Hockey finals decided by a shootout...your thoughts

[Laxer1241]

http://www.nhl.com/nhl/app?service=page&page=NewsPage&articleid=287063

it pretty much states that its not right that the wjc was decided by a shootout.
I personally think a game should not be decided over a shootout with this much signifigance. I like one guys comparisson of the world series decided by a home run contest is like a shootout in a championship game.

I want to hear your thoughts on this subject whether it be shootouts in a important game or just shootouts being introduced to the NHL.

[RockStar]

Shootouts suck, hockey games should be decided by two teams playing hockey. Next.

Seriously, shootouts have been a fact of international ice hockey for longer than I can remember. It's the way it's done in Europe, so they're not going anywhere.

With the NHL's new regular season shootouts - I hate 'em, and I never really saw what the problem was with tied games. Problem is the fans seem to love the shootouts, and we all have to admit they are pretty exciting so they're not going anywhere either.

Now reg season is one thing. Bettman will need to be assassinated if the NHL ever tries to bring in shootouts for the playoffs under his watch.

[BClax17]

Why should a team sport, such as hockey, determine the winner of a game through individual efforts such as a shootout?

If your a checking defencemen all you gotta do is play a trap style for 5 min then sit on a bench as other players do the shootout. How's that team play?

[AxemenGoalie]

Shootouts are always exciting and fun to watch. However, they should never be used to determine finals or playoff games. If that were to happen in the NHL... Like Rockstar said, Bettman would need to be assassinated.

[Kid A]

you have to admit, the new NHL is MUCH more exciting to watch than hockey before the lockout. Before, if a team scored 2 or 3 quick goals in the first, you could watch something else that night because it was pretty much assured that they would win the game. Now, no lead is safe and its keeping all of us rivited to our seats. The shootout will never be used in the Playoffs, dont worry. there's too much riding on those games.

[cougarlax21]

Even though shootouts are highly unnecessary in the regular season there are some pretty exciting people to come down on a goalie untouched.

[kevidinho]

Shootouts..they're exciting, but I don't think the really decide the better team. It's more of judging one players skill against another, rather than having a team against another. The worst is in soccer, that DEFINITELY should not be decided by a shootout. It's just which goalie gets lucky, that needs to be fixed. Like take out a man after a short period, like 5-10 minutes? But that is for another thread.

[Kid A]

that's why it is usiversally accepted that soccer isn't a real sport. I mean, c'mon. to have the World Cup, the biggest tournament on Earth, to be decided by a shootout? That's like deciding whether or not to invade Iraq using only a rock-paper-scissors match. Things of that magnitude should require more of a team effort, not random chance. France got jipped, if you ask me.

[smooth87]

that's why it is usiversally accepted that soccer isn't a real sport. I mean, c'mon. to have the World Cup, the biggest tournament on Earth, to be decided by a shootout? That's like deciding whether or not to invade Iraq using only a rock-paper-scissors match. Things of that magnitude should require more of a team effort, not random chance. France got jipped, if you ask me.

You might be right -it is George W.... (political joke, no offense)
I'll agree it's exciting to watch, but it's a team sport and should be won by the team.

[CTLaxer]

I fail to see how a shootout removes the team aspect of the sport? Shootouts are fine to me...it puts some closure on a game. Nothing was more boring to me than to watch a game for a few hours, have it go to overtime.....only to have no winner. I have no problems with shootouts, especially considering some of the great shootouts there have been. It's just another aspect of the game, think of it like special teams. There's a power play unit, a checking unit, a penalty killing unit, and now there's shootout units.

I also don't have any problems with the shootout because they won't be present in the playoffs. You'll never see a stanley cup decided by a shootout.

[kingdawgell]

shootous weren't made as a replacement for anything. they were added on to the end of games. if you recall, each team got a point for a tie. with the added shootout, you still get a point, but you have the chance to earn another point.

and to all you canadian hockey purists: I agree with you about the team aspect of the game, and how a team game probably shouldn't be decided by individual efforts (but I am still definitely FOR the shootout), but not everyone is like us. I'm pretty sure that someone flipping through the channels will watch a 5-4 shootout victory over a 1-1 tie with both goals scored in the first period and a trap used for the last two periods.

and you can't tell me that you don't get jittery and anxious when you see pavel datsyk bending over at center ice with his big half shield before he goes in 1 on 1 with one of the world's best goaltenders.

[HVTLaxGoalie15]

the new hockey sucks i think, as a longtime viewer and a player. No more big hits , fights and the refs are really anal on the penalties

[rider]

Speaking of soccer, before the advent of overtimes and shootouts, they used something called the replay. Simply put: they replayed the entire game if a game ended as a tie in regulation. And what happened if the second game ended in a tie? They replayed the game again, and again, and again. This was used in the World Cup until like the 60s, and some tournaments were held up forever because of this. In England, one matchup lasted 7 games.

[Pitibear]

Yeah, the FA Cup is a tournament that lasts what, seven months?

I sincerely dislike shootouts. A tie is a tie, we both go home with "half-a-win." if an outcome must be determined, then we crank it up for sudden death, and let the pucks, balls, whatever, fall where they may.

Play ball, not have a trick shot contest!

[Pitibear]

incidentally, if you come from behind, and catch 'em in the final minute, struggling to overcome all odds of doing so, don't you feel as though you actually won the game?

A number of years ago, Harvard beat the Yale football team in such fashion, and The Crimson the next day read "Harvard Beats Yale, 28-28!"

[Pitibear]

any combination is okay, it's the quality of play we go to see when we watch professional league play, no big deal.

The "purist" wants a tie to be a tie.

Some ties are really a win for one team or the other...the team that shouldn't have been able to compete with the better team, but overcame odds to gain the tie is but one example. In those competitions where ties still exist, check out the demeanor of the two teams at the final horn. Are they both deflated and "oh, well"? or is one obviously feeling pretty good, and the other dejected? I'd say the feeling-pretty-good team "won," and they deserved it. Why take that away from them?

In hockey we say, "let the pucks fall where they may..." yeah, we (locally) actually say that. That's the way it "ought" to be for all sports...

But then, I have absolutely nothing bad to say about sudden death...and that's play it if it takes forever sudden death.