Monday, May 09, 2005

No, not a panacea

As it is said, stop the presses: I disagree with something Tom Benjamin over at Canucks Corner posted!

Ahem. Actually, TB and my disagreements are so plentiful that I'm reluctant to comment, but my dislike of hockey without a red line necessitates this post. On the matter, I agree entirely with venerable hockey man Brian Burke, who states that removing the two-line pass rule is a hindrance to offence, not a help.

It's not rocket science, but without the red line in place, defencemen have to be on the lookout for the long pass whenever the other team initiates a rush. Blueliners are less likely to hold their position on the blueline, lest one of the coveted long passes allowed without a red line sneaks by them.

The only proof I need is to watch the top European and American college leagues, which both play without a red line. Contrary to ill-informed belief, those leagues actually have lower scoring than the NHL. So, no, removing the red line's not a panacea... unless what ails you is the lack of a more redundant game.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

Links to this post:

Create a Link


.

Free Page Rank Checker
eXTReMe Tracker