After listening attentively to Prime Time Sports on May 20/08. The discussion was about hockey's problems. As much as I hate one pill solutions, there maybe a single rule change that would go a long way to address them. Whether or not anyone agrees with such a change, it would make for interesting discussion on Prime Time.
The fundamental arguments were too long to call in on a phone line show. To the hockey “purists”, the knee-jerk reaction is to dismiss the idea outright without listening to the arguments. The simple single rule change is to “Remove the Blue Lines.”
I am trying to keep the outline as small and concise as possible. The simple solution covers a lot of territory though.
Basic Problems in HockeyIn no particular order, basic hockey problems as discussed on Prime Time:
1. The continuing appeal to the USA audience. Part of this making hockey more “television” friendly.
2. Speed of the game and length of the games.
3. Fighting.
4. Officiating.
5. Goalie equipment.
6. Defense. e.g. The Trap and the dominance of defense in today's game.
7. Ice size.
8. Tie games.
9. Offense eg. More goal scoring.
10. Number of players.
These are problems that have crept into the game over the years. So basically the nature of the game has changed while the fundamental rules have not managed to keep up. Historically, the response to these evolutions generated even more rules. In effect these rule changes contributed to make the rules governing the game more onerous, more complex and more difficult for officials to apply in a faster game.
ObservationsA... American audiences don't like complexities. Especially on television. Canadian audiences grow up with the game and are very familiar with the nuances of the “Blue Line Offside.”
When the Fox Network tried to promote the game in the USA, they believed that their audience couldn't follow the puck. So the mind masters applied a technical solution, which was colorizing the puck travel. The effect on the televised game was hysterical.
Actually, I found that most neophyte fans follow the puck, while Canadians follow the man with the puck. This is only because the Canadian viewer grew up with the game and its nuances. If one sits with immigrants who have never been exposed to the game tend to to the tennis thing and follow the puck. This confuses neophytes because many penalty calls, and offside calls are generated by players away from the puck.
B... The physique and skill levels of players are now much larger than a generation ago. The disparity of talent level between the worst and the best National Hockey League players is far less than a generation ago. The size of the National Hockey League ice sheets have not gone to the international size. One would think that it would have been mandatory for the new arenas to accommodate the potential for the larger ice sheet.
Another answer tendered has been to reduce the numbers of on ice skaters from 5 to 4. But this idea has not been palatable to many commentators and fans.
C... Attention spans of most television viewers is much shorter than it used to be. Most hockey games last about three hours when both the television networks and the live spectators really focus on two hour, to two and a half hour games.
D... Many fights occur shortly after a stoppage in play.
Hypothesis and effects
The proposition is to eliminate the “Blue Line” off side and indeed the Blue lines altogether. What would be the effect on the game?
Recently the NHL has eliminated the use of the center “Red Line”. The effect on the game has meant fewer stoppages. Logically, elimination of the Blue Lines would further reduce the numbers of stoppages on the game. This speeds up the game dramatically since a high proportion of present stoppages are related to the Blue Line offsides. More playing time in the game would be devoted to playing, not facing off.
Reduction of these stoppages would also mean a decline in fighting since there would be fewer face offs where trash talk occurs. Teams would also focus on players that combine speed and fitness which usually isn't the province of the classic goons.
Without the need for calling the offsides, this eliminates the need for any linesmen. You can reduce the number of officials on the ice. Removing the Blue Line offside aids on the remaining two referees being able to focus on actual physical infractions instead of devoting added observational stress on accessing on whether or not a play is offside. Indeed, it may be possible to reduce the numbers of actual on ice officials by use of modern technology. One referee can be on the ice, and another (both connected by radio) sitting in an observation booth off the ice.
In the latter case, with an on ice official, and with an off ice official, fewer plays would be halted by the puck striking an official. One official must be on the ice to drop the puck in the case of face offs. This would tremendously improve the observations of officials on play, reduce accidental intrusions by officials. The off ice official also calls penalties and can easily monitor any replays. With two less bodies on the ice that were in part there to monitor offsides, there is more room on the ice for play.
The net effect is to both speed up the game, make it more efficient from both a time and officiating perspective. To the television networks this would be a plus. Indeed, one is looking at a two hour versus a three hour game.
Another likely effect of the removal of the Blue Line Offside is an increase in scoring. The Trap defense depends on being able to push the puck carrier into a tight position in the center area or a spot where a check can be made. Instead of trapping and zone defenses the defending team would find the man to man defense a preferable option.
Historically, the reason that Red and Blue lines were introduced in the early part of the last century to even competition. The spread of player talent and player skill level was more profound in the time that those rules were introduced. One must remember that originally hockey's only lines were the goal crease and goal line. Street hockey or Shinny Hockey is much closer to the original design of the game than the rule intensive modern game.
In Shinny, there is no offsides. The goalie or goal player is far more active on defense and offense. The game is more fluid, rarely stops and has fewer fights due to the need to constantly perform on the puck/ball more effectively. The Shinny version of hockey is far simpler to understand.
Removing the Blue Lines would also make television viewing much easier, the game would be far faster in tempo, the goal scoring opportunities far greater and the game far easier to understand. It would be all action.
One of the greatest issues has been ice size. By removing the Blue Line Offside you increase the Offensive area of hockey play without the costly issue of renovating arenas, or reducing the numbers of on ice players.
Now one of the greatest dilemmas that modern hockey has encountered, has been the material improvement in goalie equipment enabling goalies to wear greater protection with far larger equipment without a comparable increase in weight. In real life it has meant that the modern goalie literally fills the net. The athletic goalie of the past has been replaced by the butterfly style of goalie.
Removal of the Blue Lines would also dramatically effect the goalie. While the butterfly goalies have much larger padding they have lost mobility. In the Shinny style of hockey to prevent the cherry picker pass, goalies must come out to play the puck. They are the only ones allowed to play within their creases. Outside the crease though they are allowed to play the puck.
There is one good reason for this. In Shinny, any cherry picking scorer will be marked by the goalie. In effect this means that the defending team in the other end of the rink will be put in the position of a power play situation. Anyone who has played Shinny knows that a cherry picking player is almost more annoying to their own defending team as it is to the offensive team.
Much the same thing happens in Basketball. Cherry picking remains a minor problem because the defense must present an equal number of players. Also anyone who has played Basketball and Shinny knows that trap play is very difficult because if the puck carrier manages to pass out of the trap there will be always a three or four on two situation. The only way to compensate for this is to get an extra player involved on the defense and that has to be the goalie.
If the NHL removed the Blue Lines the present day teams would be confronted by one of two choices. If they opt for a stay at home butterfly goalie, then that arrangement will not be favorable in defending the offensive rush since the defenders cannot trap the puck carriers on the blue lines. If there is a cherry picker goal scorer then any long pass will mean a free shot on the net (with goalie).
This means that with the need for a more flexible and mobile goalie playing out of the net, equipment size must be reduced. Butterfly goalies in full size equipment are not mobile enough. The large trap glove must be reduced to enable the goalie to put both hands on any stick. To a Shinny style of game the present day butterfly goalies are more like sitting duck goalies.
ConclusionsRemoval of the Blue lines enhances the television experience. How?: It is addition by subtraction. The change generates a more fluid, more goal scoring game in these ways:
It adapts the game to a better television compatible format.
It heightens the entertainment level of the game.
It generates more excitement in the offensive play.
It will generate more goal scoring.
It doesn't eliminate the Trap but it does make it far more risky and difficult to apply.
It creates more playing room on the same size of ice sheet.
It shortens game length.
It reduces the numbers of on ice officiating.
It literally makes officials more efficient.
It reduces fighting.
It forces the goalies to use smaller equipment to enable their mobility.
It again favors the more athletic, good skating goalie.
