Two Olympic finals between Canada and the United States ended in sudden-death losses for Canada, sparking criticism of the three-on-three overtime format used in international hockey. Critics argue that the format, which reduces the ice to five skaters per side, turns high-stakes gold medal games into a 'coin toss' rather than a true test of skill.
The women's final on Thursday saw Megan Keller score the overtime winner for the US, and on Sunday, Jack Hughes netted the golden goal after just 101 seconds of extra time to give the US men their first gold since 1980. Canada had outshot the US 42-28 in regulation but failed to capitalise on chances, including a missed open net by Nathan MacKinnon.
Canada coach Jon Cooper defended his team's performance but questioned the format. 'You take four players off the ice, now hockey's not hockey any more,' Cooper said. 'It's all TV-driven to end games.' He noted that the NHL does not use three-on-three overtime in the Stanley Cup playoffs, only in the regular season.
The format has drawn widespread criticism. An Edmonton Journal writer suggested that the person who devised three-on-three overtime for Olympic gold medal games 'should be stacked into a bobsleigh and pushed down a ski jump.' Critics argue that the rule fundamentally changes the game, introducing a quasi-random element akin to 'pinball' or a video game.
Proponents point to the drama and television appeal of sudden-death finishes. Three of the men's quarter-finals also went to overtime, including the US's win over Sweden. However, the format remains unpopular among purists, who argue that the most important contests in international hockey should be decided by five-on-five play.
