Does the Penalty Shootout Still Have a Place?

Since 2005-06, the penalty shootout has been a method of deciding the winners of NHL regular season games that remain tied after overtime.



Penalty shootouts have their advantages and disadvantages. Here’s a few points:



For- I would HATE games to end in a tie and I know it’s not reasonably practical to play 20-minute periods of overtime until someone scores a goal, especially in the NHL with its 82-game season. That’s one thing that frustrates me when leagues do choose to end in a tie or indeed other sports. Therefore, it makes the game more satisfying.



Against- Is it fair to decide a game in 1 on 1 situations between players and a goalie? Especially if that game is very important? It simply doesn’t replicate the game itself. Hockey is a team game.





Background

Back in 1942, NHL games were no longer permitted to go to overtime and instead were decided in regulation. This was allegedly due to travel restrictions at the time and therefore this decision, and the reduced roster size made sense as a result of the war. Overtime was re-instated in 1983 and would last five minutes if games remained tied after regulation. It wasn’t until 2005/06 that the shootout came about to stop games ending in a tie, even after OT.



Memorable Shootouts

There have been many iconic penalty shootouts, none more so for me than the USA-Russia shootout in the Sochi 2014 Winter Olympics (the TJ Oshie shootout to be fair). Oshie scored on four of six shootout attempts to give USA the win. Oshie was added to the team partly for his impressive shootout skills which turned out a pretty good decision as he ended the shootout in the eighth round.

Shootouts can also last a while. In December 2017, Florida and Washington needed a record-breaking 20 rounds of shootout before Florida could take the 2-1 win. The previous record was 15. Then in 2015, the Bruins and Oilers went to 12 rounds.




Has the penalty shootout now out-lived its time?

The penalty shootout is all well and good for a regular season game in December, for example. But how can you justify a game in March or very early April which decides which team can go to the Stanley Cup playoffs in a shootout? It seems rather unfair. Or even decide a championship? In the old EIHL Challenge Cup format, Belfast lost to Nottingham in the final, in a shootout. Whereas in 2019, we won in overtime (after the 5 minutes).

Leagues seem to recognize the unfair nature of the shootout and, in fairness to the NHL, the shootout now seems to be the last resort to decide a game. In 2015/16, 10 years after the introduction of the shootout, the NHL changed overtime from 4-on-4 to 3-on-3. This was a brilliant change!

As a spectator, it is definitely more nerve-wrecking and very very exciting! Especially when you have to wait about 10 minutes on a goal review in the middle of it all (Belfast Giants vs Cardiff Devils). Less games have gone to shootout too- result!



What Next?

Ahead of this season the ECHL introduced a new rule whereby OT lasts 7 minutes, 3-on-3. I think the ECHL might have a good idea here. Technically it should mean even less games going to shootout- much fairer on teams to get a result than if they had to sit by and watch as 3 skaters and a goalie essentially decided who got the extra point.

Personally, I like this idea. I find overtime WAY more exciting. Though, shootouts can be tense too and still terrify me at the best of times.



Scratch It or Keep It?

The shootout is not ideal but measures to reduce the chances of going to one have been introduced to make results fairer for teams. If it weren’t for the shootout, would you be happy to see a game end tied? I certainly wouldn’t! A game should have a result. So, we shouldn’t scrap the shootout just yet but perhaps, like the ECHL, other leagues could look to introduce 7-minute OT.

But we’re not there just yet. So, I guess if for now the shootout is the only solution for a game not ending in a tie, I’ll take it.