Theokritos
Global Moderator
- Apr 6, 2010
- 12,543
- 4,949
In his 1969 book "Hockey of the Future" (Khokkey gryadushchego, second edition 1971), Anatoli Tarasov analyses the typical way that Canadian teams – both amateur and pro teams – break out of their own zone, and he contrasts it with the Soviet approach. While Canadian breakouts (in his terminology: "counterattacks") tended to start with an individual exit from the zone, the Soviet approach was "purely collective", Tarasov says. Here's his breakdown:
1. The Canadian approach
Tarasov says that the Canadian defenceman (or forward) who wins possession in the defensive end will usually try to exit the zone by himself. He will carry the puck and attempt to move it past the checking player with stickhandling. If the Canadian succeeds, he forces a second checker to approach him, which in turn frees up another Canadian player who may now receive a pass.
Tarasov's criticism: "The counterattack of the Canadians occurs most often as a result of very unhurried, and sometimes, in my opinion, unacceptably prolonged actions of the player who took possession of the puck."
Tarasov thinks that this tactic stems from several specific features of hockey in Canada. One of them is the high level of stickhandling skills on part of all Canadian players, including the defencemen. Another is the active backchecking the Canadian forwards engage in; once the puck is won, the forwards are deep in their own zone and – having vigorously participated in the defence – they are not fully ready to jump into a fast counterattack right away. Consequence for the Canadian who finds himself with the puck: "There are no free pieces in the attack line, there is no-one to pass the puck to."
So the Canadian breakout starts with a player carrying the puck out of the defensive zone individually. Tarasov's assessment: "If the speed of the attack is equal to the speed of the player with the puck, which is exactly what the Canadians get, then this means that any opponent who has speed and speed endurance will always be able to get to the defence in time. (...) I don't think it's good when someone holds the puck for a long time while counterattacking. The essence of the counterattack is a quick, sudden seizure of the initiative and a swift dash to the opposing goal. (...) What kind of a counterattack is this, if we all, with a full squad, manage to return to our zone, get in line, take up positions and meet the opponent fully armed?"
2. The Soviet approach
Whereas the Canadian approach was based on carrying the puck and stickhandling, the Soviet approach was based on passing. The defencemen were obliged to send the puck ahead with what Tarasov calls "longitudinal and diagonal-longitudinal passes" as quickly as possible.
Tarasov: "It's much easier to beat an opponent if you know the art of passing: after all, the puck moves three times faster than the fastest player can skate. (...) The essence of our concept is that every defenceman must immediately, as soon as possible, send the puck ahead, and the forward, astutely catching the moment when our defenceman wins the puck, is called upon to immediately rush to free space at the front lines of attack and offer himself so that the defenceman has several options and can choose the best or most conventient."
Consequences for the game of the forwards: "The counterattack will not be successful and it will lose its meaning if it is initiated by our forwards and the forwards get stuck in the depth of our own zone for a long time. Such a counterattack is doomed: it can only be developed by means of an individual game – by stickhandling or carrying the puck to free space. This contradicts the very idea of a counterattack, which should be sudden and sharp. The pass is the foundation of it today and will remain so in the future. A pass that allows you to quickly enter the neutral zone and to break into the zone of the opponent."
Consequences for the game of the defencemen: "A defenceman who has been messing around with the puck for a long time cannot count on recognition in our hockey. (...) A defenceman who is applauded by the audience for his feints, for skillfully and nimbly stickhandling past several opponents, who carries the puck over a long distance and rushes forward himself instead of giving the puck to the line of attack where the forwards have already jumped out to advantageous positions, such a defenceman, frankly, annoys me."
But what if the forwards don't manage to get free?
Tarasov: "In this case, we should create a numerical advantage somewhere, in this (and only in this!) case we will allow our defenceman to go around the player who is checking him. But our player should not act as the Canadian professionals do in such a situation: carrying the puck and skating away from the opponent."
A breakout to Tarasov's liking: Defenceman #2 immediately sends a long forward pass ahead for either center #9 (left diagram) or right wing #8 (right diagram).
Posted on Behind the Boards (SIHR Blog)
1. The Canadian approach
Tarasov says that the Canadian defenceman (or forward) who wins possession in the defensive end will usually try to exit the zone by himself. He will carry the puck and attempt to move it past the checking player with stickhandling. If the Canadian succeeds, he forces a second checker to approach him, which in turn frees up another Canadian player who may now receive a pass.
Tarasov's criticism: "The counterattack of the Canadians occurs most often as a result of very unhurried, and sometimes, in my opinion, unacceptably prolonged actions of the player who took possession of the puck."
Tarasov thinks that this tactic stems from several specific features of hockey in Canada. One of them is the high level of stickhandling skills on part of all Canadian players, including the defencemen. Another is the active backchecking the Canadian forwards engage in; once the puck is won, the forwards are deep in their own zone and – having vigorously participated in the defence – they are not fully ready to jump into a fast counterattack right away. Consequence for the Canadian who finds himself with the puck: "There are no free pieces in the attack line, there is no-one to pass the puck to."
So the Canadian breakout starts with a player carrying the puck out of the defensive zone individually. Tarasov's assessment: "If the speed of the attack is equal to the speed of the player with the puck, which is exactly what the Canadians get, then this means that any opponent who has speed and speed endurance will always be able to get to the defence in time. (...) I don't think it's good when someone holds the puck for a long time while counterattacking. The essence of the counterattack is a quick, sudden seizure of the initiative and a swift dash to the opposing goal. (...) What kind of a counterattack is this, if we all, with a full squad, manage to return to our zone, get in line, take up positions and meet the opponent fully armed?"
2. The Soviet approach
Whereas the Canadian approach was based on carrying the puck and stickhandling, the Soviet approach was based on passing. The defencemen were obliged to send the puck ahead with what Tarasov calls "longitudinal and diagonal-longitudinal passes" as quickly as possible.
Tarasov: "It's much easier to beat an opponent if you know the art of passing: after all, the puck moves three times faster than the fastest player can skate. (...) The essence of our concept is that every defenceman must immediately, as soon as possible, send the puck ahead, and the forward, astutely catching the moment when our defenceman wins the puck, is called upon to immediately rush to free space at the front lines of attack and offer himself so that the defenceman has several options and can choose the best or most conventient."
Consequences for the game of the forwards: "The counterattack will not be successful and it will lose its meaning if it is initiated by our forwards and the forwards get stuck in the depth of our own zone for a long time. Such a counterattack is doomed: it can only be developed by means of an individual game – by stickhandling or carrying the puck to free space. This contradicts the very idea of a counterattack, which should be sudden and sharp. The pass is the foundation of it today and will remain so in the future. A pass that allows you to quickly enter the neutral zone and to break into the zone of the opponent."
Consequences for the game of the defencemen: "A defenceman who has been messing around with the puck for a long time cannot count on recognition in our hockey. (...) A defenceman who is applauded by the audience for his feints, for skillfully and nimbly stickhandling past several opponents, who carries the puck over a long distance and rushes forward himself instead of giving the puck to the line of attack where the forwards have already jumped out to advantageous positions, such a defenceman, frankly, annoys me."
But what if the forwards don't manage to get free?
Tarasov: "In this case, we should create a numerical advantage somewhere, in this (and only in this!) case we will allow our defenceman to go around the player who is checking him. But our player should not act as the Canadian professionals do in such a situation: carrying the puck and skating away from the opponent."
A breakout to Tarasov's liking: Defenceman #2 immediately sends a long forward pass ahead for either center #9 (left diagram) or right wing #8 (right diagram).
Posted on Behind the Boards (SIHR Blog)
Last edited:
