Calgary Flames Writer - Hits to the head

[TeaHatingBrit]

With the growing number of hits to the head in the NHL, you would expect that the league would be cracking down on these infractions.

However, thats in an ideal world.. NHLHS's newest Flames correspondent takes a look at the parity within in the NHL and the lack of discipline handed down by the league.

http://nhlhotstove.com/hits-to-the-head-how-do-we-draw-the-line/

What do you guys think?

[Chandler_Racing]

I hate the hit to the head rules, as a clean hit should not give rise to a suspension. For me it's part of the game.

[SOAB]

the blindside rule is ok in my books, but if a player gets caught with his head down and gets KTFO, why should the player that hit him get suspended if it was a clean, open ice hit?

don't wanna get hit? go play broomball.

[Tram Common]

Originally posted by TeaHatingBrit
What do you guys think?

I think this is a shameless plug to get views. Please kindly fuck off. ;)

[sexualbanana]

Originally posted by SOAB
the blindside rule is ok in my books, but if a player gets caught with his head down and gets KTFO, why should the player that hit him get suspended if it was a clean, open ice hit?

don't wanna get hit? go play broomball.

:werd:

I think there's a profound difference between head-hunting and catching someone with their head down.

[88CRX]

Originally posted by SOAB
the blindside rule is ok in my books, but if a player gets caught with his head down and gets KTFO, why should the player that hit him get suspended if it was a clean, open ice hit?

don't wanna get hit? go play broomball.

The rule isn't protecting players with their heads down. The rule is very clear, it's there to protect players from getting hit out of their peripheral vision from the side and/or back.

[vengie]

Originally posted by 88CRX


The rule isn't protecting players with their heads down. The rule is very clear, it's there to protect players from getting hit out of their peripheral vision from the side and/or back.

Actually it is protecting those players... Take a look at the Kassian hit during the world juniors... Clean hit in my books. Unfortunatley an injury occured, why would you penalize, let alone suspend a player for making a CLEAN LEGAL hit while in the course of gameplay?

The first thing I was taught in peewee was "KEEP YOUR HEAD UP!". I have played high level hockey all my life (Bantam AAA, Midget AAA, Jr A) and have been caught many times with my head down, and yes it hurts! but it was usually a clean hit in a contact sport.

Where this rule should be implemented is the blind sides, or hits while the victim is in the "Danger zone" (3 feet off the boards, back turned), or when its a blatant attempt at a headshot (Feet leave the ice, elbows come up etc...)

At the end of the day hockey is a contact sport, if you can't take a hit go play soccer. All of this controversy over hits and fighting is ruining the sport from its initial roots. The one rule that caused all of this? The instigator penalty.

We need to bring is back to the old style... you rock a guy, be ready for a team fighter to come after you, and come after you hard. Pay to play.

Get rid of this rule and you will see a much cleaner game.

[Freeskier]

Well as soon as you write a rule for something, it's applying the whole spectrum of light knocks to heavy illegal boarding or hits from behind to the same 'line'. It's making one point in the grayscale of hits the defining point where a hit become illegal. The only way to overcome this is to have another body examining and then using personal judgement based on the criteria in the rules.

I think we just need sensible people reviewing the hits and applying a fair and equal penalty to what are deemed illegal hits. I don't think the rule is the problem, but rather the people who have to interpret the rule and apply punishments. They have a pretty hard job and obviously some people are going to be better than others.

Edit:

Originally posted by vengie
We need to bring is back to the old style... you rock a guy, be ready for a team fighter to come after you, and come after you hard. Pay to play.


:werd:

[SOAB]

Originally posted by 88CRX


The rule isn't protecting players with their heads down. The rule is very clear, it's there to protect players from getting hit out of their peripheral vision from the side and/or back.

explain to me why Kostopoulous got 6 games then...

Stuart was battling for the puck, actually swung his stick at the puck less than a second before he got laid out. hit in the face with a shoulder and his jaw broke. Kostopoulous didn't leave his feet, elbows in, yet he still got suspended.

was it charging, maybe. to me, it wasn't an intent to injure though.

Colin Campbell is a moron that is no better than TSN's monkey that spins the wheel to predict playoff winners. there is no consistency in how he hands out suspensions.

if the NHL was actually interested in protecting the players, they would hand out suspensions by the actions committed by the players, not by how severe the injury is.

[88CRX]

Originally posted by vengie


Actually it is protecting those players... Take a look at the Kassian hit during the world juniors... Clean hit in my books. Unfortunatley an injury occured, why would you penalize, let alone suspend a player for making a CLEAN LEGAL hit while in the course of gameplay? .

International world junior rules are different! They don't allow hits to the head or neck period. Regardless what direction or if the player has his head up or down. So there is no point in even discussing that hit/suspension.


Originally posted by SOAB

explain to me why Kostopoulous got 6 games then...

Stuart was battling for the puck, actually swung his stick at the puck less than a second before he got laid out. hit in the face with a shoulder and his jaw broke. Kostopoulous didn't leave his feet, elbows in, yet he still got suspended.

was it charging, maybe. to me, it wasn't an intent to injure though.



At first I didn't think the hit was THAT bad and agreed a suspensions was way over the top. Just went back and watched it again and TK comes flying in from the blueline (charging) and hits Stuart in the head, Stuart did look up at the very last second to see him coming but didn't have any time to react.

In addition here was Colin Campbell statement on the hit:

"A number of factors were considered in reaching this decision," said NHL Senior Executive Vice President of Hockey Operations Colin Campbell. "Kostopoulos delivered a blow to the head of an unsuspecting and vulnerable player. As well, he targeted the head of his opponent and, while the hit was not from the blindside, the head was the principle point of contact. The fact that Brad Stuart was not in possession of the puck when the blow was delivered and the serious nature of the player's injury were also considered in my decision."

He even says right there that the suspension wasn't for a hit to the head.


Let me get this straight.... are you guys OK with Matt Cooke hit on Marc Savard? LOL

[Type_S1]

Originally posted by vengie


Actually it is protecting those players... Take a look at the Kassian hit during the world juniors... Clean hit in my books. Unfortunatley an injury occured, why would you penalize, let alone suspend a player for making a CLEAN LEGAL hit while in the course of gameplay?

The first thing I was taught in peewee was "KEEP YOUR HEAD UP!". I have played high level hockey all my life (Bantam AAA, Midget AAA, Jr A) and have been caught many times with my head down, and yes it hurts! but it was usually a clean hit in a contact sport.

Where this rule should be implemented is the blind sides, or hits while the victim is in the "Danger zone" (3 feet off the boards, back turned), or when its a blatant attempt at a headshot (Feet leave the ice, elbows come up etc...)

At the end of the day hockey is a contact sport, if you can't take a hit go play soccer. All of this controversy over hits and fighting is ruining the sport from its initial roots. The one rule that caused all of this? The instigator penalty.

We need to bring is back to the old style... you rock a guy, be ready for a team fighter to come after you, and come after you hard. Pay to play.

Get rid of this rule and you will see a much cleaner game.

Completely agree. I've played Bantam and Midget AAA and seen some of the best physical players around Canada and seen some horrible headshots that are clean and I think if you get caught with your head down it's your fault. If it's a clean hit there is absolutely no reason someone should be punished...they are playing hockey the way it is meant to be played.

If you blindside someone or show intent of a headshot by any means...yes suspend the bastard as he is trying to injure someone but clean hits no matter where they are on the body should have no punishment.

What I see in the NHL is honestly a bunch of old babies wanting to play the way they want, be lazy and not be punished for it. If you put your head down like a dumb ass you should be completely crushed by someone in such a high skill level league.

[Jlude]

Originally posted by vengie



We need to bring is back to the old style... you rock a guy, be ready for a team fighter to come after you, and come after you hard. Pay to play.



THIS!

That hit on Crosby a week or so a go where he got clipped by the Caps player... if that were Gretzky back in the day, that guy would have been fucked up.

[SOAB]

Originally posted by 88CRX



In addition here was Colin Campbell statement on the hit:

"A number of factors were considered in reaching this decision," said NHL Senior Executive Vice President of Hockey Operations Colin Campbell. "Kostopoulos delivered a blow to the head of an unsuspecting and vulnerable player. As well, he targeted the head of his opponent and, while the hit was not from the blindside, the head was the principle point of contact. The fact that Brad Stuart was not in possession of the puck when the blow was delivered and the serious nature of the player's injury were also considered in my decision."

He even says right there that the suspension wasn't for a hit to the head.


Let me get this straight.... are you guys OK with Matt Cooke hit on Marc Savard? LOL

your quote from Colin Campbell proves my point. he hands out discipline based on the end result of the action, not the action itself.

what happens if a player is skating up the ice with his head down and gets hit by a taller player where his shoulder is at the height of his head? automatic suspension? the tall player isn't allowed to bodycheck anymore, he's too tall. Chara better retire now.

should Brian Campbell have been suspended for DESTROYING Umberger? primary contact was with the head yet it was a clean hit.

the Cooke hit WAS a blindside hit, which i'm against. he should have been suspended just like how Glencross was suspended for the exact same hit early last season, and how Mike Richards should've been suspended for the exact same hit.

[88CRX]

Originally posted by SOAB


your quote from Colin Campbell proves my point. he hands out discipline based on the end result of the action, not the action itself.

what happens if a player is skating up the ice with his head down and gets hit by a taller player where his shoulder is at the height of his head? automatic suspension? the tall player isn't allowed to bodycheck anymore, he's too tall. Chara better retire now.

should Brian Campbell have been suspended for DESTROYING Umberger? primary contact was with the head yet it was a clean hit.

the Cooke hit WAS a blindside hit, which i'm against. he should have been suspended just like how Glencross was suspended for the exact same hit early last season, and how Mike Richards should've been suspended for the exact same hit.

I agree that the whole suspension process is screwed and that Colin Campbell is a knob!

But I thought we were talking about headshots and the new rule, not how the NHL suspensions work in general. Two different subjects.

[r3ccOs]

The body check is taught to use the body to physically remove a person from the puck and to properly finish to take the person out of play or to eliminate the play....

However, its used as an intimitation stradigy to win using a physical presence once you get past play midgit

Not that I'm against big hits, they're exciting and physicality is part of the game, BUT...

The game should evolve, and they need to prevent injuries

I've never seen a sport where players can beak at a ref, and where major calls are often made so subjectively

Fighting needs to go in my books, as the enforcer role is really a paid ice boxer who often have pre-mediated intentions.
(though I do like the hard working grinders like Cooke, Jackman, etc..)

With the pace of the game, the evolved armour, I think that more needs to be done to focus the game on the game, and to protect the players.

Perhaps remove fighting, objectify rules and increase the ice size?

[SOAB]

Originally posted by 88CRX


I agree that the whole suspension process is screwed and that Colin Campbell is a knob!

But I thought we were talking about headshots and the new rule, not how the NHL suspensions work in general. Two different subjects.

can't really discuss one without the other, imo.

the spirit of the new rule is a good one, but the execution will fail horribly until they replace Colin Campbell with someone who can do the job fairly, without any bias. someone like me :D

imo, Kostopolous should not have been suspended because Stuart was injured. it was a hard, face to face that was a charging penalty at most.

[95teetee]

Originally posted by vengie



We need to bring is back to the old style... you rock a guy, be ready for a team fighter to come after you, and come after you hard. Pay to play.





wait wait wait...it's 'old style' for the team's tough guy to go after a guy for making a clean hit on a player?

No- old style hockey meant that if your teammate got rocked by a clean hit, tough shit for him. It's new-age to go after a guy for bodychecking.

[88CRX]

Originally posted by SOAB


can't really discuss one without the other, imo.

the spirit of the new rule is a good one, but the execution will fail horribly until they replace Colin Campbell with someone who can do the job fairly, without any bias. someone like me :D

imo, Kostopolous should not have been suspended because Stuart was injured. it was a hard, face to face that was a charging penalty at most.

Sure you can. The rule in itself is good for the sport, they have eliminated blind side hits to the head through stiffer suspensions. A rule that didn't exist a year ago. A rule that would have allowed the league to suspend Matt Cooke for his hit on Savard. As for how the rule is carried out by the league (and Colin Campbell) that is a whole nother story since Campbell is biased (emails about son's games, etc etc) like you've already said.

And as far as I'm concerned the TK hit is completely irrelevant from the new rule, Campbell said it himself in his statement. TK got suspended for charging and deliberately head hunting another player. And it probably didnt' help he broke Stuarts jaw and that is was the Wing haha. Yes 6 games was a lot either way but first off he's a repeat offender so he's already looking at a couple extra games. Secondly it's TK, everyone know that a superstar player would have been lucky to receive a single game. But like I said thats a different issue in how the league is run not how the rules are worded.

I don't think Campbell has really screwed up an hits to the head rulings/suspensions as of yet.

[Type_S1]

Originally posted by r3ccOs
The body check is taught to use the body to physically remove a person from the puck and to properly finish to take the person out of play or to eliminate the play....

However, its used as an intimitation stradigy to win using a physical presence once you get past play midgit

Not that I'm against big hits, they're exciting and physicality is part of the game, BUT...

The game should evolve, and they need to prevent injuries

I've never seen a sport where players can beak at a ref, and where major calls are often made so subjectively

Fighting needs to go in my books, as the enforcer role is really a paid ice boxer who often have pre-mediated intentions.
(though I do like the hard working grinders like Cooke, Jackman, etc..)

With the pace of the game, the evolved armour, I think that more needs to be done to focus the game on the game, and to protect the players.

Perhaps remove fighting, objectify rules and increase the ice size?

I suggest you go play soccer or basketball panzy. Hockey is a mans sport...hard hitting and fighting come from the roots of the game. Talking to refs is a part of the game. "beaking" a ref gets you a penalty.

Hockey is a game meant to be played with skill, speed, emotion, strength and intensity. Now you have to do everything you can to stop the other teams best attributes. You stop speed with strength, playing the body, big hits...and since the roots of the game if the hit is clean stfu and deal with it. If something isn't going your way...you fight someone to get the team going or slow down the other team.

With the statement you just made you are not a real fan and have obviously never played at a high level of hockey yourself.

[88CRX]

Originally posted by Type_S1

obviously never played at a high level of hockey yourself.

I was thinking the exact same thing.

[SOAB]

Originally posted by 88CRX


I was thinking the exact same thing.

i don't think it even has to be at a high level. just at a high intensity. pond hockey doesn't count.

me and my friends used to play full contact floor hockey, and the intensity and competitiveness would push us to almost knock each other out. of course, none of us were pussies wishing that body-checking was only about "seperating the player from the puck".

[SOAB]

Originally posted by 88CRX


Sure you can. The rule in itself is good for the sport, they have eliminated blind side hits to the head through stiffer suspensions. A rule that didn't exist a year ago. A rule that would have allowed the league to suspend Matt Cooke for his hit on Savard. As for how the rule is carried out by the league (and Colin Campbell) that is a whole nother story since Campbell is biased (emails about son's games, etc etc) like you've already said.

And as far as I'm concerned the TK hit is completely irrelevant from the new rule, Campbell said it himself in his statement. TK got suspended for charging and deliberately head hunting another player. And it probably didnt' help he broke Stuarts jaw and that is was the Wing haha. Yes 6 games was a lot either way but first off he's a repeat offender so he's already looking at a couple extra games. Secondly it's TK, everyone know that a superstar player would have been lucky to receive a single game. But like I said thats a different issue in how the league is run not how the rules are worded.

I don't think Campbell has really screwed up an hits to the head rulings/suspensions as of yet.

i think we are on the same side of the fence here... :nut:

if this happened 2-3 years ago, i don't think TK would've gotten anything for the hit.

i just can't stand the biased bullshit from the NHL head office.

[supe]

Although checking and body injuries are part of the game, concussions seriously fuck you up long term. I think the league is doing a great job protecting its players.

No body likes to see players like Crosby on the bench.

[vengie]

Originally posted by 95teetee




wait wait wait...it's 'old style' for the team's tough guy to go after a guy for making a clean hit on a player?

No- old style hockey meant that if your teammate got rocked by a clean hit, tough shit for him. It's new-age to go after a guy for bodychecking.

That is incorrect, this does not happen in today's game because of the instigator.
Go watch the Don Cherry "Rock'em Sock'em" series. After every big hit let me know what happens. The vast majority of hits back then were in fact quite clean! however everyone was kept in check by the big team fighters.

[vengie]

Originally posted by r3ccOs
The body check is taught to use the body to physically remove a person from the puck and to properly finish to take the person out of play or to eliminate the play....

However, its used as an intimitation stradigy to win using a physical presence once you get past play midgit

Not that I'm against big hits, they're exciting and physicality is part of the game, BUT...

The game should evolve, and they need to prevent injuries

I've never seen a sport where players can beak at a ref, and where major calls are often made so subjectively

Fighting needs to go in my books, as the enforcer role is really a paid ice boxer who often have pre-mediated intentions.
(though I do like the hard working grinders like Cooke, Jackman, etc..)

With the pace of the game, the evolved armour, I think that more needs to be done to focus the game on the game, and to protect the players.

Perhaps remove fighting, objectify rules and increase the ice size?

Hitting starts in Pee wee (~11 years old). By your logic shouldn't sports like Football and Lacrosse evolve as well?

Everything you have mentioned happens in more sports than just hockey, you can only evolve a game so far from its roots before it is no longer the initial sport to begin with. They are starting to restrict things so much that soon we will be watching a bunch of figure skaters with hockey sticks.

You sound like a concerned soccer mom who will protect their little child from every bump of scrape possible.
If you do not like hockey, don't watch it, if you're afraid to participate in fear of getting hurt, Don't play it. It's that simple.

The game is fine the way it is, with the exception of the Instigator.

[r3ccOs]

Originally posted by Type_S1


I suggest you go play soccer or basketball panzy. Hockey is a mans sport...hard hitting and fighting come from the roots of the game. Talking to refs is a part of the game. "beaking" a ref gets you a penalty.

Hockey is a game meant to be played with skill, speed, emotion, strength and intensity. Now you have to do everything you can to stop the other teams best attributes. You stop speed with strength, playing the body, big hits...and since the roots of the game if the hit is clean stfu and deal with it. If something isn't going your way...you fight someone to get the team going or slow down the other team.

With the statement you just made you are not a real fan and have obviously never played at a high level of hockey yourself.

Oh I'm a huge fan of Hockey and yes only played to double A whenst I quit as a midget and haven't re-entered the sport until recently.

Temperance is a virtue regardless of sport, belive me...
Its not that I'm a pansy, but keeping your head clear to make prudent tactacle decisions is more important than "losing it" for the sake of it.

I boxed to a div golden glove level & played as a Free safety with the Bisons... So its not that I don't understand physicality, its the lack of discipline and lack of "leave the game on the pitch" mentality that I don't like.

Why I say this? Well, I am a physical guy when it comes down to playing competitive sports and sometimes it just "rubs" people the wrong way.. and they retaliate by saying and doing the most outrageous things.

I was tough on a guy a couple years back playing indoor soccer, after play passed us, he kicks me and calls me a racist slur... then I tell him to try it again and he punches me in the face.
Well let me tell you, thank god this happened near the bench ref cause I damned near put that asshole in the hospital and all I got was a yellow card due to his sympathy.

However if I had done nothing, I'm certain that idiot would've recieved a proper suspension for unsportsmanlike conduct... which when I played college ball would've been much the same thing.

Maybe its just me, but people who beak without backing up words ruins whatever game they are playing.

As to the physicality, its not that I don't condone clean hits.. in fact a well time hit to break play in a critical moment is sometime's a hero's job.

BUT something needs to happen to prevent injuries and closer inspections to those events with "attempts" to injure.
Dirty knee on knee collisions, and blindside hits, hits from behind and late hits are all penalties yes, but should maybe serve more post-game criticism and repremand.

If you take those types of hit out of the game, you will still retain the essence of hockey without a deep roster of individuals in the IR.

[HungryJack]

Let's not forget this wasn't TK's first suspension, which clean hit or not, factored into the 6 game decision.

[89s1]

r3ccOs reading your last two posts is like two separate people wrote them.