4 ms·
As both a hockey and baseball fan this rule seems to me a much better compromise than the NHL's system of ending a game by shootout if the 5-minute 3-man-a-side
by hunterjrj 10y ago
As both a hockey and baseball fan this rule seems to me a much better compromise than the NHL's system of ending a game by shootout if the 5-minute 3-man-a-side overtime fails to result in a goal.
The spirit of the game is very much preserved as all factors in scoring a run (both defensive and offensive strategy) are still in play, whereas in hockey it artificially pits the goalie against the shooter, which only happens rarely during the actual game.
- DrScump 10y agoRegular-season overtime was a dumbing-down of hockey (thank you, Bettman). Result: teams play it artificially safely in the last few minutes to "preserve" a point. All it took was a modification of how results count in the standings. My suggestion: (all games are 4 points) - 4 points for regulation win - 3 points for overtime win (1 5-minute overtime, 4-on-4) - 2 points for a tie - 1 point for overtime loss it artificially pits the goalie against the shooter, which only happens rarely during the actual game It never happens in that artificially slowed-down construct. That's why (true) breakaways result in goals more than penalty shots. As for baseball, they could at least put off the tee-ball freebie runner until, say, after the 10th inning.