longer) is far more interesting than having two specialists go up against the goaltender over and over again. I can't believe there are people who actually favor introducing that format in the NHL.

Seconded. In soccer the go with 5 shooters and if it's still a tie they carry on with no player allowed a second attempt until the whole team (including the goaltender!) is through. More interesting and exciting.

 

[Jacques Trap*]

Seconded. In soccer the go with 5 shooters and if it's still a tie they carry on with no player allowed a second attempt until the whole team (including the goaltender!) is through. More interesting and exciting.

I would've loved to have seen bobrovsky and quick take a pk vs one another.

 

[Jussi]

You may be right be generalizing North Americans like that. However, if the Finns or the Czechs or someone one else organized an international tournament that facilitated the the very best players from each country being able to participate, I for one would consider it a "best on best".

I think you missed the point. It's not about a country organizing a tournament, but rather one league. It's not like Canada/USA nor Finland/Czech Rep would be organizing a World Cup on their own.