The Nature of Our Game - Part 1

You know, every sport has a certain "nature", or some things that make it different from any other. Sumo wrestling is quite obviously different from hockey, and so is downhill skiing, basketball, figure skating, and so forth. (Yes, it's always possible that there are some similarities between sports. But, no two are ever exactly alike.)

What spells the difference in the nature of each game? Mainly, the rules.

In the case of ice hockey, its rules dictate that contests be played on an ice surface, that that surface be of certain dimensions, that it be surrounded by boards, and that it be divided by lines that have further rule applications. Rules also govern the tools to be used (like sticks and a puck), the time allotted to play, the number of active players permissible per team, how substitutions may be made, and especially how a winner should be determined.
.

As a first aside here, I believe that coaches also have -- and continue to -- greatly influence the nature of our game. I mean, ever since the first puck was dropped, tacticians have been seeking ways to give their teams an edge within the rules. So, we can only thank some pretty bright coaches for ultimately refining things like the length of a typical shift, the way players actually achieve changes on-the-fly, and what most now considered smart playing principles. Come to think of it, have you ever wondered who initiated strategies that are now known as forechecking, breakouts, cycling, powerplays, penalty-killing and the likes?
.

So, what's the big deal about this nature of our game? Well, I'm going to suggest that a close study of our game helps us define the true demands placed on our players. And, it further determines the physical and mental attributes required to play the game well.
.

As yet another aside, I always have some fun asking a group of hockey school kids what their game would be like if it was played under some extreme new conditions... For example, what kind of players would they recruit -- and what attributes would they seek in those players, if the game was played in a 10' x 15' room? Amid the giggles, someone would likely recommend sumo-types or football linemen, and players with more brawn than skill. (Hey, how well do you have to skate or puckhandle under those kinds of conditions?)... At the other extreme, I ask the kids to then build their team to play on a rink the size of a football field. Ah, now we're talking about there hardly ever being a body-check -- so size won't matter, and we're also probably going to recruit players who can absolutely fly, puckhandle and pass really well. Would there be a difference in the way we'd want to condition the two different types of athletes? You bet!
.

So, why did I choose to make this the subject of my first real post? It's because nearly everything else we'll ever want to discuss here needs to be evaluated according to the nature of our game. What it's like to really play the game will often immediately tell us if a given drill or conditioning method will help or hinder our players. So can we usually measure the real effectiveness of a new training gadget.
.

Finally, you should know that I do, from time to time, slightly temper this approach... First, there are occasions when a player (or a group of players) needs a change of pace, or a slightly different approach to training. Especially if the next season is far-off, it might not be a bad idea to briefly take one step backwards in order to eventually gain two or more steps ahead... Secondly, believe it or not, each level of our game has it's own slightly different nature... But, those topics are best saved for another day.