Andrew, thank you for that post. I had just typed up the following stuff, before seeing this last one, and was wondering while posting what your thoughts on this point might be.

My question really originally formed because I was re-watching a few of our games from Sheffield, and something I had noticed was the damage that was done from a mistake on the strike was costly and dramatic; much more so than what may have been gained from executing the play well. When both teams attack hard, and both teams execute well the stronger team will usually have the advantage, but not by much (if they are at least somewhat competitively close not NZ vs. Japan, but say US vs FRA), and the advantage quickly disappears into regular back and forth play. BUT when a team makes a mistake, it appears they are in position to be crippled, even more so than at some random point in the game where the puck is around mid pool.

I’m not sure if this is always the case, and good teams will always punish mistakes, that is part of what makes a good team good, and even good teams can make a mistake or two during a game; and it appears to me that on a strike play it is not usually the team that executes better, that gains much, but rather the team that makes a mistake that loses on the play.

I could very well be wrong, but it seems a more conservative approach to the play might be a better choice in most circumstances, then as nicky pointed out when its called for blast one straight down the gut.

BTW, I this is a big change in opinion for me because I used to be the arrogant forward who thougtht I could win every strike and just trust my teamates would be following me. Older, slower, less fit, ?smarter???