Last Updated on Sunday, 27 May 2012 18:31
By Jack Blatherwick
Let’s Play Hockey Columnist
Anatoly Tarasov, the father of Soviet hockey, was the most successful international coach in history. His passion was creative, deceptive offensive attack, and this continues to dominate developmental coaching in Russia and Europe today. So it should not surprise anyone that they produce a disproportionately greater number of the world’s most creative offensive geniuses.
Decades ago Tarasov observed that North American coaches were so preoccupied with defensive systems, they hardly bothered to teach offensive attack, except for the power play. This is true today at every level of American hockey, because it is the quickest route to win, and it is much easier to draw X’s and O’s on the board than to train for skills like those of Pavel Datsyuk or Sidney Crosby.
Encouraging creativity is a sure-fire way to lose in the short run at the youth level, because skills are not yet perfected. Losing is not tolerable in a youth system of “big event” games, a system that continues to hurt development in the U.S. It is precisely the opposite in Europe and Russia, where a youth coach would be fired if he emphasized winning over development.
Even after high school hockey in our country, coaches become judges of offensive talent, more than developers. So if a competitive, fast, strong, hard-working college or professional player lacks just one offensive skill, he is assigned for life to a defensive role.
What if football or basketball coaches ignored offensive attack and simply worked on defensive systems? Ridiculous, you say? They’re up all night thinking of new ways to create offense. Does this mean they ignore defense? Of course not, but somehow in hockey, it is fashionable to say, “Games are won by good defense.” Period.
What about good offense along with good defense? For a quick laugh try this Google assignment: type the words, “Offense hockey.” Obviously, Google has an American — not Russian — bias, because the first 10 suggestions on their list all start with the word, “Defensive…”
Bobby Richardson, longtime NHL scout, college coach, and developmental coach to hundreds of players in the Boston area, writes about the deceptive offensive attack of the New Orleans Saints, comparing it to European and Russian hockey. The Saints use many different formations, personnel groupings and pre-snap shifts to confuse the defense. Then as the ball is snapped, there is always an effort to deceive linebackers into taking a fatal step in the wrong direction. They use fake runs on pass plays, stutter steps one way and counters the other way on running plays — anything to deceive the defense for a second.
They pass in traditional “running” situations, and they run when the defense expects a pass. Coach Sean Peyton designs each fake and stutter step to look exactly like the real thing and speaks of this extra little effort that makes the offense successful.
The phrase “extra effort” in North American hockey is most often reserved for a defensive play like blocking a shot or backchecking hard; or on offense, to describe someone crashing the net for a rebound, all great plays, of course. However, unlike Coach Peyton, we don’t teach the little extra effort to make a realistic fake, drawing a defender one way while passing back in the oppposite direction; yet, this is the very reason players like Crosby and Datsyuk rise above the average.
Tarasov employed the same concepts in hockey that the Saints use in their offense…extra effort directed toward deception and creativity. Today, at most levels of North American hockey, when an attack faces an even-man defensive alignment at the blue line, players are told to dump the puck deep and forecheck. In other words, against a good defense, “Give up on this attack opportunity and wait for another one.” Imagine this in a basketball or football game, if the other team happens to get the allotted number of defenders, forget about trying to outsmart them; forget deception; forget offense — just punt on first down and wait for another opportunity.
“Keep it simple. Never make mistakes with the puck.” That’s offensive hockey American style. But, the greatest coaches of all time say things like, “The team that makes the most mistakes is taking the initiative, and they will win later in the season.” That was John Wooden’s philosophy, and it captured 10 NCAA basketball championships in 12 years! Imagine that; then consider his question for youth coaches, “How can a real teacher not indulge mistakes?”
“A (hockey player) has to be a sort of magician to outwit and outplay the opponent,” Tarasov said. “The main objective of a coach (in the future) will be the development of the players’ fantasy (imagination/creativity).” It’s been 35 years since Tarasov hoped for such a future in hockey, and creativity has not become the main objective in American youth hockey. In fact, if a player tries something creative and fails in a weekend PeeWee tournament, creativity may be rewarded with a long, cold lesson — sitting next to a coach who didn’t study great teachers like Tarasov or Wooden.
Visit Jack’s website at www.overspeed.info.
