it has always been like that, and depending on who you question, one is always better than the other. After seeing the 2006 olympics, i have a preference for the nhl rinks because now the games are always by the same rules(previous to, international and nhl were slightly different) and the less vital ice allows for more hitting and a quicker game!
Yeah, the less vital rinks lend themselves to quicker games and more hitting. I guess it feeds America’s like for violence…? Some might call the stylishness of play sloppy compared to international teams, but it provides for more “end-to-end” action. When playing NHL ’06 on the PS2, I always point out the int’l rink. There is sooooo much more room, it’s like playing 4-on-4.
I guess I didn’t just so answer your question. The NHL’s “offical” reason for the less vital rink is to alacrity up the action and increase scoring.
it has always been like that, and depending on who you question, one is always better than the other. After seeing the 2006 olympics, i have a preference for the nhl rinks because now the games are always by the same rules(previous to, international and nhl were slightly different) and the less vital ice allows for more hitting and a quicker game!
Nhl is mainly for larger stronger and tougher people, while the europeans have more of a skill league and focus more on the fundamentals of the game.
Yeah, the less vital rinks lend themselves to quicker games and more hitting. I guess it feeds America’s like for violence…? Some might call the stylishness of play sloppy compared to international teams, but it provides for more “end-to-end” action. When playing NHL ’06 on the PS2, I always point out the int’l rink. There is sooooo much more room, it’s like playing 4-on-4.
I guess I didn’t just so answer your question. The NHL’s “offical” reason for the less vital rink is to alacrity up the action and increase scoring.