|
OMG, Leave the freaking Game alone |
|
|
|
|
|
Here's hockey's biggest problem: The media alarmists.
If you missed it the other night, in the first minutes of the game, the Flyers refused to move the puck up the ice against the Bolts 1-3-1 trap. Braydon Coburn just stood there in his faceoff circle with the puck next to him, trying to entice Marty St. Louis into a forecheck. Wasn’t happening. The officials, as they should in this case, blew it dead and held a face-off in the Flyers end.
That was it. Big deal.
Within 24 hours there were tweets and blogs calling for reviews from the competition committee and rule changes. What a travesty on national television. How is Jim Bob in Topeka or Hallelujah in American Samoa supposed to fall in love with the game with this type of demonstration.
How about this: Relax!
The “stunt” was actually somewhat amusing and it sent a message. OK. More importantly, it was a rare event, as a maneuver like this has happened about as often as a goalie has scored a goal. Meanwhile, at least 90% of coaches, whether they say they like it or not, or use it or not, institute some form of trap in certain situations during various games; obviously, some more than others.
Forget that: I can hear it now; “Paint more lines on the ice”, “Monitor where the forward stands on the forecheck” “institute a shot clock”.
This is what some have referred to as hockey’s inferiority complex: Always (over) reacting, changing, gnashing teeth, and wringing its hands. Baseball is given as the counter-example: The rules for the most part haven’t changed in 100 years. (It’s been destroyed in other ways). I just don’t understand how “experts”, who apparently know and love the game and have been around hockey their whole lives, are so quick to panic and want to change it. Maybe they’re just trying to bring attention to themselves and their ideas, impress us with their adaptive knowledge and their connections to the rule makers. You can make the biggest difference by shutting up.
It used to be, you’d take a hot blonde to a hockey game and you'd have to explain to her icing and offside. That was plenty to digest, so much so that those unwilling to take on this somewhat simple education – potential fans and lazy, fat talk-show hosts alike – stayed away from hockey. But since the lock-out you've gotta explain to your date the “trapezoid”! (I realize this was just one part of the package)
Imagine. The trapezoid; so goalies can't touch the puck. The trapezoid should be the name of the UFC ring, or something in fencing or jai alai, not freaking hockey. “Scoring will go up” - but wait, according to info passed along by our friend Bob McKenzie at TSN, scoring is at 5.4 goals per game this year, after 5.5 goals a game last year. The year after the lock-out it was 6.1. "OH NO!" And “some GM’s say they’re concerned with decreasing offense”. Why? I thought this was the best it’s ever been; bigger, stronger, faster, as in the best game ever. Who are we trying to impress?! It’s hockey. We love it. Let it be. Coaches and players adapt. It’s cyclical.
Here’s an idea: Stop with the $&#*%@ rule changes! How about that? (Lose the trapezoid and put) A three-year moratorium on any rule changes: Let’s play hockey! Let’s see what we’ve got for a change. Maybe we’ll keep some casual fans who’ll understand what they’re explaining; maybe we’ll get some new fans who will understand what they’re watching. The hot blonde will appreciate it and so will you.
Follow Rob on twitter @simmerpuck
Blogger •XM Home Ice correspondent and author • 
Join the Discussion:
»