I just posted this to my much-neglected blog (link is in my signature), and thought it would be a good topic of discussion here...

So, another sickening hit on the weekend delivered to Marc Savard has started the chatter again on headshots in hockey. I personally don't like the term "headshots"; sometimes they aren't even "shots" at all, sometimes it's a clean hit gone horribly wrong. But, that's what everyone's calling it, and really I'm wasting time discussing semantics.

It baffles me how people can sit there and defend hits to the head, in any capacity. You elbow a guy in the head, that's a 2 minute minor for elbowing, even if the intent wasn't there. You hit a guy in the head with a stick, even if you didn't mean to, that's high sticking, and sometimes it even gets you 4 minutes in the box. You drive a guy's head into the boards, again, intent is not a factor, that's a boarding call and most times that's 5 minutes in the box. So how can there be any doubt that a hit to the head from the body of another player (shoulder, forearm, whatever), however accidental, would constitute at least a minor penalty???

To me, it doesn't even make sense how these calls aren't ALREADY being made. The NHL has a cover-all call for dangerous play. It's called roughing. At the very least, shouldn't some of these hits be called for a roughing violation? These days, roughing seems to be reserved to people getting pissed off after a whistle has been blown...but that's another blog perhaps.

Now, I never played hockey growing up (give me a break, I was born and raised in Australia :P) but I did play contact sports. I played a lot of rugby and Aussie Rules football to be more specific. Any contact to the head was an automatic penalty, and if the referee deemed it to be intentional or particularly wreckless, that player would get sent off (the Australian equivalent of "ejected from the game") AND receive an automatic 1 game suspension with the option for further discipline (keep in mind they only play once per week).

And no, hockey is not rugby, or any other sport. But how can the gap be so WIDE when it comes to head contact, even just within the NHL rules? Something needs to be done.

__________________

I totally agree with you Matt..

Specially since most of the highsticks are not intentional, yet penalized... and they say: "one should always be in control of their sticks"...well, in the same breath, one should always be in control of their body parts when throwing their weight around and as soon as the head is touched, it should automaticaly be called. It shouldn't matter wether its the shoulder or the elbow. Did you see the equipment they have as shoulder pads & elbow pads?!?

I would love to talk about this topic...Believe me i do.

But there is simply no use. Gary Shitman won't listen or anyone else close to him for that matter.

Do i like headshots? F*&% no. If i had the power i would give an automatic 20-season suspension to who ever delivers one and career suspension for one who goes overboard (Jumps while uses elbow and intention to injure while having previous record of headshots)

I would be so strict that i would have given Colton Orr 2 game suspension for his stick to the back of the neck on Brian Lee.

__________________

DREGER: COOKE'S HIT FRONT AND CENTRE AS GM MEETINGS

Matt Cooke's hit on Boston's Marc Savard on Sunday will serve as Exhibit A as NHL general managers gather this week in Boca Raton, Florida for meetings.

Cooke's hit, a shoulder to the head and made partially from behind, left the Bruins forward concussed and unable to travel with his team.

Savard was blindsided and according to many of the game's decision makers, was vulnerable. That's exactly what the managers are hoping to clamp down on, a hit to the head on an unsuspecting player.

There was no penalty on the play.

Monday's meetings consist of a variety of presentations relating to the issue of head checking, concussions and the NHL's ongoing concussion management program.

The NHL has invited a medical team that specializes in concussions to speak and there will also be extensive video presentations isolating both legal and illegal contact with the head.

Monday's meetings will primarily focus on the data and research the NHL has done, but the majority of the three days of meetings will be spent discussing whether or not it's time the league does something to address head checking as many general managers consider this to be a significant safety concern.

It is possible, if not likely, this group will emerge from Wednesday's final discussions with recommendations on an additional penalty or a tweak to an existing rule to include the 'shoulder to the head' hit as an illegal play.

**Currently, shoulder contact with the head is legal.

........

Dreger: Cooke's hit front and centre as GM Meetings

there are two head shot threads can you please merge them

Where is the other one?

Sorry Jas it was in the Senators general chat. But the last few posts were about head shots. I will never forget this... it changed Alfie

Any hit where the player comes from behind like they have repeatedly shown on "That's Hockey" tonight should be considered a hit from behind. If you are not coming in from the players range of vision which means in front of him to either side it should be called. Using you peripherals in sports are very important

__________________
"When it comes to humility, I'm the greatest." Bullwinkle

Democracy empowers the slave to chose his master.

Big hits have always been a part of playing hockey the problem today is in the equipment. I hung up my blades 5 years ago in fear of hurting myself. In one of the last competitive games that I played I took a two hander slash across my elbow. Guess what no pain but the wooden stick did brake in two.
Some of today’s equipment is made from Duroplast and most of it is injection molded very hard plastic with a soft padding on the inside to protect the person wearing the pads. This plastic is as hard as any hardwood. Have you ever walked into a door jam? Maybe hit you head on a wooden shelf took a baseball bat to the left ear?
The hits in the seventies were vicious yet the players got up and skated to the bench. MATT what kind of equipment do RUGBY players wear? If the league took a better look at the equipment issue you would not only see less injuries you would see better hockey. The equipment today is very stiff and does restrict movement.

How much would it hurt if this pointed plastic hit you at 20 miles per hour with 200 pounds of force behind it?

56-epove_ythelbowpads_cl.jpg Would this not feel a little better?

For the most part, rugby players don't wear any equipment at all. A mouthguard, and some players choose to wear soft headgear.

How many players get taken off by stretchers is Rugby not a very rough game?
Don’t ya think the equipment is hockey has gone a little too far?

My elbow pads could kill you, no joke. They are hard molded plastic and almost resemble one of Madonna's bras because they are so pointy on the elbow. I am 6'5 and 225lbs and can skate like a son-of-a-bitch. I know I could kill someone.
I play with regular guys like me who work all day and play hockey 2 times a week and drink beer for an hour after the game. We don't hit with much intensity. We respect each other. We only finish our checks if we can't stop in time. I would never check the shorter guys that I play with because they are guaranteed a shoulder to the head, with these guys I just rub them off the puck.
While we are not anywhere near the same level as NHL'ers, they could learn a lot from our league, and a lot of the other beer leagues around the world.

__________________

Phaneufed ( 13 ®)
http://icehole13.blogspot.com/

You know for two guys that had our differences we do think along the same lines and this is meant to be a compliment to you. I agree with you the NHL could learn from a few beer leagues and they should also watch some clips from the past. If you hit me along the boards your shoulder pads would be in my ear. I go about 200 pounds but I am only five ten. Raise your elbow and I may get dead It's like the icing rules take away the trapazoid let the goalie play the puck save a life.

I am with you on the trapezoid too.

Rugby is an extremely rough game. Have a look at the ears of a rugby player, and how they've been damaged because people have stomped on them in the ruck.

With regards to hockey, obviously helmets are a must, anyone could slip and fall on the ice let alone the force of hits driving you there.

Why is there any need for hard shells on any padding. The pad is supposed to be there to protect the player, not to hurt another.

__________________

Don't even get me STARTED again on that damn trapezoid!

*chants* START START START START

The Trapezoid

Would you give a UFC fighter a pair of gloves with a hard plastic shell? Just saying

No I wouldn't.