I hate it too, when coaching's getting to anal.
That combination of too much money involved, the massive increase in info gathering through modern technology, the armada of experts who work that plus of infos into knowledge, constantly blowing up the bubble of people involved and profiting in the backgrounds, and in consequence increasing their collective fear of losing jobs and investments, which results in this manic quest for controlling the rather uncontrollable, the sport itself, and killing all the risky, bold, skillfull, unexpected sides of sports, or in other words the pure essence of it, that combination, to bring this unbearable long sentence, which only a person with a germanic background can come up with, that combination, is what I fear most in sports.
Unfortunately, there's a clear tendency in modern sports. (Like the Mercedes drama from Sotchi)
But luckily some stuff goes in cycles as well.
And regarding the playingstyle of Canada in 2014 (it's already the second-to-last OG
), I'm totally with you. It was boring as hell. Call me crazy, but I think it has a lot to do with Switzerland! And if I ever had a chance to ask the canadian staff a question, it would be about that very topic.Let me explain my thoughts: Canada had for quite some time a lot of troubles with Switzerland, much more than they should've had talentwise. And while in the 80s and 90s, on international level, the top european teams like Sweden, Czechoslowakia and its 2 successor states and Russia, oftenly played more efficient and advanced tactics, Canada gained a lot of ground over the last 15 years, and clearly overtook e.g. Russia tactically during the process. Not so with Switzerland, somehow the oftenly brought out the worst in Canada, and it looked like a tactical thing, and it went beyond not taking the Underdog seriously. Im pretty sure they wondered why, and investigated.
And along came 2013 WC, where Switzerland was clearly the best team for 9 games and 10 minutes, before everything collapsed. Everthing was way beyond their talent level. The system under Sean Simpson was brilliant, once it started clicking. Short shifts, to keep a high skating intensity level, total commitment defensively of all 5 men, only taking risks in a super quick transition game through quick long passes out of D, or rushing forward after a turn-over, while the rest of the line joins the attack to keep up the pressure. Aggressiv double men forechecking, when the opponent hasn't control yet or fumbles the puck in D, falling back quickly when the opponent controls the puck.
Do magic on the transition, keep it simple, oldschool, when being installed offensively. High intensity cycling, simple puck on the goal, redirects and rebounds. Over the course of the tournament turning hotter and hotter, they took more risks in neutral situations. But the basics remained.
That's exactly, how Canada played a few months later 2014. A carboncopy of Switzerland, just lightyears more talented. OG was inevitable.
But while it was enormously exciting, following that stunning journey and excitement of the underdog, skating knots into the opposition's legs, a bit like you line-up 8 prime Afinogenovs on the wings, always hustling, but not always scoring, somehow charming, it was rather dull to watch the heavy favorite Canada underplay his potential talent in favor of pure efficency in a rather reserved manner. While it was a clever thing to do, it couldn't move my easily moveable heart one bit. Even if they had some impressive plays and goals, here and there.
2014 I will always remember as the OGs, where the women's tournament easily outshone the mens' in excitement level.
To come back to the very topic of the thread. All the fluffy ball, you never played hockey yourself, it's a manly man's game, man up! comments in here fall a bit short, as hockey, unlike other sports like football/soccer, has a long history of constantly adapting rules. Hockey changed a lot over the last decades. Protectors, sticks, skates, speed, intensity, endurance, overall commitment, tactical schooling,goalie quality, and over the last 10 years defensmen quality improved a lot.
Especially the body protectors created the paradoxon, that it didn't made hockey more safely, but on contrary, allowed the players to check with more speed and intensity, maybe reducing shoulder injuries, to the cost of more severe injuries to neck/head area.
Defensive blocking is similarly influenced by the modern protectors, as the players survive bodyhits by the puck even when behaving in the most reckless manner, but offtenly exposing their vulnerable faces suicidally, when going low so uncontrolled, pretty much forcing the blueliners to shoot flat, if they don't want to ruin their opponents' faces.
IMO opinion what makes hockey so uniquely special is the combination of artlike skills that clash with the harsh physical consequences, when you lose timing or awareness. And not piling up in babylonian dimensions in the own crease.
So yeah, for me they could definitely try to improve the ruling in this department.
I miss a bit the time, when I regularly ran into lack of sleep, just to watch a regular season Boudreau's Washington Globetrotters game with guys like Semin, Backström, Ovie, Green and co. finding enough space in the offensive zone to do their magic and celebrate hockey on finest level, day-in day-out much more entertaining than 95% of all PO games I've seen with all its clutching, sacrifying the health, blood etc.
Ulimately we need more guys like Syomins again, who essentially wanted to entertain, not to obey to every anal coaching approach.
