27 ms·

This is written by Ken Dryden, a well-known retired goalie. Very cool. Essentially he is just arguing that because of the size of goalie pads, the most successf

This is written by Ken Dryden, a well-known retired goalie. Very cool. Essentially he is just arguing that because of the size of goalie pads, the most successful strategy has become cause chaos around the net and then try and push the puck in while the goalie is distracted. He’s right, I think, in that it does slow down the inherently high-speed nature of the sport. So for shooters and coaches, that is the strategy. Rush the net with multiple offensive players, multiple defensive players will go with them, multiple arms, legs, and bodies will jostle in front of the goalie, and the remaining shooters, distant from the net, will fire away hoping to thread the needle, hoping the goalie doesn’t see the needle being threaded, because if he does, he’ll stop it. The situation for the shooter is much like that of a golfer whose ball has landed deep in the woods. He’s been told many times that a tree is more air than leaves and branches, but with several layers of trees in front of him, somehow his ball will hit a leaf or branch before it gets to the green. Somehow, the shooter’s shot will not make it to the net. So he will try again. Because what else can he do? I played hockey for about a decade growing up, alternating between goalie and defense. One “unofficial” solution I had to this problem was to make it extremely unpleasant for other players to be around the net. In hockey, you have a lot of leeway in terms of physicality and you can push, shove, lock the stick of your opponent, and do a number of other things that are completely penalized in basketball or soccer. The result was that opposing players became hesitant to get too close to the net, thus solving the problem somewhat. If a player was on a breakaway, I’d also try to do stuff like this (as the goalie), which of course makes opponents stay far away from you. https://youtu.be/W5u0khFnHUg https://youtu.be/W5u0khFnHUg A possible solution could be to expand the goalie-only area around the net. That would, in theory, force opponents to focus more on shooting and not on piling around the goalie.

garmaine 6y ago
> In hockey, you have a lot of leeway in terms of physicality and you can push, shove, lock the stick of your opponent, and do a number of other things that are completely penalized in basketball or soccer. The result was that opposing players became hesitant to get too close to the net, thus solving the problem somewhat. Also the goalie is given waaay more leeway. The goalie can get away with things that would definitely result in the penalty box for anyone else. I don’t know whether is is by convention, or because penalizing the goalie is such a heavy disadvantage that it isn’t done lightly.
- jamiek88 6y ago
  Same in football (soccer) as well. The goalkeeper is protected and can simultaneously get away with more contact. Historically its because goalkeepers have been vulnerable when in the air and outfield players leading with their feet when reaching for a contested ball.
- remarkEon 6y ago
  I think it’s also kind of an unwritten rule. Been watching hockey for 25 years now and it’s rare to see the goalie go to the box, but when they do it’s for a particularly egregious slashing penalty (usually to the ... swimsuit area). I agree with the general point of the article though, which I thought was well written. Hockey, especially over I’d say the last 5-6 years or so has gotten a lot more “run and gun” than before that imo.
  - miskin 6y ago
    I'm not sure how referees are handling this in Canada or the USA, but in Europe, if the goalie hits any other player with blocker to head area, it is the game penalty for him. If the goalie starts a fistfight (without gloves), it is also the game penalty.
    - remarkEon 6y ago
      Where in Europe are you? I've been trying to find more hockey to watch that's not US based. In the NHL it's extraordinarily rare for a goalie to get into a fight (also fighting in hockey should definitely not be banned ... it's part of the art and culture of the sport).
      - miskin 6y ago
        I'm in Slovakia. I think problem with watching hockey in TV is not only about quality of players, but also production of the broadcasting. Here NHL shines and it is big difference. When I was on live match, it was quite watchable (even Slovak league ;), but in TV it lacks the action that is provided by good broadcast production - a lot of cameras, cuts, etc. Also around here it is quite uncommon for goalies to fight, but especially goalies coming from Canada tended to "payback" in some brawls around crease with blocker and paid dearly for it, as they had to leave the crease during important play-off game afterwards.
remarkEon 6y ago
Good comment. Expanding the crease is an interesting idea but I’m not a fan of it for one reason: it would likely lead hockey down the path of baseball, where so much of the game is “reviewed”. Inevitably if we expand the crease size more players are going to inadvertently cross through it because, well, skating on ice is a little chaotic. Which to me has always been the point (and the fun) of the game. Edit: LOL just watched that video. I remember watching that game as a kid.
- keiferski 6y ago
  Maybe you could have a two-zone area. The outer part is if you step into this and don’t immediately step out within 2 seconds, it’s a penalty while the inner part is immediate penalty.
  - m8s 6y ago
    To be honest, the less the referees are involved, the better. There's a much simpler answer: increase the size of the net. Hockey sticks are pretty incredible these days, and the torque generated from flexing the stick is pretty unbelievable. Playing in net in hockey is mostly about setting up at the right angles and blocking the highest percentage of the net that you can, combined with athleticism and instinct. But a bigger goal would lead to more goals, if that's the end goal for the NHL.
    - keiferski 6y ago
      I don’t think the goal is necessarily to have more goals, but to reduce the pile up of players around the net. Maybe it’s my goalie experience speaking, but the highlight of hockey to me was always the direct confrontation between a shooter and the goalie. The more chaotic the goals, the less interesting the sport is.
      - remarkEon 6y ago
        Inclined to agree. The goals I remember from watching hockey in my youth are the really sexy ones. A risky pass and a breakaway, or some slick skating at the blue line to put some defenders off balance. Also, “just make the goal bigger” sounds a lot like “change the rules so more runs are scored” in baseball. You lose an element of the game you can’t get back when you do that. Maybe that’s a little “old man yells at cloud” but whatever.
QuesnayJr 6y ago
I didn't see who the author was until the end, so I spent the article thinking "Wow, this is someone who's spent way too much time thinking about goaltending." And then I saw it was Ken Dryden, and it all made sense. His book about being in the NFL, "The Game", is good.
- jacurtis 6y ago
  I thought the same thing. I was like, "Wow this must be a superfan, who knows all the inner workings of the players union and how the goalies practice". Then at the end with the author's bio I almost wanted to go read the whole article again, realizing this is one of the best goalies to play in the NHL.
JohnBooty 6y ago
The result was that opposing players became hesitant to get too close to the net, thus solving the problem somewhat. Hahaha this was my solution too in floor/street hockey. I was not the best goalie in terms of sheer athleticism, to put it extremely mildly. So I took advantage of my size and the goalie equipment and got good at throwing my body into scrums around the net. I didn't even hit opposing players per se. But if there was a loose puck/ball I took advantage of the fact that I could make a beeline for it and if there happened to be an opposing player in my way... well, unfortunate for them! A possible solution could be to expand the goalie-only area around the net. That would, in theory, force opponents to focus more on shooting and not on piling around the goalie. This is a very surprising conclusion given that they tried this already in the 90s and it was a total disaster. Culminating in the infamous Cup-winning goal (against Hasek, from your clip above) no less. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/343121-one-final-thought-on-the-1999-stanley-cup-no-goal https://bleacherreport.com/articles/343121-one-final-thought... It was a boon for the goalies, not the scorers, and it turned every goal into a controversial mess. As a fan you couldn't even celebrate a goal -- you had to wait until the refs and/or replay decided if it was okay or not minutes later. Part of the problem is that attacking players can't really control their position in a precise way in a scrum, given all of the contact and the fact that everybody's, well, wearing ice skates. Half of the time the goals were called off for a player being in the goalie crease it wasn't their fault. And then there was Martin Brodeur, who absolutely broke the game for about a decade by skating around like an "invulnerable third defenseman nobody was allowed to touch." Effective, but really contrary to the spirit of the game and about as much fun as watching paint dry. I really cannot think of a solution besides larger nets. 4-on-4 makes for really exciting hockey but that feels like fundamentally changing the sport too much. It would also IMO place too much emphasis on penalties. A 5-on-4 advantage for two minutes is one thing but 4-on-3 is quite another. Refereeing in a mass action sport will always be highly imperfect and that would really put the game in the refs' hands.
- dmurray 6y ago
  Maybe the penalties could still be 5-on-4: the offending player gets removed, but can be replaced, and the other team gets to bring on an additional skater.
Dma54rhs 6y ago
There's a little box inside penalty box in soccer where the goalkeeper has by the rules relative freedom to do whatever he wants for his own safety in soccer as well. Also similarly to crowding the goalie in hockey, own players sometimes build another wall to keep the view of the ball from goalkeeper. Haven't watched NHL for a decade but it seems all the sports constantly evolve to take maximums from situations.
- klingon78 6y ago
  The goal in football/soccer is a bit larger than in hockey. If you’re going to bring that up, we could talk about the hows and whys of the NBA not allowing goaltending. Have you ever noticed that one player just can’t jump up and sit in the goal for the whole of the game? It’s rather small, so the game then would be about who could remove the man from the area above the basket. Perhaps we could just make the goalie have to stay away from the crease in the NHL and wear something similar to that which everyone else wears? (Unfortunately, there are a number of good reasons things are the way they are[1].) [1]- https://hockeyanswered.com/what-is-the-purpose-of-the-goalie-crease-in-hockey-2/ https://hockeyanswered.com/what-is-the-purpose-of-the-goalie...
- smcl 6y ago
  I have never heard of these rules regarding the six-yard box in football. As far as I am aware it is only for positioning your goal kicks and something to do with indirect free kicks (a rare occurrence) where they can't be inside that box. I'm sure the keeper does mess around with people in that area, but I don't think it's their right as codified in any rules of the game
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - Dma54rhs 6y ago
    Yeah, I was mistaken, these are not real rules as written down. But you can often hear commentators talking about it and keepers are being trained to protect themselves in that area. They recently changed the rule that you can touch the keeper in that area (eg. during the corners etc). Around 2006, before it was not allowed. Any body contact, but keepers knowing it was not allowed for the attackers to have proper body contact with them and they kinda hacked the rule often and were fishing them or looking for the contact.
praptak 6y ago
> A possible solution could be to expand the goalie-only area around the net. That would, in theory, force opponents to focus more on shooting and not on piling around the goalie. The point of the article is that the goalies are too big and therefore you have to crowd the net to even get a chance of scoring. Banning the crowding does not solve the root cause. The result (if the article is correct) would be a game with much fewer goals, probably boring.
- eru 6y ago
  > The result (if the article is correct) would be a game with much fewer goals, probably boring. Maybe boring, but maybe not. Football does really well at attracting attention globally, and they only have a handful of goals in a match at most. Sometimes even zero. (Germany scoring seven goals against Brazil in the World Cup a while ago was big news.)
  - me_me_me 6y ago
    > (Germany scoring seven goals against Brazil in the World Cup a while ago was big news.) Those type of events are outliers and not worth using > Football does really well at attracting attention globally That's only because everyone else is watching it. I got tired of following football around 14, its inherently repetitive and boring (unless you play it yourself) not to mention the extent of match fixing.
    - 101008 6y ago
      > I got tired of following football around 14, its inherently repetitive and boring (unless you play it yourself). > Those type of events are outliers and not worth using.
    - eru 6y ago
      > Those type of events are outliers and not worth using Yes, that was exactly my point. A score of 7 is considered an extreme outlier. That tells you that normal scores are much lower. > That's only because everyone else is watching it. I got tired of following football around 14, its inherently repetitive and boring (unless you play it yourself) not to mention the extent of match fixing. I don't watch any sports myself, but I don't think the people who do so are all deluded. Yes, there's a social aspect to it, but that's not the only thing.
jug 6y ago
Yeah, these are common strategies for I think basically as long as I've watched ice hockey. Have guy parked in front of the goalie. Keep other players in the attacking zone. Shoot from the blue line. Hope for the puck to hit players/blades along the way in the commotion that will change the direction so late that the goalie doesn't have time to react, but even if not, at least players will block the goalies vision. Your idea to make it unpleasant to be parked in front of the goalie is also a common "solution" but that's why they place the big players there. :D Some are basically meant for this one position. I now recall "Demolition Man" Tomas Holmström back in the day. He even built special protection for the job, like a special back plate for the constant crosscheckings. Yes, even if not for this reason, I think the goalie area should be expanded a bit. It always felt too small, like they could seriously disrupt the goalies job before even breaking rules.
newsclues 6y ago
Bigger nets, and limit goal pad sizes
- pbrb 6y ago
  Interesting because they actually decreased net size like 7 or 8 yrs ago.
hourislate 6y ago
If a player was on a breakaway, I’d also try to do stuff like this (as the goalie), which of course makes opponents stay far away from you. https://youtu.be/W5u0khFnHUg https://youtu.be/W5u0khFnHUg Yeah, nothing like trying to end a players career. Should have been suspended for the season and fined.
- tolbish 6y ago
  That was a clean move. Hasek had no way of knowing Gaborik would not be looking where he was going.
  - disgrunt 6y ago
    Hasek absolutely could see Gaborik had his head down. But you're not supposed to have your head down. Nowadays this would likely be seen as a hit to the head and possibly suspension worthy.
    - tolbish 6y ago
      How was Hasek supposed to know Gaborik would not look up? This was not a blind-side hit.
      - disgrunt 6y ago
        How was Scott Stevens supposed to know Eric Lindros wouldn't look up? Pretty much the same answer. The rules were different back then, but today if you're about to hit someone with their head down you're expected to let up. Since Lindros' career was derailed by hits with his head down, players are now taught not to skate through traffic with your head down.
        tolbish 6y ago
        The scenarios are not the same for several reasons, the two most important being (1) Stevens performed a hit to the head, and (2) he did it to a defenseless player (Lindros was defenseless because he was cutting between defenders, not because he wasn't looking where he was going).
bluntfang 6y ago
>If a player was on a breakaway, I’d also try to do stuff like this (as the goalie), which of course makes opponents stay far away from you. I played soccer as a goalie at a high level in my youth, and this was my strategy on breakaways as well, completely legal move as long as I tackled the ball and not the player. I was a very intimating and athletic goalie at 6'5" ~220. Players did not like to be near me.
hbosch 6y ago
>A possible solution could be to expand the goalie-only area around the net. That would, in theory, force opponents to focus more on shooting and not on piling around the goalie. Pandora's box is already open. Bigger net, more space, smaller pads, etc. won't get players to necessarily focus more on skill shots... it will likely make the chaotic approach today more successful.
- jacurtis 6y ago
  Yeah i do agree that pandora's box might already be open. I am an avid hockey fan and there has been a huge shift towards "trick" shots in the past few years to get around these goalies. It is becoming increasingly rare to see "normal" goals anymore in NHL hockey. Goalies are simply too good that normal goals won't go in. So if a defensemen wants to slapshot the puck, his forwards (who are down in front of the net) need to "screen" the goalie so the goalie can't see the puck. The forward then needs to try to dodge the puck at the last second before the goalie can react. We also are seeing probably half or so of NHL goals come from deflections to pinball the puck around so the goalie can't even track the puck. It is amazing how good NHL forwards are getting now at deflecting. We routinely see triple deflections now. The rest of the goals are just from diving the net. With 6-8 players in front of the net (3 attacking forwards, and 5 defending forwards+defensemen) just slapping at the puck in the chaos as it bounces around, it eventually goes in. So I have long since believed that they should widen the net (just by 4-6 inches). But I do think that the NHL players have just gotten so good at creatively combatting the goalie, that widening the net might end up with too many goals in games. There is a fine balance between not enough scoring like in Soccer (Football outside USA) and with too much scoring (like in Basketball). American Football does a good job balancing the scoring. Most games have 3-4 touchdowns between both teams, plus a handful of other scoring opportunities like field goals and conversions. It keeps the touchdowns exciting (players even dance in the endzone on live TV), while still moving the game along with smaller scoring opportunities throughout the game.
  - caddemon 6y ago
    I also think American Football (and baseball) does a good job of having quantifiable action outside of scoring plays. Every play has a clear result, often with obvious valence. So even though it doesn't count directly towards the final score, you can build up tension and excitement for example just on 3rd down conversion attempts. An experienced viewer might be able to pick out this sort of mini battle during other sports, and there are also more nuanced battles in football that a random viewer may not pick up on. But for somebody casual, or even just listening on the radio or checking for updates on an app, there is a lot more "result" happening on a football field. Plus the pauses help, when somebody gets the better of their opponent in a traditional goal-based sport you usually know mere moments later whether it had an impact on the game. A 3rd down conversion on the other hand can have minutes of game time (let alone real time) before one knows whether it led to a score. And even if it didn't, there is at least a clear impact on time of possession. So I think perception of too little vs too much scoring can be helped by this dynamic, where real scores still feel very impactful but there are "fake" scores one can also root for on a shorter timescale.
playingchanges 6y ago
Man that clip is so old time hockey I love it. Best part is the ref giving him the attaboy after. I remember thinking that Hasek wearing the cage instead of a modern goalie mask was so cool as a kid.

garmaine 6y ago

> In hockey, you have a lot of leeway in terms of physicality and you can push, shove, lock the stick of your opponent, and do a number of other things that are completely penalized in basketball or soccer. The result was that opposing players became hesitant to get too close to the net, thus solving the problem somewhat. Also the goalie is given waaay more leeway. The goalie can get away with things that would definitely result in the penalty box for anyone else. I don’t know whether is is by convention, or because penalizing the goalie is such a heavy disadvantage that it isn’t done lightly.

jamiek88 6y ago
Same in football (soccer) as well. The goalkeeper is protected and can simultaneously get away with more contact. Historically its because goalkeepers have been vulnerable when in the air and outfield players leading with their feet when reaching for a contested ball.
remarkEon 6y ago
I think it’s also kind of an unwritten rule. Been watching hockey for 25 years now and it’s rare to see the goalie go to the box, but when they do it’s for a particularly egregious slashing penalty (usually to the ... swimsuit area). I agree with the general point of the article though, which I thought was well written. Hockey, especially over I’d say the last 5-6 years or so has gotten a lot more “run and gun” than before that imo.
- miskin 6y ago
  I'm not sure how referees are handling this in Canada or the USA, but in Europe, if the goalie hits any other player with blocker to head area, it is the game penalty for him. If the goalie starts a fistfight (without gloves), it is also the game penalty.
  - remarkEon 6y ago
    Where in Europe are you? I've been trying to find more hockey to watch that's not US based. In the NHL it's extraordinarily rare for a goalie to get into a fight (also fighting in hockey should definitely not be banned ... it's part of the art and culture of the sport).
    - miskin 6y ago
      I'm in Slovakia. I think problem with watching hockey in TV is not only about quality of players, but also production of the broadcasting. Here NHL shines and it is big difference. When I was on live match, it was quite watchable (even Slovak league ;), but in TV it lacks the action that is provided by good broadcast production - a lot of cameras, cuts, etc. Also around here it is quite uncommon for goalies to fight, but especially goalies coming from Canada tended to "payback" in some brawls around crease with blocker and paid dearly for it, as they had to leave the crease during important play-off game afterwards.

remarkEon 6y ago

Good comment. Expanding the crease is an interesting idea but I’m not a fan of it for one reason: it would likely lead hockey down the path of baseball, where so much of the game is “reviewed”. Inevitably if we expand the crease size more players are going to inadvertently cross through it because, well, skating on ice is a little chaotic. Which to me has always been the point (and the fun) of the game. Edit: LOL just watched that video. I remember watching that game as a kid.

keiferski 6y ago
Maybe you could have a two-zone area. The outer part is if you step into this and don’t immediately step out within 2 seconds, it’s a penalty while the inner part is immediate penalty.
- m8s 6y ago
  To be honest, the less the referees are involved, the better. There's a much simpler answer: increase the size of the net. Hockey sticks are pretty incredible these days, and the torque generated from flexing the stick is pretty unbelievable. Playing in net in hockey is mostly about setting up at the right angles and blocking the highest percentage of the net that you can, combined with athleticism and instinct. But a bigger goal would lead to more goals, if that's the end goal for the NHL.
  - keiferski 6y ago
    I don’t think the goal is necessarily to have more goals, but to reduce the pile up of players around the net. Maybe it’s my goalie experience speaking, but the highlight of hockey to me was always the direct confrontation between a shooter and the goalie. The more chaotic the goals, the less interesting the sport is.
    - remarkEon 6y ago
      Inclined to agree. The goals I remember from watching hockey in my youth are the really sexy ones. A risky pass and a breakaway, or some slick skating at the blue line to put some defenders off balance. Also, “just make the goal bigger” sounds a lot like “change the rules so more runs are scored” in baseball. You lose an element of the game you can’t get back when you do that. Maybe that’s a little “old man yells at cloud” but whatever.

QuesnayJr 6y ago

I didn't see who the author was until the end, so I spent the article thinking "Wow, this is someone who's spent way too much time thinking about goaltending." And then I saw it was Ken Dryden, and it all made sense. His book about being in the NFL, "The Game", is good.

jacurtis 6y ago
I thought the same thing. I was like, "Wow this must be a superfan, who knows all the inner workings of the players union and how the goalies practice". Then at the end with the author's bio I almost wanted to go read the whole article again, realizing this is one of the best goalies to play in the NHL.

JohnBooty 6y ago

The result was that opposing players became hesitant to get too close to the net, thus solving the problem somewhat. Hahaha this was my solution too in floor/street hockey. I was not the best goalie in terms of sheer athleticism, to put it extremely mildly. So I took advantage of my size and the goalie equipment and got good at throwing my body into scrums around the net. I didn't even hit opposing players per se. But if there was a loose puck/ball I took advantage of the fact that I could make a beeline for it and if there happened to be an opposing player in my way... well, unfortunate for them! A possible solution could be to expand the goalie-only area around the net. That would, in theory, force opponents to focus more on shooting and not on piling around the goalie. This is a very surprising conclusion given that they tried this already in the 90s and it was a total disaster. Culminating in the infamous Cup-winning goal (against Hasek, from your clip above) no less. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/343121-one-final-thought-on-the-1999-stanley-cup-no-goal https://bleacherreport.com/articles/343121-one-final-thought... It was a boon for the goalies, not the scorers, and it turned every goal into a controversial mess. As a fan you couldn't even celebrate a goal -- you had to wait until the refs and/or replay decided if it was okay or not minutes later. Part of the problem is that attacking players can't really control their position in a precise way in a scrum, given all of the contact and the fact that everybody's, well, wearing ice skates. Half of the time the goals were called off for a player being in the goalie crease it wasn't their fault. And then there was Martin Brodeur, who absolutely broke the game for about a decade by skating around like an "invulnerable third defenseman nobody was allowed to touch." Effective, but really contrary to the spirit of the game and about as much fun as watching paint dry. I really cannot think of a solution besides larger nets. 4-on-4 makes for really exciting hockey but that feels like fundamentally changing the sport too much. It would also IMO place too much emphasis on penalties. A 5-on-4 advantage for two minutes is one thing but 4-on-3 is quite another. Refereeing in a mass action sport will always be highly imperfect and that would really put the game in the refs' hands.

dmurray 6y ago
Maybe the penalties could still be 5-on-4: the offending player gets removed, but can be replaced, and the other team gets to bring on an additional skater.

Dma54rhs 6y ago

There's a little box inside penalty box in soccer where the goalkeeper has by the rules relative freedom to do whatever he wants for his own safety in soccer as well. Also similarly to crowding the goalie in hockey, own players sometimes build another wall to keep the view of the ball from goalkeeper. Haven't watched NHL for a decade but it seems all the sports constantly evolve to take maximums from situations.

klingon78 6y ago
The goal in football/soccer is a bit larger than in hockey. If you’re going to bring that up, we could talk about the hows and whys of the NBA not allowing goaltending. Have you ever noticed that one player just can’t jump up and sit in the goal for the whole of the game? It’s rather small, so the game then would be about who could remove the man from the area above the basket. Perhaps we could just make the goalie have to stay away from the crease in the NHL and wear something similar to that which everyone else wears? (Unfortunately, there are a number of good reasons things are the way they are[1].) [1]- https://hockeyanswered.com/what-is-the-purpose-of-the-goalie-crease-in-hockey-2/ https://hockeyanswered.com/what-is-the-purpose-of-the-goalie...
smcl 6y ago
I have never heard of these rules regarding the six-yard box in football. As far as I am aware it is only for positioning your goal kicks and something to do with indirect free kicks (a rare occurrence) where they can't be inside that box. I'm sure the keeper does mess around with people in that area, but I don't think it's their right as codified in any rules of the game
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- Dma54rhs 6y ago
  Yeah, I was mistaken, these are not real rules as written down. But you can often hear commentators talking about it and keepers are being trained to protect themselves in that area. They recently changed the rule that you can touch the keeper in that area (eg. during the corners etc). Around 2006, before it was not allowed. Any body contact, but keepers knowing it was not allowed for the attackers to have proper body contact with them and they kinda hacked the rule often and were fishing them or looking for the contact.

praptak 6y ago

> A possible solution could be to expand the goalie-only area around the net. That would, in theory, force opponents to focus more on shooting and not on piling around the goalie. The point of the article is that the goalies are too big and therefore you have to crowd the net to even get a chance of scoring. Banning the crowding does not solve the root cause. The result (if the article is correct) would be a game with much fewer goals, probably boring.

eru 6y ago
> The result (if the article is correct) would be a game with much fewer goals, probably boring. Maybe boring, but maybe not. Football does really well at attracting attention globally, and they only have a handful of goals in a match at most. Sometimes even zero. (Germany scoring seven goals against Brazil in the World Cup a while ago was big news.)
- me_me_me 6y ago
  > (Germany scoring seven goals against Brazil in the World Cup a while ago was big news.) Those type of events are outliers and not worth using > Football does really well at attracting attention globally That's only because everyone else is watching it. I got tired of following football around 14, its inherently repetitive and boring (unless you play it yourself) not to mention the extent of match fixing.
  - 101008 6y ago
    > I got tired of following football around 14, its inherently repetitive and boring (unless you play it yourself). > Those type of events are outliers and not worth using.
  - eru 6y ago
    > Those type of events are outliers and not worth using Yes, that was exactly my point. A score of 7 is considered an extreme outlier. That tells you that normal scores are much lower. > That's only because everyone else is watching it. I got tired of following football around 14, its inherently repetitive and boring (unless you play it yourself) not to mention the extent of match fixing. I don't watch any sports myself, but I don't think the people who do so are all deluded. Yes, there's a social aspect to it, but that's not the only thing.

jug 6y ago

Yeah, these are common strategies for I think basically as long as I've watched ice hockey. Have guy parked in front of the goalie. Keep other players in the attacking zone. Shoot from the blue line. Hope for the puck to hit players/blades along the way in the commotion that will change the direction so late that the goalie doesn't have time to react, but even if not, at least players will block the goalies vision. Your idea to make it unpleasant to be parked in front of the goalie is also a common "solution" but that's why they place the big players there. :D Some are basically meant for this one position. I now recall "Demolition Man" Tomas Holmström back in the day. He even built special protection for the job, like a special back plate for the constant crosscheckings. Yes, even if not for this reason, I think the goalie area should be expanded a bit. It always felt too small, like they could seriously disrupt the goalies job before even breaking rules.

newsclues 6y ago

Bigger nets, and limit goal pad sizes

pbrb 6y ago
Interesting because they actually decreased net size like 7 or 8 yrs ago.

hourislate 6y ago

If a player was on a breakaway, I’d also try to do stuff like this (as the goalie), which of course makes opponents stay far away from you. https://youtu.be/W5u0khFnHUg https://youtu.be/W5u0khFnHUg Yeah, nothing like trying to end a players career. Should have been suspended for the season and fined.

tolbish 6y ago
That was a clean move. Hasek had no way of knowing Gaborik would not be looking where he was going.
- disgrunt 6y ago
  Hasek absolutely could see Gaborik had his head down. But you're not supposed to have your head down. Nowadays this would likely be seen as a hit to the head and possibly suspension worthy.
  - tolbish 6y ago
    How was Hasek supposed to know Gaborik would not look up? This was not a blind-side hit.
    - disgrunt 6y ago
      How was Scott Stevens supposed to know Eric Lindros wouldn't look up? Pretty much the same answer. The rules were different back then, but today if you're about to hit someone with their head down you're expected to let up. Since Lindros' career was derailed by hits with his head down, players are now taught not to skate through traffic with your head down.
      - tolbish 6y ago
        The scenarios are not the same for several reasons, the two most important being (1) Stevens performed a hit to the head, and (2) he did it to a defenseless player (Lindros was defenseless because he was cutting between defenders, not because he wasn't looking where he was going).

bluntfang 6y ago

>If a player was on a breakaway, I’d also try to do stuff like this (as the goalie), which of course makes opponents stay far away from you. I played soccer as a goalie at a high level in my youth, and this was my strategy on breakaways as well, completely legal move as long as I tackled the ball and not the player. I was a very intimating and athletic goalie at 6'5" ~220. Players did not like to be near me.

hbosch 6y ago

>A possible solution could be to expand the goalie-only area around the net. That would, in theory, force opponents to focus more on shooting and not on piling around the goalie. Pandora's box is already open. Bigger net, more space, smaller pads, etc. won't get players to necessarily focus more on skill shots... it will likely make the chaotic approach today more successful.

jacurtis 6y ago
Yeah i do agree that pandora's box might already be open. I am an avid hockey fan and there has been a huge shift towards "trick" shots in the past few years to get around these goalies. It is becoming increasingly rare to see "normal" goals anymore in NHL hockey. Goalies are simply too good that normal goals won't go in. So if a defensemen wants to slapshot the puck, his forwards (who are down in front of the net) need to "screen" the goalie so the goalie can't see the puck. The forward then needs to try to dodge the puck at the last second before the goalie can react. We also are seeing probably half or so of NHL goals come from deflections to pinball the puck around so the goalie can't even track the puck. It is amazing how good NHL forwards are getting now at deflecting. We routinely see triple deflections now. The rest of the goals are just from diving the net. With 6-8 players in front of the net (3 attacking forwards, and 5 defending forwards+defensemen) just slapping at the puck in the chaos as it bounces around, it eventually goes in. So I have long since believed that they should widen the net (just by 4-6 inches). But I do think that the NHL players have just gotten so good at creatively combatting the goalie, that widening the net might end up with too many goals in games. There is a fine balance between not enough scoring like in Soccer (Football outside USA) and with too much scoring (like in Basketball). American Football does a good job balancing the scoring. Most games have 3-4 touchdowns between both teams, plus a handful of other scoring opportunities like field goals and conversions. It keeps the touchdowns exciting (players even dance in the endzone on live TV), while still moving the game along with smaller scoring opportunities throughout the game.
- caddemon 6y ago
  I also think American Football (and baseball) does a good job of having quantifiable action outside of scoring plays. Every play has a clear result, often with obvious valence. So even though it doesn't count directly towards the final score, you can build up tension and excitement for example just on 3rd down conversion attempts. An experienced viewer might be able to pick out this sort of mini battle during other sports, and there are also more nuanced battles in football that a random viewer may not pick up on. But for somebody casual, or even just listening on the radio or checking for updates on an app, there is a lot more "result" happening on a football field. Plus the pauses help, when somebody gets the better of their opponent in a traditional goal-based sport you usually know mere moments later whether it had an impact on the game. A 3rd down conversion on the other hand can have minutes of game time (let alone real time) before one knows whether it led to a score. And even if it didn't, there is at least a clear impact on time of possession. So I think perception of too little vs too much scoring can be helped by this dynamic, where real scores still feel very impactful but there are "fake" scores one can also root for on a shorter timescale.

playingchanges 6y ago

Man that clip is so old time hockey I love it. Best part is the ref giving him the attaboy after. I remember thinking that Hasek wearing the cage instead of a modern goalie mask was so cool as a kid.