Shootouts Have To Go!

A couple years ago someone (it was likely several someones) thought shootouts were a great way to decide a National Hockey League game when the game ends in a tie. That's right, a team sport, when tied after regulation and a brief five minute overtime period, will now be decided on the performance of individual players. But what was wrong with a tie in the first place? Sometimes a game is played between two evenly matched teams who give their all but neither team can get any advantage on the other. Oh that's right, our society has become one of winners and losers; the eternal quest to be better than our neighbours; bragging rights between fans, people who have very little say in how "their team" is put together or performs.

In today's society, the entertainment value is no longer part of the 60 or so minutes of regulation time and overtime but it has been reduced solely to the final outcome. We need to have a winner at any and all cost. After all, it is hard to berate the opposing team if the game ends in a tie, except in Philadelphia of course. People these days need closure and a tie game doesn't give them that. A clear cut winner does. The NHL, on the other hand, was looking for a way to add excitement and in the process, try to stop teams from "playing for a tie" late in the third period and through overtime. Not sure the shootout idea has helped in this regard quite as expected.

Let's use Saturday night's 'Battle of Alberta' as an example of why shootouts are not a good way to break ties. Out of the six shots only one found the back of the net. All three of Edmonton's skaters not only missed the net but didn't even get a shot off while Calgary's skaters were about as fun to watch as the zamboni cleaning the ice just before the shootout. In my opinion a tie in any game would be better than the pathetic display witnessed in Edmonton Saturday night.