HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

What size rink do you prefer: NHL, International or midway?

View Poll Results: What's the best rink size?
NHL: 200 feet long and 85 feet wide 24 27.91%
International: 210 feet long and 98 feet wide 23 26.74%
Midway: 205 feet long and 91 feet wide 39 45.35%
Voters: 86. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-02-2011, 01:39 PM
  #1
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,831
vCash: 500
What size rink do you prefer: NHL, International or midway?

What size rink do people prefer?
  • A standard NHL rink is 200 feet long and 85 feet wide, with goal lines 11 feet from the end boards.
  • International ice is 210 feet long and 98 feet wide. Goal lines are 13 feet from the end boards.
  • A midway point would be 205 feet long and 91 feet wide, with the goal 12 feet from the end boards.

The advantage of a large rink is that it allowed the skilled and the fast players to display their skill. The advantage of a small rink is that it makes the game more physical.

Personally, I like the midway point. It gives the skilled players more room to roam, but it also keeps the game decently physical. I think that a slightly larger rink would make the game more interesting, with more scoring, more creativeness, and less use for guys like Boogard, while still allowing guys like Prust to be very useful.

Another advantage of larger ice would be fewer injuries, so star players would last longer and long-term it would improve the quality of the players.


Last edited by Beacon: 05-02-2011 at 02:57 PM.
Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 01:51 PM
  #2
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 17,094
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerEsq View Post
What size rink do people prefer?
  • A standard NHL rink is 200 feet long and 85 feet wide, with goal lines 11 feet from the end boards.
  • International ice is 210 feet long and 98 feet wide. Goal lines are 13 feet from the end boards.
  • A midway point would be 205 feet long and 91 feet wide, with the goal 12 feet from the end boards.

The advantage of a large rink is that it allowed the skilled and the fast players to display their skill. The advantage of a small rink is that it makes the game more physical.

Personally, I like the midway point. It gives the skilled players more room to roam, but it also keeps the game decently physical. I think that a slightly larger rink would make the game more interesting, with more scoring, more creativeness, and less use for guys like Boogard, while still allowing guys like Prust to be very useful.
Was always under the impression that International dimensions were 200x100 and that NHL was 200x85

This link agrees.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_rink#Dimensions

I prefer the tighter 200x85 as it creates more physicality and speed.

pld459666 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 01:52 PM
  #3
Ail
Girardi Sucks
 
Ail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Mysidia
Country: United States
Posts: 18,249
vCash: 500
I'll take whatever brings more creativity and slick goals.

I like physical hockey too, but the highlight reel plays are where it's at.

Ail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 01:57 PM
  #4
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,831
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
Was always under the impression that International dimensions were 200x100 and that NHL was 200x85

This link agrees.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_rink#Dimensions

I prefer the tighter 200x85 as it creates more physicality and speed.
http://proicehockey.about.com/od/int...mpic_rules.htm

This one gives my measurements. Either way, it's not about the precise number of feet. I just want to know if people prefer NHL size, International size or somewhere in the middle.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 02:02 PM
  #5
ThisYearsModel
Registered User
 
ThisYearsModel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 7,094
vCash: 500
Given the size of NHL players and the lack of offense, olympic is the way to go.

ThisYearsModel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 02:03 PM
  #6
JohnnyRanger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 41
vCash: 500
after watching a few games in the worlds, i would love to see a wider rink. the game moves so much faster and gives your skilled guys some room to work with...international all the way

JohnnyRanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 02:23 PM
  #7
bmundus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: seattle, wa
Country: United States
Posts: 204
vCash: 500
+ - on both sides that to me kinda even it out.
bigger rink: Skilled faster players will be given time to make plays. Less injures because of less physical play. You will see more speed. Easier to fallow, for those new to hockey.
smaller rink: The hitting!, you just don't see that much hitting in international. quick plays because you have to make them with less room. Goes along with last point but the game appears faster.

I like the fact that we have a different rink/game then international play.
Funnest game I have been to was in LuleŚ of the SEL, but that was more to do with the fans.
I do like the way the refs called the 2010 Olympics, I would pick that part of International play over anything.

bmundus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 02:39 PM
  #8
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 24,178
vCash: 50
Awards:
The wider rinks are great at opening things up. More offensive flow. However, it comes with a tradeoff: less physical play. It's also worth considering that a lot of guys in the league right now, who grew up playing a rugged North American game, would be far less useful on a larger ice surface.

Wade Redden and players like him were crippled by the "opening up" of the game post-lockout, with the reduction on clutch-and-grab and greater emphasis on speed and agility. You'd see a similar wave of once-good players no longer being able to cut it on a larger surface.

I enjoy watching the Olympics and international tournaments on those large surfaces. The guys playing in those events are the best of the best, and they thrive on the open surfaces. For the NHL, though, with all the muckers and grinders that I know and love, I'd prefer keeping the smaller, more confined surface.

__________________

It's just pain.
nyr2k2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 02:45 PM
  #9
vipernsx
Flatus Expeller
 
vipernsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 6,527
vCash: 500
NHL players have gotten bigger but the rinks haven't. It only makes sense that they do. I say midway.

vipernsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 02:47 PM
  #10
Swept In Seven
Disciple of The Zook
 
Swept In Seven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 9,491
vCash: 50
I say midway

Swept In Seven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 02:51 PM
  #11
pwoz
Registered User
 
pwoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 2,547
vCash: 500
Midway, but that means Dolan sells fewer $eats. It will never happen.

pwoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 02:52 PM
  #12
Swept In Seven
Disciple of The Zook
 
Swept In Seven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 9,491
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwoz View Post
Midway, but that means Dolan sells fewer $eats. It will never happen.
If the NHL makes it a rule Dolan must comply

Swept In Seven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 03:38 PM
  #13
94now
Registered User
 
94now's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Snow Belt, USA
Country: United Nations
Posts: 6,445
vCash: 500
I don't care. It is harder to play trap on Olympic size ice. On the other hand, cycling is problematic on bigger rink. I am glad the nets are the same.
I wonder why people comment on rink size influence, if majority thinks that effort wins the game.

94now is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 03:40 PM
  #14
pwoz
Registered User
 
pwoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 2,547
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJBergy86 View Post
If the NHL makes it a rule Dolan must comply
Yea, but it wouldn't get that far. People like Dolan would make $ure the proposal would fail.

pwoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 05:00 PM
  #15
Dustin Peener
HF Top 30
 
Dustin Peener's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: I'm in THE BAR
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 51,150
vCash: 526
I say make it wider, but keep the same length

Dustin Peener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 05:09 PM
  #16
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
 
Bluenote13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BKLYN, NYC
Posts: 23,869
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
Was always under the impression that International dimensions were 200x100 and that NHL was 200x85

This link agrees.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_hockey_rink#Dimensions

I prefer the tighter 200x85 as it creates more physicality and speed.
Depends on what your definition of both are. I see plenty of hitting and speed in international play, in EVERY tournament I've watched.

Bluenote13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 06:28 PM
  #17
BlueshirtBlitz
Rich Nash
 
BlueshirtBlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 19,216
vCash: 500
I prefer keeping it the same just because the larger rink would be such a fundamental change that would alter the entire landscape of the NHL's present and future.

I do like both rinks, though.

BlueshirtBlitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 08:44 PM
  #18
Beacon
Sent to HF Minors
 
Beacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 8,831
vCash: 500
In a perfect world, I would want them to make the rink 5 feet wider and increase the space behind the goal by a foot on each side, which would create 2 feet extra length.

Physical play is still very relevant, but the extra space would mean the permanent end to the trap and clutch-and-grab.

Beacon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 09:10 PM
  #19
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Sooner or later, the NHL will have no choice. You can only continue to alter rules so long. Eventually, they'll be faced with one stark and sobering reality: these men are just too big to play on such a small rink and get creative offense out of it consistently.

The NHL rink was fine when the NHL players were different. Today, the international sized rink is the only solution.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 09:25 PM
  #20
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 24,178
vCash: 50
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
Sooner or later, the NHL will have no choice. You can only continue to alter rules so long. Eventually, they'll be faced with one stark and sobering reality: these men are just too big to play on such a small rink and get creative offense out of it consistently.

The NHL rink was fine when the NHL players were different. Today, the international sized rink is the only solution.
I think that would necessitate a fundamental shift in the way the game is taught and played by players growing up in North America. A shift from "our" style of play to something more European. Otherwise, with the talent pool as diluted as it already is, we're going to have a ton of guys that aren't suited to the wide-open style of the larger rinks.

I'm not saying that's necessarily bad, just that it's a bigger change than I think many people realize.

nyr2k2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2011, 09:34 PM
  #21
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr2k2 View Post
I think that would necessitate a fundamental shift in the way the game is taught and played by players growing up in North America. A shift from "our" style of play to something more European. Otherwise, with the talent pool as diluted as it already is, we're going to have a ton of guys that aren't suited to the wide-open style of the larger rinks.

I'm not saying that's necessarily bad, just that it's a bigger change than I think many people realize.
That's fine with me. I'd love to see a shift toward more passing and cycling of the puck instead of the never-ending board scrums and non-existent offense that you see the NHL's lower-caliber teams (like this one) spend the majority of games doing. It doesn't mean that there will be no physicality, but physicality alone is boring, and that's not far from the truth when you think of the way some crappy NHL clubs play.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 11:28 AM
  #22
nyrmetros
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,360
vCash: 500
International..... no question....

nyrmetros is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 11:42 AM
  #23
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 17,094
vCash: 500
.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AJBergy86 View Post
If the NHL makes it a rule Dolan must comply
Not really.

Until the Bruins moved into TD Bank their old arena was 191x83

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Garden

pld459666 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 11:47 AM
  #24
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 17,094
vCash: 500
.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote13 View Post
Depends on what your definition of both are. I see plenty of hitting and speed in international play, in EVERY tournament I've watched.
Short tourneys are one thing where the games by design are more intense.

Watch a season of SEL hockey and let me know what you think. No knock on the SEL, but it's a slower game and more defensive driven and alot of that has to do with the size of the rinks they play in.

Yes, the talent will be more than evident, but I like that talent can be nullified by physical play.

Widening the rinks will create more hooking and holding and general overall obstruction as not everyone can keep up.

pld459666 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2011, 11:52 AM
  #25
Blueshirt Special
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Blueshirt Special's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,245
vCash: 500
I'd like to see the mid-way, but it will never happen. Owners will never retro-fit rinks in irder to LOSE seats!

__________________
WIN NOW
Blueshirt Special is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:11 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.