A Non-Neutral Stance

I'm a big fan of the IIHF World Championship tournaments in any format. Whether it's men or women on the ice, seeing nations clash on the ice is always fun for hockey fans when it comes to bragging rights about which country has the best team. The major problem that I have with the IIHF, however, reared its ugly head again today at the end of the Canada-Switzerland contest in Prague, Czechia. There was nothing wrong with the game as the two countries went toe-to-toe in regualtion time for sixty minutes before heading to overtime as neither Canada nor Switzerland could break the 2-2 tie. To solve the problem, the IIHF mandates that team play be suspended with a berth to the gold medal game on the line, and we're treated the dumbest way to break ties: the shootout.

I'm not going to complain that Canada lost and Switzerland won because it's irrelevant in this discussion. Switzerland deserves to play in the gold medal game based on the results of the game, and I'm absolutely content with that. They earned it, so they'll get a shot at bringing home the gold medal. What I struggle with, though, is why the shootout even needs to be a thing at these tournaments. It's not like there are other games scheduled or a time limit on this tournament, yet they opt to decide games in the most anti-team way.

I completely understand the usage of shootouts in the round-robin part of the tournament because it does determine a winner and loser in a three-point game where there are time limits. Having a result that keeps the two-point, extra-time win intact means that the standings get a little crazier in how they look based on how those games end, so having a shootout to end those games is entirely palatable even if I despise everything about the skill competition.

The IIHF oversees country-vs-country competitions, yet they reduce the games to a simple one-on-one when nothing is solved through 70 minutes of play. If we're emphasizing one country's best players versus another's best, shouldn't we embrace the team game more than a breakaway competition? And shouldn't this team concept be emphasized in the medal round where the country with the best team wins the gold medal? I can't remember the last time someone said, "Jonathan Toews won the 2007 World Junior Championship" despite all his shootout goals. Instead, Canada won the championship despite that shootout victory, but the US still should have been able to decide that semifinal game as a team, not as individuals.

When it comes to determining medal colours for countries, the shootout should NOT be used for any reason. Let the teams play, I beg you. There is more than enough time to reset for a second medal-round game that happens, and the results are far more true than having a handful of players determine what medal for which a country will play. You can't ask 20 players to band together and get to a semifinal only to reduce the "team" to six players. That makes no sense, especially when one considers how important depth players become in a high stakes game.

Good luck to Switzerland who will face Czechia in the gold medal game tomorrow. Canada and Sweden will battle for the bronze medal as the 2024 IIHF Men's World Championship wraps up tomorrow. For a tournament that has seen some remarkable plays from a number of teams, reducing teams to a handful of breakaways to determine medals is idiotic.

It's time to retire the shootout in pivotal games.

Until next time, keep your sticks on the ice!