AlbertaBoy12 Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 57 minutes ago, travel_dude said: They did away with the two line offside as a way to reward sleepers. Speeds the game up. More goals. I don't have a problem with humans making calls based on what they see. They will always be points of view, but I would rather they call a clean entry offside than go to this BS of giving every coach the chance to challenge every goal. Some teams have been given 3 minutes to decide if they want to challenge it. It's like getting a free TO to decide if you use a TO. IMHO, you should have to make the decision to go ahead or challenge right away. No 30 second delay. Play stands or you challenge it. You want to improve the game? Hold refs accountable for their calls. Give them the standard of quality and have their bosses hold them to it. You blow calls too often, you don't get playoff games. This has nothing to do with offsides as well. The other night he waved off the goal because tkachuk skated in front of the goalie, when is the last time you saw a ref wave off a goal, I don't remember seeing it. The refs and teams, are getting way too much leeway for the calls they make. There is getting right and then there is what we have now, why is a ref with 1000 games experience waving off that play? I don't understand it at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 3 hours ago, travel_dude said: They did away with the two line offside as a way to reward sleepers. Speeds the game up. More goals. Or put another way.... they effectively got rid of the Red Line. It serves no purpose now other than figuring out where the heck the first faceoff is. Just a random brain fart: What if they got rid of the blue lines, and kept the red line? Game is faster, players are bigger, ice seems smaller. 3 lines was too many. We effectively dropped to 2 lines. What if we dropped to one line? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 16 hours ago, jjgallow said: What if there wasn't any offside? It's an interesting question but I do think we have to be careful about removing offside entirely. The offside rule creates a lot of dynamics in gameplay and without it, we are going to see a lot of players just standing around. Mainly, there will always be one or three cherry pickers in the offensive zone and perhaps always one guy parked infront of the other team's goalie regardless of where the puck is. After that, we are going to see generic 1-on-1 battles along the boards where the winner of the puck will immediately ice the puck or throw the puck at the opponent's net right away. Repeat over and over shift after shift. That will be hockey without offsides. Ever play shinny without offsides? Ya basically just lazy players not coming back and waiting for the puck in the offensive zone. Make a save, win a rebound, pass the puck up to your cherry pickers as quickly as possible. Repeat over and over. Goals? Yes, it will increase goals but it will eliminate variety, strategy, and overall quality. I am one who was never a fan of removing the two-line pass rule because it has turned hockey into a half-court sport and reduced goals. Yes, reduced goals. The Trap, Left Wing Lock, etc all create goals by means of team work and strategy by forcing turnovers in the neutral zone and generating odd man rushes. Some of the highest scoring years in the NHL during the 80s happened with the red line in play. Moreover, turnovers create scoring chances and neutral zone turnovers are the biggest contributor to goals. With the red line, turnovers happened around the blue line. Without the red line, turnovers have to happen in the defensive zone which is much farther away from your opponent's net and it gives your opponent so much more time to regroup and recover. What killed goals in the 90s and early 2000s was clutch and grab. They should have removed clutch and grab while keeping the red line. No red line was popularized by European hockey and what we see in Europe are teams lining up 4 guys at their own blueline and backing in. That's so sad. It used to be you flood the neutral zone with 4 guys and send in one forechecker to force the issue. If they break your trap, it's a breakaway. If they turn the puck over, it's a 2-on-1. Slower gameplay but methodical and full of strategy. The only advantage to no red line is the flow of game play and less stoppages. That's a bonus i guess but it comes at the expense of intelligent coaching and true team work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted January 21, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 If you remove offside he prepared to see a lot of defenders throwing "Hail Marys" up and down the ice. The game would look like a massive game of ping pong and be absolutely terrible to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 9 hours ago, The_People1 said: It's an interesting question but I do think we have to be careful about removing offside entirely. Ever play shinny without offsides? Ya basically just lazy players not coming back and waiting for the puck in the offensive zone. Make a save, win a rebound, pass the puck up to your cherry pickers as quickly as possible. Repeat over and over. Goals? Yes, it will increase goals but it will eliminate variety, strategy, and overall quality. ...... No red line was popularized by European hockey and what we see in Europe are teams lining up 4 guys at their own blueline and backing in. That's so sad. It used to be you flood the neutral zone with 4 guys and send in one forechecker to force the issue. If they break your trap, it's a breakaway. If they turn the puck over, it's a 2-on-1. Interesting. I feel like there are competing themes here. Potentially unconctrolled offence, or all defence? Street hockey is street hockey, even if you introduce lines, you still get the cherry pickers imho? 29 minutes ago, cross16 said: If you remove offside he prepared to see a lot of defenders throwing "Hail Marys" up and down the ice. The game would look like a massive game of ping pong and be absolutely terrible to watch. Maybe. But...why doesn't that happen in soccer? Wouldn't players, at the pro level, catch on to the Hail Mary's....as they catch onto Hail Mary's in every other sport, including where the phrase originated from (Football)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlbertaBoy12 Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 8 minutes ago, jjgallow said: Interesting. I feel like there are competing themes here. Potentially unconctrolled offence, or all defence? Street hockey is street hockey, even if you introduce lines, you still get the cherry pickers imho? Maybe. But...why doesn't that happen in soccer? Wouldn't players, at the pro level, catch on to the Hail Mary's....as they catch onto Hail Mary's in every other sport, including where the phrase originated from (Football)? soccer has offside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 34 minutes ago, jjgallow said: Interesting. I feel like there are competing themes here. Potentially unconctrolled offence, or all defence? Street hockey is street hockey, even if you introduce lines, you still get the cherry pickers imho? Maybe. But...why doesn't that happen in soccer? Wouldn't players, at the pro level, catch on to the Hail Mary's....as they catch onto Hail Mary's in every other sport, including where the phrase originated from (Football)? Hail Mary is a desperate effort to get a touchdown. It would be akin to having no goalies and trading shots from the opposing blueline. Reacting to offside call issues by eliminating another line would be extreme. Why not start with issue at hand; how to get the most accurate calls without creating a challenge every shift. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 35 minutes ago, jjgallow said: Interesting. I feel like there are competing themes here. Potentially unconctrolled offence, or all defence? Street hockey is street hockey, even if you introduce lines, you still get the cherry pickers imho? If we remove the red line, then we will get more goals for sure but whether more goals justifies the loss of dynamics in gameplay is subjective. One reason I dont like basketball is because 99% of the action is the same over and over. The same 4 or 5 set plays. Give your superstar isolation on one side and let him beat 1-on-1 coverage to get to the rim. Rinse repeat for the whole game. It's high scoring but so repetitive. Imagine if the ball or ball carrier has to cross mid-court first before teammates can or else it's a loss of possession and the other team inbounds in your half of the court. Wow. Subtle rule change with profound impact. Suddenly, there would be action at mid court on every possession. Teams would setup defensively to create turnovers at center court and put tremendous pressure on the dribbler to gain the zone with control. We may see some form of the dump and chase... Like lob and chase because there are no boards in basketball. We may see intentional lob and not chase, immediately setup a counter defense on the loss of possession and reverse the pressure. Offsides in basketball will introduce many more strategies that we cannot imagine right now and it will result in more variety of action at the expense of scoring. In my opinion, improve watchability. Basketball is dumbed down and water down. It's too much about superstar vs superstar rather than team game vs team game. And the lack of offsides is a huge contributor of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted January 21, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 1 hour ago, jjgallow said: Interesting. I feel like there are competing themes here. Potentially unconctrolled offence, or all defence? Street hockey is street hockey, even if you introduce lines, you still get the cherry pickers imho? Maybe. But...why doesn't that happen in soccer? Wouldn't players, at the pro level, catch on to the Hail Mary's....as they catch onto Hail Mary's in every other sport, including where the phrase originated from (Football)? 1 soccer has offsides. It isn't based on a line it's based on where the defenders are. 2- while I enjoy soccer it's a sport that has never really cracked mainstream North America because it is regarded as boring. 3rd - a completed Hail Mary in football is extremely rare. 90% of the time the Hail Mary is a nothing and boring play. And that's coming from a packer fan who has been the benefactor of a few Hail Marys in the last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 1 hour ago, The_People1 said: One reason I dont like basketball is because 99% of the action is the same over and over. The same 4 or 5 set plays. Give your superstar isolation on one side and let him beat 1-on-1 coverage to get to the rim. Rinse repeat for the whole game. It's high scoring but so repetitive. I completely agree with this, but I always thought of this difference to be more about the lack of a goaltender than the lines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 1 hour ago, cross16 said: 1 soccer has offsides. It isn't based on a line it's based on where the defenders are. True. 1 hour ago, cross16 said: 2- while I enjoy soccer it's a sport that has never really cracked mainstream North America because it is regarded as boring. I actually find soccer boring, but not because of the lack of lines. Its popularity can't really be denied, or rivalled. 1 hour ago, cross16 said: 3rd - a completed Hail Mary in football is extremely rare. 90% of the time the Hail Mary is a nothing and boring play. And that's coming from a packer fan who has been the benefactor of a few Hail Marys in the last year. Right, which is why football hasn't degraded to a hail mary game. Just curious, that's all. Maybe a system would also quickly evolve in hockey? I'd just like to see One profesisonal hockey game with new blue line, just to see what would happen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob74 Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 19 hours ago, travel_dude said: They did away with the two line offside as a way to reward sleepers. Speeds the game up. More goals. I don't have a problem with humans making calls based on what they see. They will always be points of view, but I would rather they call a clean entry offside than go to this BS of giving every coach the chance to challenge every goal. Some teams have been given 3 minutes to decide if they want to challenge it. It's like getting a free TO to decide if you use a TO. IMHO, you should have to make the decision to go ahead or challenge right away. No 30 second delay. Play stands or you challenge it. You want to improve the game? Hold refs accountable for their calls. Give them the standard of quality and have their bosses hold them to it. You blow calls too often, you don't get playoff games. That actually makes sense. It could also be a huge gamble. I know from watching from the bench, we tend to see most offsides (as a beer leaguer). So, having three coaches, training staff and players on the bench, someone should catch or think a play is offside. I think they should go with, once the puck is fully on the blue paint and the foot is still there, then it is onside. I don't like the idea of the foot still in the air but on the other side rule some have suggested. I think a part of the skill of a hockey player is staying onside and reading the play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob74 Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 2 hours ago, cross16 said: 3rd - a completed Hail Mary in football is extremely rare. 90% of the time the Hail Mary is a nothing and boring play. And that's coming from a packer fan who has been the benefactor of a few Hail Marys in the last year. I was beginning to see hockey as a game much like football. There were a lot of PP's after that one lockout season and basically teams just seemed to take turns in each other's ends playing the PP. I got bored really fast. Maybe that's how they should play a 2nd OT instead of a shootout. Take turns on 1 min PP's. lol. IF a team scores shorthanded, it's still over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.