Beantown's verdict on the NHL's latest CHARAde (get it?)
by Beantown Canuck on Mar 10, 2011 2:36 PM PST
Email
PrintAlright alright alright.
I know you're all waiting for my perspective on the whole Chara thing. And it's this: what Chara did was sketchy, but, outcome aside, it was well within the norms of regularly accepted you-get-a-penalty-for-that NHL sketchiness. I see no strong evidence of any heightened malice, and although there are plausible allegations out there, I've seen no explanation that has evidence suggesting it is likely to be more correct than "he just happened to hit him a little bit late, and it happened to be a perfect storm of a hit which resulted in an atrocious injury". So, based on the rules and the precedent, I don't think he should have gotten a lengthy suspension, but I agree with the logic that he should have gotten a game or two or three just because people would (and clearly have) gone batshit if they don't.
But honestly, the problem is simply that the rules vis-a-vis violence and player safety in the game have not kept pace with the times. Players are bigger and stronger and faster, as are their pads, all of which clearly contribute to the severity of potential injuries when things go awry. But I think the bigger issue, and one that is equally valid, is that the public appetite for violence in sport has changed, and concern about safety in sport has increased. And an increased expectation of professionalism amongst high-paid athletes influences how we think about the way they play the game. It seems these are far more salient issues today than they have ever been in the past. I'm not sure exactly why this is the case, but probably part of the reason is youtube and bloggers.
So what do we do? Either the NHL changes how the game is policed, and therefore how the game is played, in response to changing public attitudes, or it doesn't. That's basically the long and short of it as far as I'm concerned. There's no other way I can think of that will change player behaviour- and how the NHL polices the game clearly will influence decisions made on the ice. Just compare today's game to the game of 8 years ago (obstruction anyone?).
It's taken me a while to admit this, but I think it's time, I've had enough. Let's change the rules.
My proposals:
1. Fighting. Gone. It's not necessary. The only argument I've heard is that it allows players to police the game themselves. Well they've done a shitty job of it, so done. No more. I enjoy it personally, but it's not necessary, and players do get hurt, both in the short term (Hall) and long-term (Probert). And it really does send a bad message to kids. It really does.
2. No blindside hits, or hitting from behind, ever. Automatic game misconduct. Automatic multi-game suspension. The main argument against such a rule (or so I understand) is that this will encourage players to turn their back to the opposition when playing the puck, especially along the boards, because they know that either the other team will get penalized for hitting them, or they'll be free to maneuver. But you know what? I don't care. Players will adjust. At worse, we're encouraging pussies to be pussy, but no one gets hurt because of it. It also clearly gives an advantage to the person playing the puck, i.e. offense, over the person trying to knock him off the puck, i.e. defense. It'll be different to what we're used to, but it will become the new normal. And increased offensive output isn't a bad thing.
3. No anything-to-the-head. No elbows, no knees, no sticks, no pushes. You may not intentionally touch another player's head in any manner whatsoever, even something as simple as a facewash. This is to hit home the point that the NHL is serious - the head is a no-go zone. Never acceptable. Automatic game misconduct. Automatic multi-game suspension.
And the NHL needs to enforce these rules vigilantly and without apology. That's my two cents. It's time to get radical.
Now if you came here thinking my punny title was cute, and you now feel ripped off by the serious tone, sorry!
70 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Preach On!
1. If it’s two goons sent out to fight a pre-planned fight, I want to see the coaches suspended too. If it is two guys who go at it in the flow of the game, I can accept game misconducts with out further suspension.
2. Auto game misconduct, yes. Auto-multigame suspension? well, I think it should be reviewed, maybe with presumption of suspension.
3. yep.
but I think you need a number four:
4. violent stick fouls more strongly punished. The reply often seems to be “but if they can’t fight, we’ll just see more spearing / slashing / etc.” That CAN’T be left as a possible, or even considerable substitute.
Hey Beantown,
I can only say BRAVO to your suggestions. You also have brilliantly supported your points.
If enforced, these changes would make the game so much better and safer, for our kids sake.
I, hereby, cast my vote for you, as a temporary replacement for Commissioner Bettman.
Los Angeles, CA
Standing up for yourself
and your team mates is a bad message for kids?
"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, Chief Hunk, Chief Charmer and Chief Drama Queen.
by Section 312 on Mar 10, 2011 3:29 PM PST reply actions
i have nothing against standing up for yourself and your teammates
just like i’m sure the NFL has nothing against it
or the NBA (etc etc etc)
but none of them say “and the way to do it is to punch each other in the head”… since punching each other in the head has no inherent value in the sport other than the fact that it is the traditional way to stand up for teammates, and one that has been coddled by the rules
as i mentioned, the counter argument has always been, without fighting and enforcers, players will be dirtier and sneakier… which is why the primary focus on my answer is: The NHL has to do a better job of policing, and be willing lay down the motherfucking law. Don’t let people get away with shit and they’ll stop attempting shit.
by Beantown Canuck on Mar 10, 2011 3:49 PM PST up reply actions
Thats quite the task
Especially since the NHL has shown hesitation when it comes to enforcing rules. In the case of eliminating these aspects, the NHL would have to enforce with conviction or not bother enforcing at all.
Morrow on Twins: (shakes head) "You know what they're going to do and you still can't do anything about it"
C Henrik Sedin #33: Vancouver Canucks Captain, 2010 Art Ross Trophy Winner and 2010 Hart Memorial Trophy Winner.
Nucks Misconduct's official black guy and first line center (Twitter's 1st line center also).
by Chuckles Canuckles on Mar 10, 2011 3:53 PM PST up reply actions
well i agree
that’s what i meant when I said:
And the NHL needs to enforce these rules vigilantly and without apology. That’s my two cents. It’s time to get radical.
The NHL has to decide that they’re serious, and the way to do that is to make tough standards, and enforce the shit out of them.
by Beantown Canuck on Mar 10, 2011 3:59 PM PST up reply actions
But the NHL doesn't do that
so if you take away fighting it will be like thunderdome out there.
"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, Chief Hunk, Chief Charmer and Chief Drama Queen.
by Section 312 on Mar 10, 2011 4:07 PM PST up reply actions
well again
my plan is take it or leave it
if they decide they want to do something about violence/safety,
they have to go for broke, or else it won’t work
if NHL head office doesn’t think they can change their enforcement culture, then they won’t be able to change much about the game
by Beantown Canuck on Mar 10, 2011 4:09 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah I hear you
but they recently decided to do something about head shots. How’s that going? I don’t think the NHL is capable of effectively policing itself so I would be afraid of what would happen long term if they did away with fighting.
They should just go to a one fight rule. You fight you are tossed from the game. Fight more than 6 times in a season and you face a lengthy suspension. Allow them to fight if a situation requires it. If they are just fighting to fight then they will end up out of the NHL.
"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, Chief Hunk, Chief Charmer and Chief Drama Queen.
by Section 312 on Mar 10, 2011 4:16 PM PST up reply actions
well
that’s certainly better than the status quo and I would support it
by Beantown Canuck on Mar 10, 2011 4:22 PM PST up reply actions
Wow, I’ve never thought of that capping the amount of fights before a suspension is given is a really good idea, although I’m not sure about the immediate ejection from the game. This could just encourage the coaches to carry a goon on the roster as they couldn’t risk losing a valuable player from the game
"Ironic isn't it, that the very strings I played then are made from the very gut of the animal this song is about" - David McGahan
Sweet..Chin….Music!
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
"If you find yourself alone, riding in the green fields with the sun on your face, do not be troubled. For you are in Elysium, and you're already dead!"
by Sean Zandberg on Mar 10, 2011 7:22 PM PST up reply actions
Darryl Boyce's taken it one step further
Delivering one to John Cena
In Lou We Trust/Twitter
I wish there was something I could do. But What?
by Kevin Sellathamby on Mar 11, 2011 6:15 AM PST up reply actions
Who is that?
Satan?
Morrow on Twins: (shakes head) "You know what they're going to do and you still can't do anything about it"
C Henrik Sedin #33: Vancouver Canucks Captain, 2010 Art Ross Trophy Winner and 2010 Hart Memorial Trophy Winner.
Nucks Misconduct's official black guy and first line center (Twitter's 1st line center also).
by Chuckles Canuckles on Mar 10, 2011 7:33 PM PST up reply actions
nope. Not sure tho
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
"If you find yourself alone, riding in the green fields with the sun on your face, do not be troubled. For you are in Elysium, and you're already dead!"
by Sean Zandberg on Mar 10, 2011 11:35 PM PST up reply actions
Change of Attitude
It seems that this has been a hot button issue today. I agree with you in principle but I haven’t had enough time to digest or consider your proposed rule changes to comment on them.
What I would say is that I think that as much as specific rule changes there needs to be a change of attitude on the part of the players. They need to accept responsibility to ensure that hits of a reckless or dangerous nature,with the intent to injure or taking advantage of players in compromised or exposed positions do not occur. For that there is a role to be played by the NHLPA who have been silent on many recent questionable hits and wiffed completely on the Chara/Pacioretty incident.
PS
I, too, vote for Mr. Beantown to replace Gary Bettman as Commissioner. Having said that, I think that Bettman is so bad for the game in so many ways that I would vote for Justin Beiber to replace him if it would get rid of him. I am sure that you would be better.
Bettman's done some bad things for hockey
but he’s also increased the entertainment level overall, massively increased the revenues and increased the fan base. All things that without, this league would probably have folded, or at least shrunk pretty hard. He’s like the asshole CEO a corporation brings in to get them past a certain plateau because he’s just thick skinned and bullheaded enough to make unpopular choices that have long term benefit. Where the NHL is failing is that now that he’s done some positive things, he’s definitely outstayed his welcome. At least that appears to be the popular consensus. :)
"What the fuck's a 'Beeber'???"
Dropping F-bombs since the early 70's.
'Nucks Misconduct Sr. VP of Inappropriateness and Questionable Conduct, second director of immaturity.
Playing Devil's advocate
From when I was in high school, I was taught some valuable lessons. One was rules do not govern people, people goven people. Another is law without enforcement is meaningless.
So here are my thoughts on your 4 proposals.
1. No fighting. My question is how do you propose to enforce this rule? How can the ref or linesmen jump in preemptively when two players (or more) decide to fight? Not to mention fighting is very much part of the hockey culture. I mean there is what is known as the Gordie Howe Hat Trick. Culture is not easily changed. It’s like driving over the speed limit. We all know everyday out there not everyone drives under the speed limit and no law is going to change it. You can try to prevent it, but it’s going to be difficult to stamp it out.
2. No blindside hits. As we know the speed of the game is getting faster and alot happens during a play. A player suddenly turns looking somewhere else and a hit came from the blindside. The hitter is already committed and you blindsided the guy by accident. Now should we suspend the hitter? It’ll be so difficult to enforce this and get it right that what you propose basically means the end of hitting in professional hockey. I don’t know how I feel about that, maybe it’ll be for the best, but again hitting is part of hockey culture, and it’ll be hard to enforce it.
3. No anything to the head. Well, sometimes you don’t mean it and you’re moving your stick up and you hit a guy in the head. Right now it’s a 2 minute penalty, but you propose an auto game suspension. It doesn’t take into account of the context of the hit and it’s too black and white for comfort. We might end up seeing people skating with their heads down carrying the puck forward because nobody can touch him without risking a suspension.
I don’t agree with how Chara case is handled by the league, but I don’t agree with knee-jerk reactions either. Rules are black and white but the incidents are in shades of grey. I think your intention is good in wanting to protect the players, but I don’t think draconian rules are the answer.
by Canuck in Japan on Mar 10, 2011 3:49 PM PST reply actions
1. You enforce it by lengthy suspensions and fines against both the team and the player. You will be astonished at how quickly things will change.
2. As with current “automatic suspensions”, the NHL can rescind this after the fact if they think the referee made a mistake. But the default rule should be the suspensions, and you need to argue out of it, not a default rule of arbitrariness. I don’t think it’ll mean the end of hitting, but you’re right, that is a concern. If that’s what happens, and the fans/league decides the game is no longer as enjoyable, then perhaps we take a step back and decide my rules aren’t worth it. I agree it’s radical, no doubt about it.
3. I mentioned touching someone’s head with intent. There’ll have to be some judgment, because if you’re leaning into someone at the same time as they try to squirm to the side, you may hit their head instead of their shoulder. So there’ll have to be some judgment. But I want the default rule to be clear – do not touch the head, don’t even try. Again, if players behave in an extreme way to try and take advantage of the rule, and the fans/league decides the game is no longer as good and it is therefore not worth, then again I would say the rule should be revisited.
by Beantown Canuck on Mar 10, 2011 3:58 PM PST up reply actions
I think the banniing of fighting really depends on the timing of implementing the rule. For example how in Vancouver they banned smoking in restaurants. It was a good timing because smoking was declining and the general attitude towards smoking is a negative one. However let say it was the 1950s when smoking was popular and to suddenly ban it from restaurants, I think it would be more difficult to do than now.
As I said, culture is hard to change.
by Canuck in Japan on Mar 10, 2011 4:19 PM PST up reply actions
it's a lot easier to change in hockey
where all your actions are constantly being watched
and there is 100% control over incentives by the league (i.e. they can fine and suspend players)
than in society at large, so i don’t think your analogy says much
again, look how quickly they got rid of the clutching and grabbing post-lockout by simply heavily enforcing the obstruction rules… remember how many penalties they called during the first year and a half? and people complained about too many penalties… but then players adjusted their play to avoid penalties, and the game has improved dramatically
by Beantown Canuck on Mar 10, 2011 4:25 PM PST up reply actions
I think fighting will eventually go away organically without having to ban it
as goons become less and less useful and Sather finally retires to his love nest with his one true love, James Dolan.
Morrow on Twins: (shakes head) "You know what they're going to do and you still can't do anything about it"
C Henrik Sedin #33: Vancouver Canucks Captain, 2010 Art Ross Trophy Winner and 2010 Hart Memorial Trophy Winner.
Nucks Misconduct's official black guy and first line center (Twitter's 1st line center also).
by Chuckles Canuckles on Mar 10, 2011 3:50 PM PST reply actions
And it really does send a bad message to kids. It really does.
I hate to be all pro-violence here, but violence is a necessary part of life. Defending ones self and others is an honorable thing to do, and the day every member of humanity eschews violence is the day the sun goes nova and the Earth is incinerated.
While I don’t think senseless goonery is good for the game, I don’t think arguing that it sends a bad message to kids is valid. Kids need to learn it’s a tough world and the majority of people through life will shit on you if they get half a chance. Perhaps if kids learned that these days instead of being pampered, insipid weaklings (by and large) the Western world would be in a better place.
Gah. I think I just mixed up hockey and socio-political issues. My mistake.
"We've made too many compromises already, too many retreats. They invade our space, and we fall back. They assimilate entire worlds, and we fall back. Not again. The line must be drawn here! This far, no further! And I will make them pay for what they've done!" - Captain Jean-Luc Picard
by Tyr on Mar 10, 2011 4:25 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
i completely disagree
with everything you said, but i know many will agree
by Beantown Canuck on Mar 10, 2011 4:30 PM PST up reply actions
Damn you
bleeding heart liberal!!!!
"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, Chief Hunk, Chief Charmer and Chief Drama Queen.
by Section 312 on Mar 10, 2011 4:31 PM PST up reply actions
I actually anticipate that most people would disagree with me!
"We've made too many compromises already, too many retreats. They invade our space, and we fall back. They assimilate entire worlds, and we fall back. Not again. The line must be drawn here! This far, no further! And I will make them pay for what they've done!" - Captain Jean-Luc Picard
but I agree with the logic that he should have gotten a game or two or three just because people would (and clearly have) gone batshit if they don’t.
I do not agree with that one bit! That’s just silly. Fuck the people! Rules are rules and Chara was within them.
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
"If you find yourself alone, riding in the green fields with the sun on your face, do not be troubled. For you are in Elysium, and you're already dead!"
I don't think you should run for public office
I don’t think the “Fuck the people” line would get you very far ;)
"We've made too many compromises already, too many retreats. They invade our space, and we fall back. They assimilate entire worlds, and we fall back. Not again. The line must be drawn here! This far, no further! And I will make them pay for what they've done!" - Captain Jean-Luc Picard
Unless he meant
In bed
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
NM's Chief Lady Pleaser. Just ask eightyseven.
I would / could never run for public office. Actually, “fucking people” is status quo for politics isn’t it?
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
"If you find yourself alone, riding in the green fields with the sun on your face, do not be troubled. For you are in Elysium, and you're already dead!"
by Sean Zandberg on Mar 10, 2011 5:30 PM PST up reply actions
wanna hear a crude joke?
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
"If you find yourself alone, riding in the green fields with the sun on your face, do not be troubled. For you are in Elysium, and you're already dead!"
by Sean Zandberg on Mar 10, 2011 5:34 PM PST up reply actions
Might as well
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
NM's Chief Lady Pleaser. Just ask eightyseven.
Also
When does anyone around here ask before laying on a dirty one?
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
NM's Chief Lady Pleaser. Just ask eightyseven.
OK
A doctor, a lawyer, and a priest, along with three boy scouts are in a plane that is going to crash. Well, there are only three parachutes total.
The doctor says, “Let the kids have ‘em. We’ve had a long and good life, they have yet to live.”
The lawyer replies, “Fuck the kids.”
And so the Priest says, “Do we have time?”
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
"If you find yourself alone, riding in the green fields with the sun on your face, do not be troubled. For you are in Elysium, and you're already dead!"
by Sean Zandberg on Mar 10, 2011 6:09 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
i heard that one about a decade ago
but it was about michael jackson, not a priest
and now he’s dead and countless priests all around the world have been revealed to be child rapists. sigh, not as funny any more… or more funny?
by Beantown Canuck on Mar 10, 2011 6:24 PM PST up reply actions
killjoy!
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
"If you find yourself alone, riding in the green fields with the sun on your face, do not be troubled. For you are in Elysium, and you're already dead!"
by Sean Zandberg on Mar 10, 2011 6:27 PM PST up reply actions
Hank’s comments ate 100% on the ball if you ask me. Thornton comes across as a bit of a bitter bitch, but Hank is on the money.
by Beantown Canuck on Mar 10, 2011 7:06 PM PST reply actions
interesting
Nucks Misconduct Contributor
"If you find yourself alone, riding in the green fields with the sun on your face, do not be troubled. For you are in Elysium, and you're already dead!"
by Sean Zandberg on Mar 10, 2011 7:27 PM PST up reply actions
I hope
He digested that ball if he at all of it
"Playin hurt, baby that don't faze me. I don't got time for pain. The only pain I've got time for is the pain I put on fools who don't know what time it is!"
NM's Chief Lady Pleaser. Just ask eightyseven.
Hank and Jumbo
real talk from them.
Morrow on Twins: (shakes head) "You know what they're going to do and you still can't do anything about it"
C Henrik Sedin #33: Vancouver Canucks Captain, 2010 Art Ross Trophy Winner and 2010 Hart Memorial Trophy Winner.
Nucks Misconduct's official black guy and first line center (Twitter's 1st line center also).
by Chuckles Canuckles on Mar 11, 2011 12:24 AM PST up reply actions
Beantown, I agree with your sentiments largely.
What about incidental contacts to the head? How does a guy like Chara check a guy like St. Louis? What you stated is the ideal, but what about guys that duck at the very last minute, and you end up giving them a head-shot?
The biggest problem with the NHL is that it needs to uphold your rules, and hold by them steadfastly. Over-penalize, rather than under, and do it for every single violation that shows up. Doesn’t matter if it’s Sid or Hordichuk. If they hit a guy from behind / deliver a deliberate headshot, they get the same penalty.
I want Goodell to take care of handing out the penalties, I love the job he’s done for the NFL. So it pissed off some guys… Fuck them. No one guy is bigger than a league.
Frequent visitor to Nucks Misconduct.
Got the call to the big leagues!
the NHL can case-by-case
look at the mitigating factors if there is an appeal, and if there’s strong evidence that it was just dumb luck and incidental rather than a controlled action, it can rescind the automatic suspension
but i want the suspension to be the default, and only if there is evidence clearing the player should it be rescinded, not what it is right now, which is there is no suspension until the nhl decides in its discretion that there was clear evidence that there should be one… i want to change the burden of proof from proving there was an illegal move to proving that there wasn’t.
And I exactly agree – over-penalizing, which will be very frustrating in the beginning (as it was when we first had all the obstruction penalties), is the way to change behaviour.
by Beantown Canuck on Mar 11, 2011 8:53 AM PST up reply actions
it's pretty pure and simple
the NHL’s current disciplinary process is broken. The whole system needs to be changed; it’s not the rules that are the problem, it’s the process for determining punishment. Fix that first, THEN worry about rules.
"What the fuck's a 'Beeber'???"
Dropping F-bombs since the early 70's.
'Nucks Misconduct Sr. VP of Inappropriateness and Questionable Conduct, second director of immaturity.
There could come the time,
probably sooner than later, when the NHL will be forced to change, against its wishes. And cilivil lawsuits will do that.
The Bertuzzi case is coming up, and it may set a precedent. The Chara investigation is also just the tip of the iceberg.
If the injured players start suing the NHL – and our increasingly sophisticated legal system, and litigious society certainly allows for that, in addition to the players being wealthy enough to afford a good attorney – the League could be mired in a number of lawsuits in a short time. Then the NHL will have a choice: either go bankrupt/crippled with huge settlements, or change the rules. I expect that hurting them where it hurts the most (their pockets) will make them change in a heartbeat.
Los Angeles, CA
So, Beantown,
if I were you, I would start acquiring an expertise in the laws concerning professional sports and injuries. There may be some low-hanging fruits there, ready for picking.
Los Angeles, CA
hehehehe
low hanging fruits
Morrow on Twins: (shakes head) "You know what they're going to do and you still can't do anything about it"
C Henrik Sedin #33: Vancouver Canucks Captain, 2010 Art Ross Trophy Winner and 2010 Hart Memorial Trophy Winner.
Nucks Misconduct's official black guy and first line center (Twitter's 1st line center also).
by Chuckles Canuckles on Mar 11, 2011 2:05 PM PST up reply actions
I never thought that I will feel this way,
but now I hope that Moore will win the case, and Bertuzzi, Crow, and Orca Bay will lose.
THAT will get the NHL’s attention, to better enforce the rules, because if Moore wins, then every player who lost their livelyhood to a dirty play, is going to sue.
Los Angeles, CA
THAT will get the NHL’s attention, to better enforce the rules, because if Moore wins, then every player who lost their livelyhood to a dirty play, is going to sue.
Call me confused, but how on earth could that possibly make u want to see moore win the case???? You WANT the NHL to be bankrupted? Step back a step or two and look at the long term ramifications of your statement… also think a bit deeper… every player who lost ANY livelihood to a cheap play could sue. This possible result doesn’t help the NHL in any way shape or form… this result DESTROYS the NHL, and quickly too. No, if you’re a fan of the NHL you most definitely do NOT want Moore to win this case…optimally you want it settled out of court, which breeds the same result of the NHL being forced to think about the butterfly effect of certain incidents without the NHL losing sponsors, owners, revenue and image.
"What the fuck's a 'Beeber'???"
Dropping F-bombs since the early 70's.
'Nucks Misconduct Sr. VP of Inappropriateness and Questionable Conduct, second director of immaturity.
optimally you want it settled out of court, which breeds the same result of the NHL being forced to think about the butterfly effect of certain incidents without the NHL losing sponsors, owners, revenue and image.
You got it exactly right. Being hurt in the pocket, the NHL and the owners will quicly overhaul their rulels and the enforcement of these rules. And that’s what I want to see.
The NHL and their deep pockets are more than capable of defending themselves against any lawsuit, and they will quickly offer to settle. But there will be no more of this whitewashing and sweeping under the rug thing. Obviously, I don’t want them to be bankrupt, just roughed up and bruised a little.
Los Angeles, CA
you
are thinking way to short term on this. Trust me, if moore wins this is nothing but bad for hockey. Picture the escalation of ridiculousness you’re preaching…
"What the fuck's a 'Beeber'???"
Dropping F-bombs since the early 70's.
'Nucks Misconduct Sr. VP of Inappropriateness and Questionable Conduct, second director of immaturity.
Without
trying to get too deep into this discussion (we all have our opinion), I think that the excalation and ridiculousness will be the short-term effect (people will get tired of it, after a while), and the long-term effect will be that the owners and commissioner will change the rules on one of their upcoming meetings. This will change the game, in the long-term.
Los Angeles, CA
Just that you know where am I coming from
…my son is currently finishing off (he is 8 years-old now) his first hockey season, and he loves it. I want to see the game a little safer, by the time he is in adult hockey.
When these kids see violence in NHL, they quicly try to imitate it. A couple of weeks ago, at a tournament, my son was trying to tip in a loose puck, while the opposing goalie was scrambling to cover it. The play was whistled dead as soon as the goalie covered, but one of the opposing defenseman skated over and cross-checked my son in the chest. This was after the whistle. My son fell behind from the crosscheck, but he was ok. The kid who did it, was immediately ejected from the game. Remember, that these are little kids, 7 and 8 years old.
The coach of the offending kid later said that “the kid did it because he sees this in the NHL all the time, when a defenseman stands up for his goalie”. This was the excuse for the violent behaviour.
Kids are like sponges, they emulate everything that the adults do. And for some reason, they pick up the bad things much faster.
Los Angeles, CA
at no point have i said
i’m against a mindset change that limits injury. My difference of opinion with you on this has nothing to do with wanting different results, I want the same results. What I don’t want is a precedent setting court case that results in the NHL becoming the MacDonald’s coffee of sports. Because don’t fool yourself, if Moore wins his case and that does set a precedent for other players to make civil suits against the league, there will not be a league by the time your son gets old enough to join it. This is my problem with your original statement.
The mindset change you want starts with the youth hockey and gets moved up as the ages move up. We’ve already seen it; goon hockey is pretty much dead, even tho fighting still occurs. Heck when I was a kid they didn’t even wear helmets; I watched that change as players older than me had come up thru the system wearing helmets. When I was first NHL age, helmets were mandatory and wearing visors was considered pansy…now it’s pretty much common…next will be the cage. The mindsets ARE being changed. My buddy’s kid is 16, and being scouted right now (although apparently he’s decided to go the Chris Tanev college route instead of Major Jr. route), and he tells me some of the differences in what they teach the kids now than when he and I played in the 80’s, and it’s astounding how different a game it is. I don’t mean the speed and technical precision, I mean the code and the way they teach the kids against doing certain things, reacting certain ways.
"What the fuck's a 'Beeber'???"
Dropping F-bombs since the early 70's.
'Nucks Misconduct Sr. VP of Inappropriateness and Questionable Conduct, second director of immaturity.
er...
just so there’s no confusion, when he and I played in the 80’s we were never in the ‘being scouted’ position…in reading what I wrote, I don’t mean to imply that I ever played serious or well enough that even jr. b was in my sites…
"What the fuck's a 'Beeber'???"
Dropping F-bombs since the early 70's.
'Nucks Misconduct Sr. VP of Inappropriateness and Questionable Conduct, second director of immaturity.
Everyone should read Ken Dryden’s piece in the Globe and Mail.
His closing sentiments are exactly what I felt when writing my post:
Max Pacioretty was only the latest; he will not be the last. Arguments and explanations don’t matter any more. The NHL has to risk the big steps that are needed: If some of them prove wrong, they’ll still be far less wrong than what we have now.
by Beantown Canuck on Mar 12, 2011 10:28 AM PST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Nucks Misconduct
Related FanShots on Nucks Misconduct
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Nucks Misconduct Store
Your clothing sucks. Go fix it.
