First off, I hate the shoot out. It has taken away the thrill of the penalty shot. And I really don't like that the loser gets a point, if the game goes into OT. You lost the game, why should you be rewarded with a point, for losing the game?
Now, if the deciding a winner is so important, then why don't they use the shoot out in the playoffs? Get rid of the shoot out, if after 5 min OT period the game is tied, then it ends in a tie. One point to each team, it worked for many years prior to Bettman insert the extra point for an OTL.
ANyone else agree with me?
2007-12-09 12:58:45 · 6 answers · asked by Justin R 4 in Sports ➔ Hockey
Bettman approved it, so he is responsible. If the coahces don't want to coach, or the players don't want to play late in a game, then why are they being paid millions of dollars to paly a game?
2007-12-09 13:17:25 · update #1
I agreed with you even a few days ago.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ArKSNRRouQ8b5ns4zZQQ1gzty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071203124905AAt3i9L&show=7#profile-info-88e5bc54c9e96e802d1624f4a993fc1baa
2007-12-09 13:03:23 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
The game was sooooo much better without Shootouts!.. and the games seemed to work even before Bettman approved such nonsense...
Whether it gives some of the less famed players a chance to show talent.. doesn't matter... They obviously have the talent because they were obviously picked to play in the NHL!
If you were a coach you wouldn't pick a kid that can't skate worth a **** to play a forward position when he can learn very well practicing to be a goalie instead... But you still wouldn't put him in the NHL because well he can't skate!
I think that shootouts in hockey were the worst thing to ever happen. The game was much more interesting to end in a tie... and it wasn't so boring;.... to watch one player from each team skate down the rink to score 1on1 with the goalie... kinda defeats the purpose of a game if you ask me!
And I'm glad they don't use it in the playoffs... cause that would just be stupid!
2007-12-10 03:43:07 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
All of you bring up very valid points but I'm going to have to disagree with you guys on this one.
The shoot out gives other players (besides the stars of the team) to show what they have
For example:
On the Penguins, Sidney Crosby and even Evgeni Malkin aren't very good in the shoot out and the last two games for the Pens have gone into one. Who would of thought that young Kris Letang would come up with the game winner? It just gives other players the chance to show what they have and gain respect by the fans.
I do agree with the fact that the loser shouldn't get a point. That doesn't make sense at all.
2007-12-09 21:57:31 · answer #3 · answered by LetsGoPens 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It wasn't Bettman's idea to add the extra point.
It was the NHLPA's as a way to get the players to play (or more accurately - coaches to coach) in the late stages of the game.
I said earlier (this is the umpteenth time this question has been asked) the owners wanted it, but I have since been corrected by the NHLPA.
Bettman doesn't approve anything, he has no vote unless matters end in a tie. In 15 years as commissioner, he had never had to vote. In 15 years as president, Ziegler only voted once.
2007-12-09 21:04:48 · answer #4 · answered by Like I'm Telling You Who I A 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yeah, I asked a question about the shootout in the playoffs a few weeks ago. Since they use the shootout in the regular season, why don't they use it in the playoffs? Everyone said no to that(and I agree), but why would you do something in the regular season and then change it come playoff time? I think they should eliminate the shootout altogether.
2007-12-09 21:15:43 · answer #5 · answered by -closed- 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It's been wildly popular here in the minors, so you guys got stuck with it. Traditionalists, like us, be damned!
2007-12-09 21:17:36 · answer #6 · answered by pricehillsaint 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋