The olympics went without a hitch, had fantastic hockey, and the IIHF has a penalty for all hits to the head. Goonery like this doesn’t belong in the game. As proven by the olympics. Let great players in the game, let them play. That’s hockey. That doesn’t mean hitting, physicality, or hard work will leave the game. It just means Patrice Bergeron wouldn’t be sitting out last playoffs, and Marc Savard wouldn’t be on the sidelines for this year’s playoff push.
oh yeah forgot to mention----
This doesn’t happen:
so this never happens:
[quote]hockechamp14 wrote:
The olympics went without a hitch, had fantastic hockey, and the IIHF has a penalty for all hits to the head. Goonery like this doesn’t belong in the game. As proven by the olympics. Let great players in the game, let them play. That’s hockey. That doesn’t mean hitting, physicality, or hard work will leave the game. It just means Patrice Bergeron wouldn’t be sitting out last playoffs, and Marc Savard wouldn’t be on the sidelines for this year’s playoff push.[/quote]
I’m sorry, but I don’t want to see the NHL resemble international hockey at all. Nothing was proven at all by the Olympics. I’ve watched plenty of international hockey, and it’s incredibly boring compared to what the NHL used to be.
And yes, it does mean that physicality, hitting, and hard work will be compromised. We have already seen that happen over Bettman’s era with the rule changes, instigator penalty, and rule interpretations. The NHL was incredible in the 1970’s and 1980’s, and every time the NHL has tried to take things away from the players and police things themselves, it has backfired.
Go to Sweden if you want to watch that kind of hockey.
[quote]mrw173 wrote:
[quote]hockechamp14 wrote:
The olympics went without a hitch, had fantastic hockey, and the IIHF has a penalty for all hits to the head. Goonery like this doesn’t belong in the game. As proven by the olympics. Let great players in the game, let them play. That’s hockey. That doesn’t mean hitting, physicality, or hard work will leave the game. It just means Patrice Bergeron wouldn’t be sitting out last playoffs, and Marc Savard wouldn’t be on the sidelines for this year’s playoff push.[/quote]
I’m sorry, but I don’t want to see the NHL resemble international hockey at all. Nothing was proven at all by the Olympics. I’ve watched plenty of international hockey, and it’s incredibly boring compared to what the NHL used to be.
And yes, it does mean that physicality, hitting, and hard work will be compromised. We have already seen that happen over Bettman’s era with the rule changes, instigator penalty, and rule interpretations. The NHL was incredible in the 1970’s and 1980’s, and every time the NHL has tried to take things away from the players and police things themselves, it has backfired.
Go to Sweden if you want to watch that kind of hockey.[/quote]
I don’t mean a removal of fighting. Fighting with honor and to police hits is fine. I never saw NHL in the 70’s and 80’s because I was born in 88.
1996 world cup of hockey. That was amazing. 97 Red Wings. Same.
I understand what you’re saying, but I don’t think the game is going back to the way it was. The players are bigger, stronger, faster, and more talented.
The olympic hockey from this year is the best I’ve seen in any recent years though, and they have a penalty to hits to the head - therefore, it wouldn’t end hockey as we know it now.
playoff hockey > olympic hockey
Way more physicality in playoffs too.
I gotta start watching hockey. Make no mistake, hard hits sell tickets.
While the hit may or may not have been late, the problem here is the guy doing the hitting has a record of this type of late hit which goes to show the intent. Considering the skill level that these guys are supposed to have, he had plenty of time to avoid the hit or make sure that he didn’t catch him in the head. If you look at the slow motion replay, he doesn’t raise his arm and hits with his shoulder.
But looking at it in real time, you can see that he could have changed direction ever so slightly and made a shoulder-to-shoulder hit instead. The intent with this guy is clear considering his past record. The outcome may have been more severe than he intended, I will give him that. But Cooke is definitely a goon and this is what the league needs to get rid of.
My other problem with this whole thing is what would have happened if the exact situation happened except that it was Shawn Thornton doing the hitting and it was either Malkin or Crosby receiving the hit? That is the biggest problem with the NHL.
[quote]spyoptic wrote:
I gotta start watching hockey. Make no mistake, hard hits sell tickets.[/quote]
“Hard hits sell tickets” Oh yeah!, and dvd’s…just ask Don Cherry.
[quote]spyoptic wrote:
I gotta start watching hockey. Make no mistake, hard hits sell tickets.[/quote]
I agree with hard hits, but these guys are professionals and should be able to skate well enough to avoid hitting a guy square in the head with his shoulder. If he can’t then he has no business in the league.
I don’t know about you guys, but it didn’t seem dirty to me. I don’t really see how you can blame the guy doing the hitting any more than the other. I mean the way the guy shot, he put his own head low and out in front.
If you think the guy could have swerved to avoid him, couldn’t the guy shooting have moved his head? Shouldn’t the guy with the puck pay attention to his surroundings?
In highschool soccer, they actually penalize kids for putting themselves in an un-safe position (whether or not it causes an incident). They do something similar in football with guys putting themselves in danger with unsafe tackles.
Just because a person gets hurt doesn’t mean they don’t share any blame in the incident.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I don’t know about you guys, but it didn’t seem dirty to me. I don’t really see how you can blame the guy doing the hitting any more than the other. I mean the way the guy shot, he put his own head low and out in front.
If you think the guy could have swerved to avoid him, couldn’t the guy shooting have moved his head? Shouldn’t the guy with the puck pay attention to his surroundings?
In highschool soccer, they actually penalize kids for putting themselves in an un-safe position (whether or not it causes an incident). They do something similar in football with guys putting themselves in danger with unsafe tackles.
Just because a person gets hurt doesn’t mean they don’t share any blame in the incident.[/quote]
You are not supposed to have contact away from the puck, though they often let it go if you aren’t in a vulnerable position. It’s not always possible to protect yourself, hence why there are rules against boarding and running the goalie. This guy has a history of dirty hits.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I don’t know about you guys, but it didn’t seem dirty to me. I don’t really see how you can blame the guy doing the hitting any more than the other. I mean the way the guy shot, he put his own head low and out in front.
If you think the guy could have swerved to avoid him, couldn’t the guy shooting have moved his head? Shouldn’t the guy with the puck pay attention to his surroundings?
In highschool soccer, they actually penalize kids for putting themselves in an un-safe position (whether or not it causes an incident). They do something similar in football with guys putting themselves in danger with unsafe tackles.
Just because a person gets hurt doesn’t mean they don’t share any blame in the incident.[/quote]
You’ve obviously never played hockey because that is the position your body is in when you take a shot like that. To use your soccer analogy, it would be like faulting a player for stepping into a kick because it puts the plant leg in a vulnerable position. And this is completely different than spearing in football, which by the way, was originally implemented to protect the player being hit, not the moron who jeopardizes his own neck. There is no penalty for not being in a proper tackling position (i.e. head-up, face-first).
DB
[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I don’t know about you guys, but it didn’t seem dirty to me. I don’t really see how you can blame the guy doing the hitting any more than the other. I mean the way the guy shot, he put his own head low and out in front.
If you think the guy could have swerved to avoid him, couldn’t the guy shooting have moved his head? Shouldn’t the guy with the puck pay attention to his surroundings?
In highschool soccer, they actually penalize kids for putting themselves in an un-safe position (whether or not it causes an incident). They do something similar in football with guys putting themselves in danger with unsafe tackles.
Just because a person gets hurt doesn’t mean they don’t share any blame in the incident.[/quote]
You’ve obviously never played hockey because that is the position your body is in when you take a shot like that. To use your soccer analogy, it would be like faulting a player for stepping into a kick because it puts the plant leg in a vulnerable position. And this is completely different than spearing in football, which by the way, was originally implemented to protect the player being hit, not the moron who jeopardizes his own neck. There is no penalty for not being in a proper tackling position (i.e. head-up, face-first).
DB[/quote]
So, in soccer your take would be like faulting tackling a shooter with his leg planted? It’s still legal to tackle a guy in soccer when shooting, even though it raises the probability of the guy blowing out his knee.
The way I understand the football rule, it protects both players.
Lastly, I’m not calling the guy an idiot or saying that it’s his fault. What I am saying is that he chose to play hockey, he chose to take the shot, he put himself in a vulnerable position, he didn’t appear to be that aware of his surroundings, and he got hit.
Something like the young girl in skimpy clothes walking down an alley at night. She doesn’t deserve to get raped, but what the hell did she expect?
[quote]hockechamp14 wrote:
[quote]mrw173 wrote:
[quote]hockechamp14 wrote:
The olympics went without a hitch, had fantastic hockey, and the IIHF has a penalty for all hits to the head. Goonery like this doesn’t belong in the game. As proven by the olympics. Let great players in the game, let them play. That’s hockey. That doesn’t mean hitting, physicality, or hard work will leave the game. It just means Patrice Bergeron wouldn’t be sitting out last playoffs, and Marc Savard wouldn’t be on the sidelines for this year’s playoff push.[/quote]
I’m sorry, but I don’t want to see the NHL resemble international hockey at all. Nothing was proven at all by the Olympics. I’ve watched plenty of international hockey, and it’s incredibly boring compared to what the NHL used to be.
And yes, it does mean that physicality, hitting, and hard work will be compromised. We have already seen that happen over Bettman’s era with the rule changes, instigator penalty, and rule interpretations. The NHL was incredible in the 1970’s and 1980’s, and every time the NHL has tried to take things away from the players and police things themselves, it has backfired.
Go to Sweden if you want to watch that kind of hockey.[/quote]
I don’t mean a removal of fighting. Fighting with honor and to police hits is fine. I never saw NHL in the 70’s and 80’s because I was born in 88.
1996 world cup of hockey. That was amazing. 97 Red Wings. Same.
I understand what you’re saying, but I don’t think the game is going back to the way it was. The players are bigger, stronger, faster, and more talented.
The olympic hockey from this year is the best I’ve seen in any recent years though, and they have a penalty to hits to the head - therefore, it wouldn’t end hockey as we know it now.[/quote]
Olympic hockey this year was an improvement over Olympics from previous years. I think it was because of 2 main reasons:
- It was played on a North American style rink (smaller) which encourages more physical play
- The medal rounds were officiated very liberally. They weren’t calling every little hook, clutch, and grab like they do in the NHL. As a result, the games had a lot more flow than the typical penalty-fest we are used to in the NHL.
However, as a whole, I’d still evaluate the Olympics this year as inferior to the NHL playoffs in previous eras.
Consider the latter point in terms of how the NHL will regulate head shots. The way they’ve been talking at the GM meetings this week, it sounds like NHL refs are going to have a lot of subjective criteria to work with for assessing a penalty for a hit to the head.
Given how tight the NHL game is officiated nowadays, and given how poorly they do with it when it comes to penalties like hooking and slashing (sorry, just because the stick makes contact with the jersey doesn’t mean it’s a hooking penalty, and just because a player drops his stick doesn’t mean he was slashed), I’m worried that we’re going to see perfectly clean hits being called as penalties just because of some incidental contact to the head.
And if that happens, then yes, physicality of the game will be compromised.
Anyone who has played any type of checking hockey knows that you are complete control of your body when coming in for a hit. The guy shooting has no control. Marc Savard didnt “swerve wildly” at the last second like someone carrying the puck may do (re: knee on knee hits) he was following through on his shot, he stayed in a straight line. Cooke came from behind his (Savard’s) shoulder and cut in front of Savard. He could have easily gone shoulder to shoulder, that hit happens 20 times a game. Instead he went out of his way to hit Savard the way he did. He had every intention of hiting Savard up high. No doubt.
[quote]mrw173 wrote:
Consider the latter point in terms of how the NHL will regulate head shots. The way they’ve been talking at the GM meetings this week, it sounds like NHL refs are going to have a lot of subjective criteria to work with for assessing a penalty for a hit to the head.
Given how tight the NHL game is officiated nowadays, and given how poorly they do with it when it comes to penalties like hooking and slashing (sorry, just because the stick makes contact with the jersey doesn’t mean it’s a hooking penalty, and just because a player drops his stick doesn’t mean he was slashed), I’m worried that we’re going to see perfectly clean hits being called as penalties just because of some incidental contact to the head.
And if that happens, then yes, physicality of the game will be compromised.
[/quote]
Nice post agreed! I still think the players need to be protected because GM’s are willing to give guys who headhunt jobs.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Lastly, I’m not calling the guy an idiot or saying that it’s his fault. What I am saying is that he chose to play hockey, he chose to take the shot, he put himself in a vulnerable position, he didn’t appear to be that aware of his surroundings, and he got hit.
Something like the young girl in skimpy clothes walking down an alley at night. She doesn’t deserve to get raped, but what the hell did she expect?[/quote]
That’s not how hockey works. We all know we play a dangerous game with plenty of lines in the sand. You do your best to play hard and win without crossing any of those lines. Obviously while playing on edge it can sometimes be broken, intentionally or unintentionally (— see todd bertuzzi). In the end the players have to look out for each other or else there is no league to play in, and no healthy hockey players.
Unfortunately, the league already set their own precedent for this hit this year with the Richards hit on Boothe. It was a very similar hit, though the result was not nearly as bad for Boothe. But since nothing was done there, nothing was going to be done here. You can see it in the replays that Cooke lined up and aimed right at his head. Like I said before, he may not have set out to give him a concussion and take him out for the season, but he did intend to level him with a hit to the head.
As BobCat said, if, Cooke is a professional hockey player, he should be able to skate well enough to have been able to avoid hitting him the head, so he had to have aimed to hit his head with the shoulder. Since there is no rule in the game against this, there was no penalty. So with the rules they are now, you can legally end a players career and the league will just call it incidental contact or a clean hit. That is why the GM’s are trying to add this new rule.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I don’t know about you guys, but it didn’t seem dirty to me. I don’t really see how you can blame the guy doing the hitting any more than the other. I mean the way the guy shot, he put his own head low and out in front.
If you think the guy could have swerved to avoid him, couldn’t the guy shooting have moved his head? Shouldn’t the guy with the puck pay attention to his surroundings?
In highschool soccer, they actually penalize kids for putting themselves in an un-safe position (whether or not it causes an incident). They do something similar in football with guys putting themselves in danger with unsafe tackles.
Just because a person gets hurt doesn’t mean they don’t share any blame in the incident.[/quote]
You’ve obviously never played hockey because that is the position your body is in when you take a shot like that. To use your soccer analogy, it would be like faulting a player for stepping into a kick because it puts the plant leg in a vulnerable position. And this is completely different than spearing in football, which by the way, was originally implemented to protect the player being hit, not the moron who jeopardizes his own neck. There is no penalty for not being in a proper tackling position (i.e. head-up, face-first).
DB[/quote]
So, in soccer your take would be like faulting tackling a shooter with his leg planted? It’s still legal to tackle a guy in soccer when shooting, even though it raises the probability of the guy blowing out his knee.
The way I understand the football rule, it protects both players.
Lastly, I’m not calling the guy an idiot or saying that it’s his fault. What I am saying is that he chose to play hockey, he chose to take the shot, he put himself in a vulnerable position, he didn’t appear to be that aware of his surroundings, and he got hit.
Something like the young girl in skimpy clothes walking down an alley at night. She doesn’t deserve to get raped, but what the hell did she expect?[/quote]
No, that’s not what I’m saying. I was responding to your assertion that the guy put himself at risk because of the way he shot and by leaving himself exposed. Cooke easily could have avoided hitting him in the head, but he’s a headhunter and that’s what he does. And while he’s likely not trying to end a career I doubt he felt badly about it either.
Btw, in soccer, what does FIFA do to a guy who tackles late into a plant leg? I’m pretty sure he gets fined and suspended. Hell, they suspend for a game for yellow cards in consecutive games.
And yes, in football the rule does protect both players, but it wasn’t put in place to protect the tackler, it is just a byproduct of the rule.
DB
FIFA is a bunch of pussies, and late is a matter of opinion in this case. If it was truly on the follow through of the shot (what put savard in the position) it couldn’t have been that late. I happen to be a big fan of savard by the way from when he played for my thrashers.
Oh, and the guy that compared this to the bertuzzi hit is an idiot. Bertuzzi was no where near the edge with what he did.
Let me try to explain better how I feel about it. I HATE penalties that involve intent. Intent is impossible to know. You cannot see it, you cannot touch it, it is not objective. You cannot expect a referee on the ice to instantly and fairly judge the motive behind an action. Period. If you are going to remove the ridiculous subjectivity of “intent” from the call, all the hits have to be treated equally and in that case I just don’t think its fair for the guys where the hit is truly inadvertent. I feel like its part of the game. Start taking away hitting and you get women’s hockey. You cannot make the game completely safe and if you did, I wouldn’t watch it anymore.
I mean, look at a sport like boxing, guys get killed and suffer brain damage all the time. Should they ban hits to the head? If you step into a boxing ring, the only way to not get hit is to avoid the punches yourself.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
FIFA is a bunch of pussies, and late is a matter of opinion in this case. If it was truly on the follow through of the shot (what put savard in the position) it couldn’t have been that late. I happen to be a big fan of savard by the way from when he played for my thrashers.
Oh, and the guy that compared this to the bertuzzi hit is an idiot. Bertuzzi was no where near the edge with what he did.
[/quote]
Yeah because playing hockey for 18 years and three years of junior I obviously know nothing about hockey.
My point was is that the line is crossed because hockey you play on the edge. Weather that line is crossed by an inch or a mile. Bert was trying to get him to fight, but a fuck up that big is another story.
I agree that you can’t police intent, but if you keep having hits like this and lose talented players, you no longer have a league, fan base, or revenue to keep paying the fucking goons who damage guys.
I blame Scott Stevens. Fuck you Scott Stevens, you ruin Kariya and Lindros — and now the league. Goddamn.