Actually they are already experimenting with it and they use it in youth tournaments across the country including all the can/am tournaments which are huge.
Please explain how that is worse than having a game be decided by a breakaway? It would rarely ever get to 2 on 2 anyway and 3 one 3 happen in actual games already (though very rarely).
Still does not take away the stupidity of the idea. Never wanted the shootout, so that does not involve any thought process by me. Play 60, results in tie and you play 10 mins 4v4, if it ends in a tie each team gets 1pt apiece, if the NHL still wants a shootout for entertainment...let them shootout but it does not count in regards to wins or losses, it would go into a tiebreaker category, where if teams are tied through the other tiebreakers a shootout win versus loss would count to break the tie. This would probably rarely come into play, which is exactly what role shootouts and 3v3 play should contribute to the game, none.
Why not just run teams PP's out on the ice on a 4v3? Or maybe the goalies should take the shootouts?
Still does not take away the stupidity of the idea. Never wanted the shootout, so that does not involve any thought process by me. Play 60, results in tie and you play 10 mins 4v4, if it ends in a tie each team gets 1pt apiece, if the NHL still wants a shootout for entertainment...let them shootout but it does not count in regards to wins or losses, it would go into a tiebreaker category, where if teams are tied through the other tiebreakers a shootout win versus loss would count to break the tie. This would probably rarely come into play, which is exactly what role shootouts and 3v3 play should contribute to the game, none.
Why not just run teams PP's out on the ice on a 4v3? Or maybe the goalies should take the shootouts?
each goalie should be given a high-powered air cannon. they will then fire pucks at each other. last goalie standing wins.
I never heard of the yellow line before now, but as an immediate, temporary solution I think it is outstanding.
Basically it eliminates the illogical conclusions that the former goal review system necessitated (we know the puck is across the goal line, but there is no clear view of "white ice" between the puck and the line). It is a built in heuristic that makes the current video review model much more comprehensive.
Sensor-based review should still be the goal, but this should go into effect NOW. Never a good thing to let good goals go uncounted.
My idea of how it would work:
So what about the puck that's on it's axis, spinning, etc? That won't touch the yellow line, and you'll still have that same crap as last season.
I can't find the picture, but some people actually made diagrams of the relation of the camera to the net, etc. The puck looks like it's over but in actuality it's on almost 45 degree angle, and the corner was touching the red line.
the yellow line is hokum. only works if the puck is flat on the ice.
I never heard of the yellow line before now, but as an immediate, temporary solution I think it is outstanding.
Basically it eliminates the illogical conclusions that the former goal review system necessitated (we know the puck is across the goal line, but there is no clear view of "white ice" between the puck and the line). It is a built in heuristic that makes the current video review model much more comprehensive.
Sensor-based review should still be the goal, but this should go into effect NOW. Never a good thing to let good goals go uncounted.
My idea of how it would work:
Problem is, you move that green "Obstruction" a couple of inches into the goal, and the yellow line is useless too.
If they really want to be 100% sure about goals, they need to use technology similar to what they use in tennis.
So what about the puck that's on it's axis, spinning, etc? That won't touch the yellow line, and you'll still have that same crap as last season.
I can't find the picture, but some people actually made diagrams of the relation of the camera to the net, etc. The puck looks like it's over but in actuality it's on almost 45 degree angle, and the corner was touching the red line.
the yellow line is hokum. only works if the puck is flat on the ice.
This.
There are several rules that I'd like to see changed..
Removing the trapezoid, puck over the glass as mentioned in this thread, and overtime. I kinda just like a 3vs3 for 10 minutes. If no score, then go to a shootout. I know I could only choose one, but it's too hard for me to decide But really, I'd probably go with the overtime.
Pretty much anything that's been implemented since the lockout. The game has been guinea pigged with too much. There needs to be more thought behind things that are put into the game. The game was fine for the most part but we keep seeing radical change which is taking things farther and farther away from what it should be
^^^^^^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^^^^^ i wish they dint screw with the game at all.....leave it the way it was from the beginning.....i mean the rule parts....i can see screwing with the pads and stuff just cause the shots are much much harder then before..harder NOT faster........i would like to see them get rid of the CURVE rule all together.....hell IF u can shoot with a curve from hell.....let em do it.....thats the lamest rule i have heard of.....except the instigator rule toss that one out too GARY you,,........sorry tourettes starting to click in
Mine would be simple. I don't know if you guys read, but Alfreddson was involved in talks to make the size of the rinks universal internationally. He supports them being olympic size, which I think would help the game. I don't know if you guys have ever played on olympic size ice, but it opens the ice up significantly and makes the game more finesse. Maybe hockey could get rid of their current reputation of "having an excuse to fight as a sport".
Mine would be simple. I don't know if you guys read, but Alfreddson was involved in talks to make the size of the rinks universal internationally. He supports them being olympic size, which I think would help the game. I don't know if you guys have ever played on olympic size ice, but it opens the ice up significantly and makes the game more finesse. Maybe hockey could get rid of their current reputation of "having an excuse to fight as a sport".
What do you guys think?
Fighting is part of the NA game. What are the most popular sports? MMA, Nascar, NFL. Each one has a certain aspect of violence, and each has a popularity that sells. MMA is hand to hand combat, knockouts, blood. Nascar is people watching high speed action in an oval and waiting for a crash or a bump and spinout. NFL promotes the violence of the sport while at the same time attempting to say it is doing something about head injuries. If the international community wants their "finesse" game they can keep their rinks, but trying to change the size of a rink so to make it more "finesse" will only depopularize the sport even more than it is at this time.
And go figure, is this a Pens fan wanting to pansify the sport even more? Pathetic.
Mine would be simple. I don't know if you guys read, but Alfreddson was involved in talks to make the size of the rinks universal internationally. He supports them being olympic size, which I think would help the game. I don't know if you guys have ever played on olympic size ice, but it opens the ice up significantly and makes the game more finesse. Maybe hockey could get rid of their current reputation of "having an excuse to fight as a sport".
What do you guys think?
No. Bigger rinks make the game dull. See: all non-northamerican leagues.
Sorry guys but I think it's inevitable that it's going to happen. You ahve to look at the bigger picture. Figting only attracts the meatheads who like fighting. The guys with pure talent and soft hands don't need it, it hinders their game.
Anyway, I'm not saying that I want to take fighting away, I just want fighting to be one aspect of the game, I don't want hockey to be viewed as, "the fighting sport", I want it to be a game that requires extraordinary talent. That way it'll attract a broader audience and bring it back. North America is dominated by football, basketball and baseball. I'm looking at the big picture for the overall health of the sport.
Sorry guys but I think it's inevitable that it's going to happen. You ahve to look at the bigger picture. Figting only attracts the meatheads who like fighting. The guys with pure talent and soft hands don't need it, it hinders their game.
Anyway, I'm not saying that I want to take fighting away, I just want fighting to be one aspect of the game, I don't want hockey to be viewed as, "the fighting sport", I want it to be a game that requires extraordinary talent. That way it'll attract a broader audience and bring it back. North America is dominated by football, basketball and baseball. I'm looking at the big picture for the overall health of the sport.
Violence in direct aspect to the game attracts fans, not the Crosby fellators who feel the need to have every touch of the stick a penalty or every time Crosby dives to the ice like he has been shot is a penalty. It does help keep those players who take liberties with others, such as Cooke, to be held accountable by action and not threats. It is also part of the entertainment value of the dollar spent to the consumer who goes. When do people stand and cheer besides on goals, when two willing combatents take the center of the ice and square off to earn their paychecks. Don't be such a wuss.
Violence in direct aspect to the game attracts fans, not the Crosby fellators who feel the need to have every touch of the stick a penalty or every time Crosby dives to the ice like he has been shot is a penalty. It does help keep those players who take liberties with others, such as Cooke, to be held accountable by action and not threats. It is also part of the entertainment value of the dollar spent to the consumer who goes. When do people stand and cheer besides on goals, when two willing combatents take the center of the ice and square off to earn their paychecks. Don't be such a wuss.
My intentions are not to take fighting out of the game completely. I by no means want it gone completely. I think you may have gotten the wrong idea. I know that people love fighting, and trust me, I hate Crosby's theatrics as much as the next guy. I just want other people to see that Hockey is actually enjoyable to watch, because frankly, I'm sick of basketball and football getting all of the high ratings. So, when Alfreddson brought that up at the summit, I agreed with his proposals.
But really, I'd probably go with the overtime.
