For reference:
Quote:
International
Hockey rinks in most of the world follow the International Ice Hockey Federation (IIHF) specifications, which is 61 metres (200 ft) × 30.5 metres (100 ft) with a corner radius of 8.5 metres (28 ft). The distance from the end boards to the nearest goal line is 4 metres (13 ft). The distance from each goal line to the nearest blue line is 17 metres (56 ft). The distance between the two blue lines is also 17 metres (56 ft).[2]
North American
Most North American rinks follow the National Hockey League (NHL) specifications of 61 metres (200 ft) × 26 metres (85 ft) with a corner radius of 8.5 metres (28 ft).[3] The distance from the end boards to the nearest goal line is 3.35 metres (11.0 ft). The NHL attacking zones are expanded, with blue lines 19.5 metres (64 ft) from the goal line and 15.3 metres (50 ft) apart.[4]
|
Just wanted to discuss the real challenges that the international ice poses to the Canadian and US hockey teams. It's not the length, of course, because the length is practically the same; but the width and the distance from the goal line to the blue line. A lot of game moves (shots, passes, drops, stopping the puck at the blue line etc.) are worked out by the players to almost an automatic level through the thousands of hours spent on ice playing and practicing. I am wondering, how much these ice differences are actually screwing this automatism for the Canadian and American players when they play abroad and how the coaches are adjusting/correcting for them. They can't be ignored these little things, especially at the Olympic level. Are they of enough significance to impact our winning chances?