• Print

Campbell's Cuts: Game better off on NHL-sized ice

Ilya Kovalchuk had both the tying and game-winning goal Sunday.  (AFP PHOTO/David BOILY)

Zoom Image

Ilya Kovalchuk had both the tying and game-winning goal Sunday. (AFP PHOTO/David BOILY)

QUEBEC CITY - Russian hero Ilya Kovalchuk said it best when he summed up his team’s ability to come back from a two-goal deficit to win the gold medal game of the World Championship against Canada in overtime Sunday afternoon.

“When you’re playing on the big rinks and you’re trailing by two goals, it’s always tough to come back,” Kovalchuk said.

There is a certain contingent of hockey snobs that look down their noses at the NHL product, all the while claiming the international game to be far superior, in large part because the players have so much room to display their creativity.

They are wrong, so wrong.

What the gold medal final of the World Championship – one of the best hockey games witnessed by these eyes in years – proved beyond a doubt is that the game is played at its highest level when the best of the North American pro game and the European game are married to one other.

Of course, any game that boasts the kind of talent the gold medal game had is bound to be exciting, but it’s even more so when the game is played at a frenetic pace instead of the choreographed and predictable set plays we see so often at the NHL level. This certainly wasn’t Columbus in the middle of February.

And most of what made that possible was that the game was played on an NHL-sized ice surface of 200-by-85 feet, rather than the 200-by-100 expanse used in the international game. If anything, the World Championship this year proved the smaller ice surface is not to blame for dull hockey. In fact, if the International Ice Hockey Federation is serious about improving the quality of the global game, it will take its game to the smaller ice surface.

It would force hundreds of rinks around the world to retrofit - to be sure at something of a significant cost - but it’s certainly a lot easier to make a rink smaller than it is to take out seats and make it bigger.

The international ice surface seems more like an ocean than a hockey rink sometimes. Shots from the faceoff dot on the big ice usually require a boarding pass because the distance is so much further and they often land harmlessly in the goalie’s glove. Quick shots off the sticks of the best players from the same spot on the North American-sized ice are dangerous and often result in goals.

Beating a defenseman to the outside on the international ice is almost impossible because even the slowest-footed blueliner has all kinds of time and space to angle off his attacker. But on smaller ice, that same defenseman will simply run out of room and if the skater is quick enough and slippery enough to get by him, he’s bound to create an outstanding scoring chance for himself.

Related Links

The bigger, wider ice provides a neutral zone that needs its own area code, which makes it easy for coaches to dumb the game down by getting an early lead, then simply dumping the puck into the opponents’ zone and lining five players up along the blueline. The Czechs were absolute masters of doing that during their days of world dominance in the late 1990s and early 2000s. There were times watching games involving the Czechs and Swedes at the World Junior Championship that I was yearning for a set of knitting needles to insert into my eye sockets rather than be subject to a second more of that kind of torture.

What you saw in Sunday’s gold medal game – at least until Canada imposed an NHL mentality on the proceedings and decided to sit back and defend rather than continue with their puck possession game – was an exhibition of hockey that was wonderful to behold. The small rink allowed the fastest players to dart around without wasting energy skating through useless ice. It permitted the big power players to assert themselves on the game because they commanded so much valuable ice and it allowed skill players to make plays that actually meant something because they were being made in areas of the ice where they would be rewarded with a scoring chance.

There are so many ways to change the game for the better, but making NHL rinks bigger to fit the dimensions of the international game is not one of them. And if there were ever any way the NHL could convince the rest of the world that downsizing would be a good thing, the game at all levels would be the better for it.

Ken Campbell is a senior writer for The Hockey News and a regular contributor to THN.com. His blog appears Tuesdays and Fridays and his column, Campbell's Cuts, appears Mondays.

For more great profiles, news and views from the world of hockey, Subscribe to The Hockey News magazine.

COMMENTS (12)

Sort: Oldest | Newest    Filter: All | Videos


Alexander Bjärno Posted
(2009-04-30 06:20:12)



I have to disagree, this final could have been this good on big is too. I have seen the swedish playoff and the nhl one and i have too say the Swedish is more exciting than nhl one but the best player´s play in Nhl. Now the nhl got 2 skilled teams in the final but offen it´s a team with a hot golie and 5 players behind the puck. A player like Marek Malik played in my team (malmo) before he was exposed on big ice he was a joke here but on smal rink he plays for Ny Rangers :). Now come backs on big ice? what a joke sweden came back from 1-5 to win 6-5 against finland att the worlds 2003 on big ice that´s a comeback and if you lock att it statistical you will se that comebacks are more common on big ice plus here it´s a big advatege to play att home but in nhl it´s not that big advanteges becase the home team will be more offensive and that don´t pay´s off on smal ice where it´s easyier to defend. And the big ice is harder on golies ask Ed Belfour he was playing swedish 2 tier hockey he say that you can´t go out and challenge the shoter becase you get rounded so now you know why henrik lunqvist is so far back in the net. I think Nhl will benefit form bigger ice but will it happend i think not.
    0



robert Posted
(2009-04-30 06:20:09)



I agree with you,but disagree with every thing else you have ever said
    0



John Posted
(2009-04-30 06:20:02)



Now I'm just a beer league guy myself so I may not know much. But it seems to me you want to keep the more explosive players wide... make them go farther to get to the net. (Somebody once told me you have to get there if you want to score much) Where can you make them go wider (farther) to get to the net? Olympic ice. I don't think a defenceman needs to be fast to do this.. watch any of them.. they predominantly back in on defence. I don't think anyone would suggest that defencemen are as fast skating backwards as forwards are going, well, forwards. Seems to me smart (and possibly slow footed) defencemen do this by playing angles. Back in at the appropriate rate, in the right lane where you can cover passing lanes and where you can keep the guy from cutting to the middle. (or have a chance at plkaying him when he does) So the defenceman doesn't have farther to go, he's backing in... maybe a step or two to the outside... and the Olympic ice isn't longer.. just wider. So while the forward has to go wider and farther it allows more time for the defence to backcheck. Oh wait.... if I remember, we're mostly beer leaguers. We'll probably need another forum for someone to remind us that we used to know something about how to do that.
    0



Mr. William Posted
(2009-04-30 06:20:01)



In theory the bigger ice surface should help fast teams and hurt slow teams but that doesn't really work out when coaches implement a sophisticated defensive system. They just get everybody to hang back by the blue line and keep the offensive players to the outside where it is pretty much impossible to score. On smaller ice coaches can still implement a defensive system but it's not as effective. With less room it is much harder to play a puck possesion game which results in more turnovers. More turnovers means more chances and penalties. Of course I would not mind if the NHL allowed rinks to be built at any size between NHL and international. It would make things more interesting and give a new meaning to home advantage.
    0



Craig Posted
(2009-04-30 06:19:54)



Shawn, I never implied that I was a player with NHL skills, as I'm now just a beer league guy. I did however play a number of games with ex D1, D3, and minor pro players (above average players) on the big sheet and NHL size rinks and the level of play was more exciting and skilled on the big sheet. Guys with less skill and speed were exploited way more on the big sheet as they didn't couldn't keep pace or wrap up players the way they did on the smaller rink. And I believe the same is true in Olympic hockey when playing on the 2 different sheets. You may disagree, but that's your opinion.
    0



Shawn Posted
(2009-04-30 06:19:52)



I guess those two hillbillies below have no idea how the position of defence is played, or maybe they just didnt read the article. The D has a better chance to angle to the attack of an oncoming forward in international hockey because of the width. Seriously fellas, watch some hockey before you start blabbering on. As for the guy who had the first comment about playing on both sheets of ice, I'm sure you're style of play is the exact same quality as what the NHLers and pro Europeans play...right? So, you're experience is essentially useless. Its like saying I played Atom hockey on NHL size ice, so I know. Seriously guy, give me a break.
    0



Jezisko Posted
(2009-04-30 06:19:48)



I think the best way lies somewhere between the smaller and larger rink size, cause smaller rinks force to speedy hockey and larger rinks eliminates players with "low" skills but "great" size.....to Al, that 250 patch is there cause the city of Pittsburgh celebrates its 250th "birthday"
    0



Al Pascal Posted
(2009-04-30 06:19:46)



Ken not altogether certain that I agree with your opinion on larger vs smaller ice surfaces. Slower D -men would have a much more difficult time checking a speedster on a big ice surface whereas he wouldn't have to move that much on a smaller service I was also wondering if you or anyone else could inform me as well as many others -- what is the significance of the 250 patch the Pens wear on their sweaters. Thanks
    0



Perry Blake Posted
(2009-04-30 06:19:43)



Ken will have to explain it to me again how a slow defenseman like Derian Hatcher would be better on the international ice than he would be on the NHL ice. More room to cover means more room to get beat and/or outskated, not less.
    0



JT Posted
(2009-04-30 06:19:42)



I actually like the NCAA system where there are no requirements on the ice sheet. I think it would be pretty interesting if several teams had olympic ice as it would cause the team to build differently. This is seen in the NCAA as often smaller faster teams like the Golden Gophers benefit from the open olympic ice whereas the North Dakota Fighting Sioux benefit by playing on an olympic sheet with their more rough and tumble style of play. Having variety in rink size could definitely spice up the game a bit. I honestly have no preference on which size is better but it does change the game plans of the teams and the type of team the club needs.
    0




ADD YOUR COMMENT

Register or Login to submit a comment
Player/Injury News - Up to the Minute NHL Updates This Week - Subscribe Now

Which team has been hit worst by injuries this season?










THN Newsletter - Sign Up Now

“I don’t know if I’ll ever feel 100 percent this year.”

- New Jersey's Patrik Elias, who is recovering from hip and groin surgeries and has two points in five games this season.

Our Partners