36 replies to this topic

[Wing Across The Pond]

Waste of time if you ask me, I think it's a perfectly acceptable way to play hockey.

TORONTO -- The general managers will hold their first meeting of the 2011-12 season Tuesday in Toronto, and it is likely that the 1-3-1 forecheck utilized by the Tampa Bay Lightning will be a hot button topic for discussion.

The Lightning's version of the patient forecheck became a League-wide conversation piece last week when the Philadelphia Flyers opted not to attack it but instead sit back and wait. Tampa Bay chose not to attack either, but instead wait for the Flyers to attempt to move the puck up the ice.

The officials had to blow the whistle to stop the play because nothing was happening; the puck had stopped moving.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=601503&cmpid=nhl-rxl-twt

[Shoreline]

I consider the whole issue of the trap and safety rules a joke, mainly because the NHL won't address issues like: international sized ice surface, reverting back to softer pads, removing the instigator. Instead it's going to focus on how to nitpick hits and arbitrarily punish players for hits they've been making since well before I started watching hockey, making nets bigger, and probably an NBA way of dealing with the trap. I'm not sure what kind of product the NHL is trying to put out on their ice surfaces.

I'll very likely be exclusively giving a s*** about realignment.

Edited by Shoreline, 15 November 2011 - 11:32 AM.

[Wing Across The Pond]

Instead it's going to focus on how to nitpick hits and arbitrarily punish players for hits they've been making since well before I started watching hockey,

There could be a correlation to why quite a few of those players are dead now though, no?

I'll very likely be exclusively giving a s*** about realignment.

This is very true! I would like to see it how it was proposed on FSD last week I think it was, 4 division (2 of seven, 2 of eight) allocated geographically. I was watching some of Winnipeg - Tampa and was thinking, "my God they scheduled that as if the team was still in Georgia". Must be hellish

[Finnish Wing]

There's no problem in traps. They can be beat and everyone can use them. The problem was Flyers not trying to attack. It's the responsibility of the team who has the puck to keep the game going, try to score. Other team tries to prevent the scoring.

Other team doesn't have to try to take the puck back. Most important priority is to prevent scoring, not to take the puck back. So don't gimme that argument, ok?

[haroldsnepsts]

There's no problem in traps. They can be beat and everyone can use them. The problem was Flyers not trying to attack. It's the responsibility of the team who has the puck to keep the game going, try to score. Other team tries to prevent the scoring.

Other team doesn't have to try to take the puck back. Most important priority is to prevent scoring, not to take the puck back. So don't gimme that argument, ok?

Agreed.

I (mistakenly, apparently) thought there already was an existing delay of game rule if a team did not make an effort to advance the puck.

If there isn't, they don't need a rule preventing the 1-3-1. They need a delay of game rule.

[Wing Across The Pond]

There's no problem in traps. They can be beat and everyone can use them. The problem was Flyers not trying to attack. It's the responsibility of the team who has the puck to keep the game going, try to score. Other team tries to prevent the scoring.

Other team doesn't have to try to take the puck back. Most important priority is to prevent scoring, not to take the puck back. So don't gimme that argument, ok?

Is this aimed at me? Because I believe I said "GMs to discuss the 1-3-1 forecheck" - "Waste of time if you ask me, I think it's a perfectly acceptable way to play hockey."

If it wasn't aimed at me, apologies. I just want to get it out there that I agree with you. Think discussing an acceptable form of defence is a waste of time because all they can really say is, "yeah it's alright to use". If they say anything else then it's a joke, and another step towards turning the league into a goal-fest which is the equivalent of dangling a shiney object in front of a baby and shaking it around to amuse them.

[Reds4Life]

There's no problem in traps. They can be beat and everyone can use them. The problem was Flyers not trying to attack. It's the responsibility of the team who has the puck to keep the game going, try to score. Other team tries to prevent the scoring.

Other team doesn't have to try to take the puck back. Most important priority is to prevent scoring, not to take the puck back. So don't gimme that argument, ok?

Incorrect.

[Wing Across The Pond]

Incorrect.

Fantastic reasoning. Infallible argument. But believe it or not, in a game without ties, if you don't attack, you wont win. Unless the opposition puts it into their own net. The onus is on the attacking team to actually win a game, not limp through to a loss.

[Heroes of Hockeytown]

There's no problem in traps. They can be beat and everyone can use them. The problem was Flyers not trying to attack. It's the responsibility of the team who has the puck to keep the game going, try to score. Other team tries to prevent the scoring.

I initially thought this as well, but since then I've reconsidered. The goal above anything else is to win. If the Flyers think that attacking a trapping team is going to hurt their chances of winning (which it sometimes does), and if they also think that waiting will pull the Bolts out of their trap (which it did), then I don't see why they shouldn't wait; waiting for the opportunity for your attack to be effective seems like a good strategy to me.

If this sort of thing became an epidemic in the NHL then something would have to be done, but it really wasn't that big of a deal in the game it happened in. My guess is that the GMs don't do anything about this.

[hooon]

The problem is, many teams in the NHL go into the trap from time to time during a game depending on the score. Few teams use the trap exclusively like Tampa Bay, but its still a very common tactic overall, especially with a big lead. I don't see how they can possibly rule to eliminate this and how it would be enforced.

[GMRwings1983]

The trap is bad for hockey, but so is the butterfly style of goaltending. Hockey was more fun back when goalies sucked in the 1980's, and scoring from long slapshots was much easier. So what?

The trap is just a part of hockey evolution, and I don't see how they're going to make it go away. Are refs going to watch for how teams defend now and call penalties for only having one forechecker? Seems silly to me.

[haroldsnepsts]

The problem is, many teams in the NHL go into the trap from time to time during a game depending on the score. Few teams use the trap exclusively like Tampa Bay, but its still a very common tactic overall, especially with a big lead. I don't see how they can possibly rule to eliminate this and how it would be enforced.

Agreed. Dallas was going into the 1-4 against Detroit just last game.

One of which worked when Morrow scored. Of course he was open on the play because he interfered with Abby at center ice, knocking the stick from his hand. Not that I'm bitter.

But then the Wings scored on one of the other instances where Dallas used the 1-4.

[mjlegend]

I initially thought this as well, but since then I've reconsidered. The goal above anything else is to win. If the Flyers think that attacking a trapping team is going to hurt their chances of winning (which it sometimes does), and if they also think that waiting will pull the Bolts out of their trap (which it did), then I don't see why they shouldn't wait; waiting for the opportunity for your attack to be effective seems like a good strategy to me.

If this sort of thing became an epidemic in the NHL then something would have to be done, but it really wasn't that big of a deal in the game it happened in. My guess is that the GMs don't do anything about this.

It was still a 2-1 game the Flyers lost. I would say they still need some work on trying to break it. I mean, there's waiting for an opportunity and wasting a minute of game time while you try to make an argument.

It reminded me of Monty Python's Greece-Germany philosopher's soccer game:

[hooon]

Agreed. Dallas was going into the 1-4 against Detroit just last game.

One of which worked when Morrow scored. Of course he was open on the play because he interfered with Abby at center ice, knocking the stick from his hand. Not that I'm bitter.

But then the Wings scored on one of the other instances where Dallas used the 1-4.

Yeah I don't promote the 1-3-1 and I think its dull, boring hockey, but certain situations make sense. I read an article in the paper that said every NHL team uses the trap at some point or another. Not sure if that's true or not, but enforcing this rule seems like a logistical nightmare.

[heretic69]

Nothing in sports pisses me off more than seeing a trap or full court press. Anyone who runs one for a full game should be punched in the nuts.

I promise I'll be national news if I ever see Billy Donovan around town.

[Heroes of Hockeytown]

It was still a 2-1 game the Flyers lost. I would say they still need some work on trying to break it. I mean, there's waiting for an opportunity and wasting a minute of game time while you try to make an argument.

I happened to have been watching that game, and I can tell you that the score requires context. They waited Tampa out of their trap so that worked for them; they lost on a PPG and a 4-on-4 OT goal so that hasn't got anything to do with the 1-3-1.

Of course we all know that the 1-3-1 is perfectly beatable, and if I were coaching I personally wouldn't have gone that route. But I still don't think there's anything wrong with that particular part of the Flyers' strategy, especially given that they accomplished their goal on that front.

[The Secret]

Let's add some more boredom to the game and remove some more fun. Legal or not 1-3-1 is lame. If I were one of the talented players on a team using that strategy I would protest it because you are taking away my ability to beat you with my skills and replacing it with beating you with a boring system. The Tampa Bay fans boo'd the team for their strategy and I join them BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! I still love Stevie and always will and he made his mark as a scorer during a time when the game was fun and exciting I'm sad he would back such a system and help to remove more fun from the game. How many Wings game would you go to pay and see if the team sat around like that? For me the answer would be ZERO, I can find ways to bore myself for free. I would not contribute my hard earned money for million dollar salaries to watch these players sit around and wait like that.

[ben_usmc]

I hate the trap, and will forever hate teams like Min./NJ because of there use of it over the years. But it's not something that should be discussed, just learn to beat it

[wingsfan4795]

What's wrong with trapping? Are there any rules against it? I think winning is more important than entertainment value

[Finnish Wing]

Is this aimed at me? Because I believe I said "GMs to discuss the 1-3-1 forecheck" - "Waste of time if you ask me, I think it's a perfectly acceptable way to play hockey."

If it wasn't aimed at me, apologies. I just want to get it out there that I agree with you. Think discussing an acceptable form of defence is a waste of time because all they can really say is, "yeah it's alright to use". If they say anything else then it's a joke, and another step towards turning the league into a goal-fest which is the equivalent of dangling a shiney object in front of a baby and shaking it around to amuse them.

No it wasn't aimed at you or anyone here. More like at everyone who used that argument to defend Flyers, because there already was a long conversation about this on the hfboards.