Am I wrong or right (player attitude)?

[Ozz]

For players who refuse to come off in such situations, a team could throw them a double shift or two earlier in the game on the notion that they might need to skip one in the closing minutes. That way there's no *****ing about ice time and they might even end up w/more if the game doesn't necessitate line shifting at the end.

 

[Frankie Spankie]

It's kind of a conflicting situation because on one hand, you don't want to put yourself ahead of the team, but on the other, it's just beer league and shouldn't matter.

I understand the whole, we all pay to play, we should get to play as much as anyone else argument, but it seems like such a rare case that you should just take a step back and do it for the team. I know I had that attitude when I first started playing, when it was towards the end of a tight game, I wanted to make sure one of the better players are out on the ice. I even did that for regular season games, it should definitely be done for playoffs IMO.

 

[sanityplease]

Probably more to the story... I've seen plenty of self appointed 'captains' whose ego was much stronger than their skill or hockey knowledge.

If it's rec league, I don't agree with shortening the bench, everyone should have a chance to play & experience those type of situations.

 

[HutchJohnson]

(As a team we roll three lines, regardless of PP, PK, or close games at the end. BUT we stress short shifts, and sometimes you might only get 20-30 seconds.)

I agree with this philosophy - fun to play in all situations it's rec hockey after all..
Too bad you play for the Diablos though... So good and bad.

 

[hockeygeek]

I'm guessing it's recreational beer league hockey. It depends on what level. I think it's kinda pathetic when guys take it so seriously but I have played on some high level teams where there is a lot of cash going to the winners and in that situation you take one for the team if you have to. If it's casual leagues where no prize money and it's just for fun than the "captain" is a power tripping wannabe

 

[mbeam]

I've played on beer league teams where it's gone both ways. Usually we have a quick talk before playoffs start to decide how we want to play it. Do we want to have PP and PK lines? Do we want to put out our best players in the last minute if a game is tight? Or do we just want to roll lines? That way we are at least all on the same page before even hitting the ice.

While I agree that beer league is just for fun and it shouldn't be taken too seriously, I do still think that some level of competitiveness should be expected. To me, it's the difference between an organized beer league and a pick up game. Even though both are casual, pay-to-play environments, one has a level of expected competitiveness. That's just my experience anyways.

 

[ccarrigan]

Probably more to the story... I've seen plenty of self appointed 'captains' whose ego was much stronger than their skill or hockey knowledge.

If it's rec league, I don't agree with shortening the bench, everyone should have a chance to play & experience those type of situations.

As far as I know, that's the whole story.

 

[ccarrigan]

I've played on beer league teams where it's gone both ways. Usually we have a quick talk before playoffs start to decide how we want to play it. Do we want to have PP and PK lines? Do we want to put out our best players in the last minute if a game is tight? Or do we just want to roll lines? That way we are at least all on the same page before even hitting the ice.

While I agree that beer league is just for fun and it shouldn't be taken too seriously, I do still think that some level of competitiveness should be expected. To me, it's the difference between an organized beer league and a pick up game. Even though both are casual, pay-to-play environments, one has a level of expected competitiveness. That's just my experience anyways.

I agree with this for the most part. It's not a pick up game, we played 12 regular season games and switched goalies mid season to fight for the last playoff spot. Did we do all that work so that our playoff run could be decided by one guy in the last minutes? I guess it's "beer league" hockey but at a pretty competitive level, so we do want to win.

 

[sanityplease]

As far as I know, that's the whole story.

I can see both sides.

From his point of view, when you bench him, you're telling him that he sucks. Even if he is a weaker player, most people don't like to be embarrassed & treated as second class, especially when they're paying the same as everyone else is to play.

You want to win & worked hard for it, if the guy isn't good enough to play @ anytime, maybe move him out for a better player. This should be discussed @ the beginning of the season though (as another poster stated) & everyone on the team should be clear that in a competitive situation, some players could sit. If that's the way your team wants to be, make it clear. (Warning: this could turn off some players, even good ones, as you're putting winning>team play)

 

[The Tikkanen]

On the other hand the best players don't always score the clutch goals. Sometimes the weaker players are left alone because they're weaker players and they score.

 

[mikitas donut]

My team does this sometimes, but I don't mind sitting. I play many shifts a game, but if we're down, we'll load one line in the final minute and a half of the period. And it often works.

 

[ccarrigan]

I can see both sides.

From his point of view, when you bench him, you're telling him that he sucks. Even if he is a weaker player, most people don't like to be embarrassed & treated as second class, especially when they're paying the same as everyone else is to play.

You want to win & worked hard for it, if the guy isn't good enough to play @ anytime, maybe move him out for a better player. This should be discussed @ the beginning of the season though (as another poster stated) & everyone on the team should be clear that in a competitive situation, some players could sit. If that's the way your team wants to be, make it clear. (Warning: this could turn off some players, even good ones, as you're putting winning>team play)

Agree. We had done that sort of thing before, but it was before their bickering. I'd say we're successful about 80% of the time, but we were down two so who knows.

 

[Robs789]

Not a cool move in the situation. But if he was getting called off the ice randomly in the first its understandable.

When i first started i played on a much better team and subsequently was getting called off randomly by a top player on the team randomly through the games. Thats when its not cool

 

[octopi]

I think he was probably wrong under the circumstances.

some things I dealt with:

Subs(who get to play free) coming in and playing more shifts than I did. And I payed money . We were an assembled team and weren't very good and "the playoffs" weren't more games anyways.

Better players insisting on always being forwards. I realize you're better than me, you scored 5 goals and we're up by ten(one of the few games we were leading). I'd like to play up front for a change, even if I suck. This isn't pros, hotshot.

 

[do0glas]

i think generally players understand who is better than them on the team. i suppose some guys might think they are the best, who knows.

id rather just strive to be the guy that gets counted on in that situation. i dont pay $400+ to float around and not get better. even if it is low level. i like winning.

 

[BADoglick]

Everyone pays the same, everyone plays the same minutes. End of discussion. This isn't the NHL, or even a high school league. This is a rec league that everyone paid to play in. I'm on his side

 

[Noir]

Everyone pays the same, everyone plays the same minutes. End of discussion. This isn't the NHL, or even a high school league. This is a rec league that everyone paid to play in. I'm on his side

Actually I do agree.

Everyone pays to play. You obviously wanted his money to subsidize your team & league fees, or else I'm pretty sure if you had a choice between him and another paying player who is much better, the latter would've been in your team instead.


That being said, giving up his last shift could buy himself and the entire team 1 or more games in the post-season. The least you could do is ask him (not tell him) if he can give up his shift for the team. Although if he does refuse, you accepted his money for your team to play in the league so he's entirely within his right to decline.


Maybe it's possible that the reason why this is an unpleasant practice in beer league hockey, is because traditionally we expect lessers players to be sat, rather than asking them

 

[hototogisu]

I wouldn't say he's wrong, but I wouldn't exactly call him a team player either...

I mean at a certain point, you have to be realistic about your skills. I'm definitely not one of the better guys on my team and I don't have a problem giving up a late shift to a better player if it means tying/winning the game...because I want my team to win more than I care about "maximizing the value" of the money I spent to play. Maybe this guy doesn't, that's his prerogative.

But I do agree with the others who have said it isn't exactly fair to just expect him to give up his shift because he's a lesser player.

 

[gosinger]

I'm pretty happy that European "style" calls for rotating lines - its 1st -> 2nd -> 3rd (if available) -> 1st line all the time unless there is a PP/PK situation. As everyone plays about the same for lets say the first 2.5 periods if the captain decides to stick with alternate lines (i.e. just the "best" players to get that crucial point) its fine; if it works the entire team is happy, if not those left on the bench (which most times includes me) have an incentive to show during the next few practices / games that they belong on one of the top spots.

For the case at-hand, I think of a hockey game as a situation of democratic centralism. During the game whatever your captain/a-captains says goes, and you have to follow his orders. If his decisions were questionable you don't argue during the game but bring it up after the game in-front of the team where the captain has to explain/justify the decision and the team decides on how to handle the situation in the future. Should the captain not adhere to this decision in the future he has to explain/justify this decision, if the team does not agree they might have to elect a new captain.

 

[Fanned On It]

I'm pretty happy that European "style" calls for rotating lines - its 1st -> 2nd -> 3rd (if available) -> 1st line all the time unless there is a PP/PK situation. As everyone plays about the same for lets say the first 2.5 periods if the captain decides to stick with alternate lines (i.e. just the "best" players to get that crucial point) its fine; if it works the entire team is happy, if not those left on the bench (which most times includes me) have an incentive to show during the next few practices / games that they belong on one of the top spots.

For the case at-hand, I think of a hockey game as a situation of democratic centralism. During the game whatever your captain/a-captains says goes, and you have to follow his orders. If his decisions were questionable you don't argue during the game but bring it up after the game in-front of the team where the captain has to explain/justify the decision and the team decides on how to handle the situation in the future. Should the captain not adhere to this decision in the future he has to explain/justify this decision, if the team does not agree they might have to elect a new captain.

Sounds too serious to me.

 

[bigbadbruins1]

He has the me first attitude. In a way he is right, everyone did pay the same. But what it comes down to is if he wants to be able to give his team the best chance at advancing further in the playoffs, and clearly he was more interested in his own playing time and stats.
Those are the types of players that get kicked off my team.

 

[intangible]

That player is selfish and would be off the team immediately once the season ends.

...but I'd never put a player on my team who I wouldn't trust in the last couple minutes, anyway.

Also, I'm a dick when I manage teams. They know it going in and they'll really know it on the way out. I don't play to have fun; I play to win, and that's why I'll bench myself with 2 minutes to go if I think another player can do better to get us the W.

 

[OpenIceHit42]

We had something like this happen in our regional championship game..

Down by 1 with under 90sec to go our captain calls a TO in order to stack the lines, throws our best 5 out and we pull the goalie and tie it not 20 secs later. One of our "third line" guys throws a hissy fit right after that because we left the same line out who would eventually win it with seconds to go.

 

[kolankosf]

I sucked when I began. I kept my mouth shut and did what the team asked, and usually the last 7-8 mins of a 60 minute game I would work the door for the team. That was how I could help. By year 3 (still getting drafted by the team) I was working the PK and usually played the last few minutes. Play to win.

 

[Mattb124]

I pay the same as everyone on my team, but if the Captain thinks that me missing one shift might get the team the win and another game in the playoffs and give the entire team more ice time, I am all for it.

Hockey is a competitive TEAM sport, and if that is not for you...there is always singles figure skating.