| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Guest2978 |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 00:44:16
Is it just me or is anyone else out there at ALL tired of hearing about all the injuries (head or otherwise) in the NHL and then all the seemingly knee jerk reactions (or over reactions) when a player gets hurt.
Now I don't want to sound insensitive but... COME OFF IT ALREADY!!! It's not like the NHL is rounding up pregnant ladies, senior citizens, etc, etc to play the game. These are athletes that have been playing the game most of there lives and have CHOSEN to play a game that is fast, has contact, and a level of violence!!! They have CHOSEN this as a career while also getting MORE than nicely rewarded FINANCIALLY for doing so... You don't become a police officer and then say "Oh yeah but I don't like using a firearm OR the possibility of getting hurt on the job so..." or a fireman saying, "I'm not really into putting my life in jeopardy and am really scared of fires so"....
I guess my point is that if you don't like the speed, the aggression, the RISK of getting injured, or the toll the the sport MAY take of you because of its physical nature then DON'T DO IT!!
The game has been great for a very long time and a BIG HIT that leaves someone in some discomfort shouldn't automatically be given a penalty and/or automatically sent to Shanny for a review. Back in the day if you got popped going thru the nuetral zone with your head down and you got trained tracked then you LEARNED TO NOT GO THROUGH THE NUETRAL ZONE WITH YOUR HEAD DOWN.
Look men, it's HOCKEY... If you don't like being whacked with sticks, being smashed into the boards, taking a 100MPH slapshot off your ankles then QUIT!! Then you can go into a profession like say... THE POLICE where the risks are higher but where the ADULATION isn't as immediate (if at all... which is unfortunately) and they paychecks are much much lower.,,, Oh yeah, and they work 24/7 365 days a year. Maybe the powers at be, or the players, could remember that during the 3-4 months they have off every summer.
MANY in hockey have it pretty good so how about you suck it up a bit and just come to terms with playing a GAME (that many of you get paid MILLIONS of dollars to do) has some risk associated with it. Then maybe when someone in the league does deliver a CLEAN but very heavy body check (one that might even hurt a player) he won't automatically receive a penalty or have to get a call from Shanny,
Sorry this post is so long... Just had to vent a bit (and if you can believe at had ALOT more to say). Just some thoughts... Take care everyone.
Oh one last thing... PLEASE TAKE CARE when you leave the arena AT ALL TIMES as I would hate to see anyone slip etc. I fear then, the league NHL and NHLPA would have to immediatly form a committee that would research, discuss, and then implement a new, non stick, heated and lighted (with strategically placed cotton balls that the research shows SHOULD be there in case of a fall), step system that each arena will have to have in place by next season. Thus meaning ticket prices would possibly increase to cover the costs of the NHL having spent 2.6 million on researching how people walk up and down stairs... Now making it more difficult to take my little, middle class, family to ONE NHL game every few years.
God Bless, dress warm, and BE CAREFUL OUT THERE... ;) |
| 40 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Guest4967 |
Posted - 01/20/2014 : 11:23:28
Porkchop73 has it right the problem with the game is that the league is not doing a good job of policeing the game when a known agitator will get a suspension for a borderline hit but a guy like chara who was a norris trophey candidate got nothing for a deliberate dirty play that could have ended a career the third man rule is the worst thing to happen to the game because if a middle of the road player can take out crosby with a dirty play and get 5 games when crosby's gone for the rest of the season where is the deterrence but if ya get your face punched in for doing something dirty you might think twice
Oh and for fat elvis if your job included the ocasional punch in the face and you accepted that then thats on you it'called personal responsability and pronger was one of the dirtiest players in the league |
| Guest4967 |
Posted - 01/20/2014 : 10:55:58
Porkchop73 has it right the problem with the game is that the league is not doing a good job of policeing the game when a known agitator will get a suspension for a borderline hit but a guy like chara who was a norris trophey candidate got nothing for a deliberate dirty play that could have ended a career the third man rule is the worst thing to happen to the game because if a middle of the road player can take out crosby with a dirty play and get 5 games when crosby's gone for the rest of the season where is the deterrence but if ya get your face punched in for doing something dirty you might think twice
Oh and for fat elvis if your job included the ocasional punch in the face and you accepted that then thats on you it'called personal responsability and pronger was one of the dirtiest players in the league |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 01/12/2012 : 16:03:46
I for one believe the NHL took step to change the game as a result of hits like Chara's to Pacioretty. I am all good for the reporting of injuries and the suspensions (when leveled) by Shanahan to players when needed. This is a Mans game, but my memories of childhood hockey were a bunch of goons taking whacks at the talented kids playing on other teams. This is not a bush league and is played in front of the largest hockey audience in North America. Respect for players should be paramount to growth of the sport. A hard hit without the intent to injure in a legal fashion is ok, one with intent to injure or without undue care and attention to the welfare of another player is not ok.
Funny with all that being said I enjoy a great open ice hit like the majority of hockey fans and I like fighting in hockey. So I do see your side of view, just dont like dirty hockey plays or players. |
| Guest4178 |
Posted - 01/12/2012 : 12:06:02
Very fair comments Elvis. I still maintain that players are bigger stakeholders than fans of the game. They definitely have more at stake than people who watch the game for entertainment. But you make some very valid points.
To clarify things with Beans, there has always been players (and coaches and GM's) complaining when one of their own teammates or players has been affected by an illegal or dirty hit, or if a suspension is light in their opinion. I acknowledge that this takes place.
I heard the comments from Max Pacioretty's teammates (his coach, and his province) after the Chara hit. But I didn't hear anything from the other players in the league or the NHLPA after the hit.
And I definitely did not hear Pacioretty say that the game is too rough, I'm quitting!
There is an inherent risk when you put on your skates and play the game at a professional level. Not for a moment do I think that players should accept illegal or dirty hits, but every player knows the dangers involved when they step out onto the ice.
It just seems that we fans complain a lot more than the players, or we act like we know what's better for the players than they know themselves.
Or moreso, that an opinion on the exact balance of physicality and punishment in the game is an indisputable fact, and that "we" have it right and everyone else has it wrong.
To me, that's a bit pompous. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 01/12/2012 : 09:15:04
I am wondering very simply if the player, coaches, GMs, owners, etc. are actually the biggest stakeholders in the game?
If there were no fan and subsequent media media driving the economics of the NHL, would it still exist? Or would it simply be another rec hockey league with really, really good players?
If anyone, in any industry, relies on the consumer(fan), to generate the revenue for the business to exist do they, the fans, really not have the biggest voice in the direction of that business, especially when it's an entertainment business?
I think what has gotten lost in the shuffling here, is that the original post suggested the media back off the daily reports of injuries and the video to augment their stories, and that we should be tired of hearing about these injuries, and that the players, by accepting the paychecks, should be more ardent about their ability to accept these injuries as part of the game.
All some of us are countering with is that, yes indeed, injuries on normal hockey plays can occur and that is irrefutable and agreed upon. For my part, I am simply wondering where the problem is with doing all things possible to remove the plays that aren't hockey plays, that at times, are taking out the marquee names, that are part of the business and it's ability to provide the fans with the best product for their money spent, which in most cases, is far, far less than the stipends given to all employees of the NHL.
If the trend of acceptance of these plays had continued unchecked, the game at this level, would be unrecognizable, so to claim everyone involved in the NHL is copacetic to things as such, just doesn't sound valid.
There are many things I dislike about my job, the structure of management, the day to day operations, the doling of expenses, etc. etc,, but not dissimilar to any employee, it is not in my best interest to make statements supporting that, and I wouldn't expect any player, coach, GM to be any different, why bite the hand that feeds?
It certainly doesn't mean I wouldn't support any efforts made to improve the workplace, only that to stand up and yell 'hell yeah, about time', would make glaringly apparent the current shortcomings, which again, would not be prudent for not only my employment, but the reputation of the business.
Call me naive, but I would like to think that, that is what is happening here, and to allow the media to support it, is not a bad thing. To educate the fans, and allow their voices/concerns to be heard, can only be good for business. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 01/12/2012 : 08:26:46
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4306
[quote]Originally posted by Beans15
Firstly, a police officer does take a job that has risks and knowingly accepts risk. The job of a police officer is not anywhere near comparable a hockey player because criminals have no rules. There is no way to define the risk that a police officer accepts. Hockey does have rules. A hockey players risks are measureable. A hockey player is accepting the risks within the confines of the rules, not those risks that are associated with actions outside of the rules. (Quoted by Beans.)
And a hockey player takes a job that has risks and knowingly takes risks too! Same as a police officer, and no disrespect to police officers who do it for public safety rather than sports entertainment.
And really - criminals have no rules? Sorry to get off the topic at hand, but everyone has
rules, especially and including criminals! They're called laws, and criminals know the law (in some ways better than the layman), and along with hockey players, they know what's allowed or not allowed. (And the punishment or penalties doled out.)
And another thing for sure - contrary to what was asserted (that hockey players do not assume the risks associated outside the rules), every hockey player knows that some
players bend or break the rules, and they assume this risk (assume not accept - key difference) when they play the game at a professional level!
Frankly, I don't even know where to start on this one. I really don't want to get into a sociological discussion about laws, values, norms and the like. For that reason, I will do this:
criminals break laws = punishment
hockey players break rules = punishment
The police are not comparable to hockey players.
The amount of money a hockey player gets paid has no impact on the punishment of breaking rules.
That's all I was trying to say. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 01/12/2012 : 08:22:08
I want to go to Guest 4178 for a second and frankly ask how deep into the sand your head is buried. To say that players, coaches, GM's, owners, and the NHLPA are not saying anything about the state of the game is completely absurd.
Let's talk about just a few examples:
Brian Burke(GM) just a week ago was talking about the physicality of the NHL when he sent Orr down to the minors.
Lindy Ruff (Coach)has went on various rampages in this season on running the goalie and no suspensions happening
Max P and nearly every Montreal Canadien had comments about lack of discipline after the Chara hit.
The GM's as a group changed rules just this season to curb head shots.
The challenge of injuries in hockey from non-hockey plays is quite possible the most heavily discussed topic by literally ever level of hockey. It has been for at least the past 2 seasons. If you can't see that, you must have your head in the sand. If you find that comment arrogant or to abrasive, sorry. But this opinion is simply absurd.
|
| Guest4306 |
Posted - 01/11/2012 : 22:29:24
[quote]Originally posted by Beans15
Firstly, a police officer does take a job that has risks and knowingly accepts risk. The job of a police officer is not anywhere near comparable a hockey player because criminals have no rules. There is no way to define the risk that a police officer accepts. Hockey does have rules. A hockey players risks are measureable. A hockey player is accepting the risks within the confines of the rules, not those risks that are associated with actions outside of the rules. (Quoted by Beans.)
And a hockey player takes a job that has risks and knowingly takes risks too! Same as a police officer, and no disrespect to police officers who do it for public safety rather than sports entertainment.
And really - criminals have no rules? Sorry to get off the topic at hand, but everyone has
rules, especially and including criminals! They're called laws, and criminals know the law (in some ways better than the layman), and along with hockey players, they know what's allowed or not allowed. (And the punishment or penalties doled out.)
And another thing for sure - contrary to what was asserted (that hockey players do not assume the risks associated outside the rules), every hockey player knows that some
players bend or break the rules, and they assume this risk (assume not accept - key difference) when they play the game at a professional level! |
| Guest4178 |
Posted - 01/11/2012 : 16:49:16
I'm really enjoying the discussion. Thanks again Guest2978 for starting this thread!
Interesting that we (hockey fans) are having this debate. While there may be a few exceptions, there is no debate or outrage being delivered by the people in the game. (With the exception of the media, but they're not in the game – they cover the game.)
There are virtually no players complaining about the dangers in the game, and that changes need to be made to make the game less physical or that suspensions need to be more strongly delivered. (Sure, there have been a few complaints, but the majority of players seem fine with the game, especially with elevated level of enforcement on illegal hits, hits to the head, etc.)
How about the NHLPA? What do they have to say about violence in the game? I've never heard the NHLPA offer an opinion that suspensions need to be longer for dirty hits, etc. in the game. Conversely, the NHLPA is more apt to stick up for a player who they felt was unduly suspended.
The coaches and GM's don't appear to be complaining about the level of physicality in the game, and there are probably more complaints about suspensions being too harsh than the other way around.
The owners seem to like the game the way it is. And maybe it's because the fans who pay to watch the game like the game, even with a bit of nastiness in the game sometimes.
I've never met a fan who gave up their tickets because the game was too violent, and I don't think it's happening now. An argument could be made that fans stay away from the game because of the violence, but can this assertion be proven?
To use the policeman analogy (which does not imply that the occupations are the same), when a policeman is shot, stakeholders speak out. (Police members, family members of police officers, people in the community, etc.) They are outraged, as they should be.
But when a hockey player dies (or is injured), there is little outrage expressed by their hockey-playing brethren. Including coaches, GM's, the NHLPA, etc.
I've heard from a number of retired hockey enforcers who have no regrets about what they did for a living, despite the recent tragedies which have taken place. (And their own risk of brain injury showing up later in life.) There are hundreds of former players who carry battle-wounds, and most have no regrets about playing the game. (And some of these battle-wounds were the result of dirty plays.)
Getting back to the people in the game, if they're not complaining, why are we complaining? Do we know what's better for them than they do? That seems kinda pompous.
Are the players too hooked on fame and fortune to know what's better for them? Do the coaches and GM's (the majority who are former players) not care about the health of the players?
And what about the spouses, parents, etc. of players? Where do they stand on illegal hits, suspensions, and fighting in the professional game? To quote a comment made by one of this forum's regular posters, I hear crickets! Where's the outrage?
But from our pulpits, we somehow know what's best for the people in the game, despite the fact it's more their game than our game. (Yes, even for the paying fans.) For the players, it's their health and livelihood. And for us, it's just entertainment after all!
I'm not denying that fans (or media) should have a voice, but should it be louder (or carry more weight) than the biggest stakeholders in the game? |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 01/11/2012 : 15:30:30
Yes, my first post was harsh. Arrogant? I don't agree, however I see that I owe the original posting guest an apology. I did not intend any offense however I understand that my comments were offensive. I am sorry for the harshness of my comments towards you.
My issues with the original post were:
a) hockey players are comparable to police officers.
b) Legal hits are being micro-managed and punished by the NHL
c) Hockey players get paid millions of dollars so they should just deal with it
That is what is stated (paraphrasing) in the original post. Maybe that was not the intention, but that is what is written. I emphatically disagree with all of those statements. I left an open invitation for anyone to produce an example of a single legal hit that was punished and all that was provided was personal attacks. I've always loved how when a person can not produce a valid argument, things get personal. I am still waiting for anyone to provide a legal play that was punished by a suspension. Like it or not, the silence is deafening. But keep the name calling and personal shots coming. The more of those being posted and the lack of anyone providing a legal play that was punished prove my argument.
I will end with this:
The issues with the NHL today around injuries and Shanahan and whatever else is one simple word: Honor. NHL players today do not have any. There was a code that all players followed. Along the way that code has disappeared completely. Since the NHL players stopped living by that code and policing the game themselves, someone else has to do it or chaos ensues. Enter Brendan Shanahan. One can complain about it as much as they want but one thing is certain. The NHL will never be a self-policed league again. Like it or not, it is something we all need to get comfortable with. |
| sahis34 |
Posted - 01/11/2012 : 15:17:25
I think you guys are being to hard on beans, for this anyway .
|
| OILINONTARIO |
Posted - 01/11/2012 : 15:03:18
As a fringe member of this community, I would like to weigh in.
Only one negative comment towards Beans. You say that a cop's job is different because criminals don't obey the laws, but hockey has its own laws which are broken at an alarming pace, when compared to those that occur in everyday life. Per capita and per man-game of course, surely you see what I'm getting at.
Anyway, as has been discussed at length previously, the players these days are much stronger, and much faster than they were in an era like the 70's. The equipment is also sturdier and harder. Most probably gives a feeling of fearlessness or invincibility in the skaters.
While the improved equipment may save some from injury, none has been produced that can sufficiently ease the impact of the brain bouncing about against the skull.
Guess what? Concussions are more prevalent than ever. Now there are new rules, and different evaluations for punishment. Not inappropriate at all. Just a little too late. If that's what reactionary is, then fine. I would take that over no reaction at all.
The Oil WILL make the playoffs in 2012. |
| Porkchop73 |
Posted - 01/11/2012 : 14:31:17
Well, isn't this a fine little pissin match we have going. I should have jumped in on this earlier!
I think its easy to see what the original poster was trying to vent about. Perhaps his analogies weren't perfect but he has an opinion about how the game is being played.
Now, having said that I too have trouble with the issue of "men being men" and "just suck it up" or "if you don't like it, quit" as it is put in terms of the NHL.
The game is fast and the players are big but the real reason for the injuries is not that. These guys are making dirty plays and taking cheap shots. Seems like a lack of respect for the fellow player. Brian Burke is right in the point that no one is keeping the "rat" players in check anymore. No one would have dared a cheap shot at Gretzky in his day. Semenko or McSorley would solve the issue right away.
The policeman analogy is hard to make because their job is to deal with people who don't follow the rules so you can't just say "suck it up buttercup".
NHL players can reasonably expect each other to follow the rules. When they don't, people get hurt. Hard to say "suck it up or quit" when you live by the rules and others don't.
And Beans your first post was a little strong, but not so much arrogant. Seems like others think you can't have your opinion too! |
| Guest4350 |
Posted - 01/11/2012 : 14:01:26
quote:
Originally posted by Guest7752
How many players back then had their careers cut short because of cheap shots compared to today?
I have a feeling more careers are prematurely ended today, or at least we are made aware of more of this information today.
So if the NHL is "trying" to cut down on these cheap shots in order to stop the “unnecessary” injuries (not the accidental injuries), then that should be a good thing.
Hmm I think Kharlamov would disagree with you. Remember when Espo breaks his ankle with a two hand slash?
Bobby Orr's knees. It was the only way to stop him.
Also, concussions back then were just headaches you play through. The knowledge from concussions studies are much more extensive these days. Of course back then only sissies wear helmets and only smoke 1 packs a day.
As for the original post, hockey is a form of entertainment. Law enforcement is not. Keep that in mind and what is says about our society where fame and fortune is reaped upon entertainers (sports of all kinds, movies, musicians and what not) rather than the police, firefighters and doctors. |
| Guest5744 |
Posted - 01/11/2012 : 09:54:10
if you have never had a concussion or a serious injury in your life probably not qualified to post on this one |
| Guest7752 |
Posted - 01/11/2012 : 06:02:06
Beans / Fat Elvis / etc...
One more thing you all have to take into account before making your final opinions...
When you look back at 70's style hockey, and compare that to today's "Bettman" hockey - I believe you are agreeing that it was a tougher, harder-hitting game back then. And today, players cannot get away with things that they may have gotten away with back then. This is changing the game and we (the fans, media, some GM’s, some players, etc…) don’t all like it.
However - back then, we (the fans, media, etc...) did not have a Campbell or Shanny to sit there and review plays in order to deliver judgment on player’s actions, and then broadcast the punishment out to the world for scrutinizing and debating.
Players were still getting the same injuries back then as they are today - only that back then, we the viewers, etc... did not even hear about most of them. Today, we hear everything and see everything all the way down to the players coming out of the showers after a game!! Also, today, some players will not hesitate to risk their own bodies in order to make that big hit because the risk is lower… better equipment and better boards today. When I played, I thought twice before gaining some momentum and targeting a huge hit on someone in the corners because if I missed, I’d hit those hard(er) boards and risk popping out my own shoulder. I probably would not hesitate today knowing I’m better protected and the boards are more forgiving.
How many players back then had their careers cut short because of cheap shots compared to today?
I have a feeling more careers are prematurely ended today, or at least we are made aware of more of this information today.
So if the NHL is "trying" to cut down on these cheap shots in order to stop the “unnecessary” injuries (not the accidental injuries), then that should be a good thing. I think it will take some time though, before players are "used" to this newer, less violent style of playing because we have to go through a phase where the youngsters & teenagers get used to playing this style first before they come up to NHL level... It's the period between the NHL trying to weed out violent plays today and new players coming up already playing this style tomorrow... that we the fans have to endure watching. Maybe we’ll still have a tough, hard-hitting game tomorrow minus the violent, intent to injure plays.
|
| Guest4227 |
Posted - 01/11/2012 : 03:45:32
Beans is never wrong and will never change his mind. On behalf of everyone on this site I would like to take this time to thank Beans for providing us with his thoughts on every topic.
(Admin Edit - content removed - personal attack) |
| Guest4227 |
Posted - 01/11/2012 : 03:42:48
Beans
Have you ever played contact hockey?
|
| Pasty7 |
Posted - 01/11/2012 : 00:08:07
I keep hearing how the league has gone soft and we re takeing the pyhiscal aspect out of the game, every hit is suspendable and so on,, tell that to Dion Phaneuf or a better example just because he is a rookie Alexi Emelin, on a ngihtly basis these guys go out and crush the opposition and I havn't seen Emelin with a debatable hit yet, and hes up over 100 on the year averging 5 per game, (now that i said this of course.....) The rules are there and you can be a "man" and be "tough" while playing inside the rules, Emelin is a perfect example
"I led the league in "Go get 'em next time." - Bob Uecker
|
| n/a |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 22:54:54
quote:
Originally posted by fat_elvis_rocked
Geez Man, no need to wave your flag of indignance, if you have been here for any length of time, you'd know I tend to be a wee bit of a smart aleck, and that's all that blurb meant.
Of course you never talked of penalties not being dealt with appropriately.
What you do seem to beating repeatedly is that what, men are men, they take their chances, they make more than enough than to have anyconsiderations for their injuries, a punch in the teeth would straghten all things out? Fair enough, your opinion and as you say, others support that.
All I am saying is that the way the game was going is also not a representation of hockey in my opinion, when there are 30 players currently sitting out with concussions and as you metioned previously the cameras don't lie, when showing the cause of a lot of them. The NHL has made a head shot illegal, not body checks, and if that is the basis of your passionate raving, then that isn't 'bubble wrapping', only hopefully, protecting the reasons we watch the game at the NHL level, to see the best of the best. Unfortunately, any given week, a good selection of those best, are sitting out with injuries, usually caused by illegal plays, hence the 'micromanaging'.
Well said Fat Elvis. And . . . well said, Beans. I certainly didn't note any arrogance here from you, and I feel that once again the whole "man up and accept violence outside the rules of hockey" point of view is again dealing out strawman arguments to prop up a flimsy case.
I am totally with Elvis and Beans here, and that sould say something to the subject at hand - especially if you know our histories on this site. I have often argued with Fat Elvis on which hits deserved suspension or not and how long . . . and almost always disagree with Beans, lol . . . and yet, each of us does agree that
1) a number of the many injuries occurring are a result of illegal hits
2) Shanahan is doing (overall) a great job so far in handing out suspensions
But it is fun to see the level of argumentation remain at indignance at an opposing opinion couched in put-downs on our manhood. 
BTW, did you know they have ice rinks in Thailand? Found one at the top level of a mall of all places in Bangkok . . . and yes, it IS damn nice here, ha ha
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 22:19:41
Geez Man, no need to wave your flag of indignance, if you have been here for any length of time, you'd know I tend to be a wee bit of a smart aleck, and that's all that blurb meant.
Of course you never talked of penalties not being dealt with appropriately.
What you do seem to beating repeatedly is that what, men are men, they take their chances, they make more than enough than to have anyconsiderations for their injuries, a punch in the teeth would straghten all things out? Fair enough, your opinion and as you say, others support that.
All I am saying is that the way the game was going is also not a representation of hockey in my opinion, when there are 30 players currently sitting out with concussions and as you metioned previously the cameras don't lie, when showing the cause of a lot of them. The NHL has made a head shot illegal, not body checks, and if that is the basis of your passionate raving, then that isn't 'bubble wrapping', only hopefully, protecting the reasons we watch the game at the NHL level, to see the best of the best. Unfortunately, any given week, a good selection of those best, are sitting out with injuries, usually caused by illegal plays, hence the 'micromanaging'. |
| Guest2978 |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 22:01:14
I never once said that deliberate cheap shots etc shouldn't be dealt with harshly Fat... Go back and read the post.
In all my posts, how you got that I don't want cheap shots penalized I don't know.
I just said (along with alot of other stuff) that I get a little tired with the micro management of the game. These are men that have, once again, CHOSEN to play this game. All I want is for the league to let hockey be hockey and for the highly paid athletes that play the game to understand that it is still hockey and should be played with integrity, respect, and played hard.
Oh yes I don't know any fans that have given up their tickets because the game is too rough, I do know of ALOT of fans that can't afford to go to the games at all. I also know of ALOT of huge hockey fans that (on alot of nights) have trouble watching what the game is turning into.
Regardless, it seems like their are a few others in this forum that understand the gist of my original post and the frustration at which it comes from.
|
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 20:44:38
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2978
Let me put it this way... DILIBERATE cheap shots and plays that endanger other players should be dealt with swiftly and harshly......
So in other words....you DO agree with BEANS!!! |
| Guest4306 |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 18:09:25
I can't provide any examples of players suspended for clean hits, but I haven't take the time to look.
One thing which has changed in the game (and it's a good change) is that players are being held more accountable for dirty plays or hits.
But another change I've noticed is that players are letting up on opportunities to deliver clean checks or finish their checks, and that's unfortunate. Players know that a nuance here or there (a player dips or an opposing player puts himself in a vulnerable position, etc.) a well intentioned legal body-check can turn into a suspendable offense. For as many suspended players/instances, I've observed just as many "plays" where luck or circumstance prevented a player from being knocked over or injured on the same kind of play or hit.
Hockey is an extremely fast game, so a player can be coming in for a big (and legal) hit, and in a millisecond, the targeted player can turn slightly, dip their head, etc., and the end result looks worse (and ends up worse) than what the body-checker legally intended.
With respect to the WJC's, I noticed that the intensity and action was at a higher
level than the regular season NHL. And a big factor was that players finished their checks and delivered some big hits, and the vast majority of hits were legal. Were there any suspensions handed out in the WJC's? I don't think so. Were there any ejections for fights? I don't remember seeing any.
And the level of physical play at the WJC's made it very entertaining for hockey fans. Some of the big hits got as much fan noise as the goals!
In fairness, the WJC's are like the Stanley Cup Playoffs, where every game is important. (Moreso than the regular season.)
I just hope that NHL players (none who are complaining about their "dangerous" jobs by the way) do not reduce their level of physical play because a risk taken when delivering a clean body-check is measured against the risk of being suspended.
So when going into the corner, a player thinks to himself - "why bother finishing my check. It's not worth the risk." Players already temper their play (to an extent) in the regular season, and for them to do so further changes the game in a way some fans might not like.
One thing for sure. I haven't heard that any fans are giving up their tickets (or staying away from games) because the current game is too rough!
|
| sahis34 |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 17:51:52
I think we can take the risk of being too reactionary, to attempt to be proactive.
The original poster used the policeman analogy, well if a policeman gets shot, you don't tell him to suck it up, you do everything in your power to prevent that from happening again.
I don't really like the analogy in general; For choosing to be a cop takes a larger commitment to danger than hockey does.
Hockey's simply a microcosm of that. When an avoidable injury takes place, we should try and prevent the same sort of injury.
Chara's hit on Pacoiretty was the worst hit, optically; last season. The NHL could've suspended chara 20 games in an attempt to prevent similar injuries. Instead they made the glass curved.
The suspension plan is a back-up plan, if they had a better solution they would try it. |
| Guest2978 |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 17:49:45
Let me put it this way... DILIBERATE cheap shots and plays that endanger other players should be dealt with swiftly and harshly (by the league, by the opposing team, AND by the offending teams team mates, etc).
Not accepting the cheap shots by EVERYONE in hockey, I hope, would change the psychology back to where it once was. I'm sure alot of us have played sports (hockey) before and, personally, I will play as hard as possible against even my very best friends in the world. But, when their back is turned and they are facing the boards (or any other vulnerable situations that players find themselves in) I will still play them hard but won't act in a way that would put them a great risk. I think it's called respect and COMMON SENSE. It also used to be common sense to not turn towards the boards and put yourself in a risky situation. I don't know, common sense is something that seems to be lacking in the culture of today's NHL.
Plays, hits, injuries that occur strictly due to the nature of the game should be treated as such, meaning, sometimes bad (or unfortunate) things just happen and sometimes players get hurt. Somebody doesn't ALWAYS need to be blamed and have the hand of justice reaching hard to see (or try to find) a guilty party.
When it takes 10 different camera angles, slow motion, and much debate to determine if, say, a shoulder hit a head then I wonder if it needs to be debated at all. Like I said, sometimes things just happen and it is the nature of the beast when playing a fast contact sport like hockey.
My bubble wrap comment really lends itself to the idea that it is a band aid solution that doesn't do much to rectify the rats and cheap shot artists in the league and all the micro mananging that seems to be going on within the NHL is only watering down a once great, fast, and physical game. It's a behavior that needs to change and that starts with the players dealing with the players (I think). Fining a millionaire a few thousand dollars doesn't seem to be working. Especially when the millionaire wins the lottery year after year after year.
You want the cheap shots to stop?? I don't know, maybe have that player be accountable where the offence occurred. On the ice. Having to spend time in a dentists chair, or 4 weeks with your jaw wired shut, because someone put a knuckle in your mouth may make you reconsider your actions next time (especially if it was your own team mate that did it to you because they want respect and accountability brought back to the game too).
Or do what another person suggested. Suspend the heck out of these players and remove them from the game... period. Probably a combination of the 2 ideas actually.
Just quit bubble wrapping these millionaires and let the hockey players be hockey players... Because after all, at the end of the day, they ARE well paid and they all CHOSE to do this for a living. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 16:23:21
I am not really sure how to submit an opinion without feeling like it will only be refuted with sarcasm(which I never do, by the way), or not taken in the proper context.
For example, the poster's original post made me feel a wee bit uncomfortable for not feeling that these players are 'milking' the issues and we should all take a stance of, 'you make the big bucks, so suck it up, it's a man's game so act like a man', my interpretation, correct or not.
I am middle of the road on this issue, but emphatically agree with Beans that the issue isn't the physical nature of the game, but that the rules are being disregarded at times, and causing avoidable injuries.
Yes indeed, the game has it's dangers, and a player knows what they are getting in to when they sign up, but to use another analogy, should I expect to come to work and take a punch to the face, because another worker doesn't want to play by the rules? Should I shake it off and man up, because that could be a 'potential' danger of my, or anyone's job?
I realize of course this an extreme example, but no moreso than the original diatribe, which went more than slightly over the top with it's admitted rant.
Yes, I am tiring of hearing of another avoidable injury that occurred during the games.
No, I do not think Shanahan is doing the wrong thing by handing out suspensions because of these incidents.
The gauntlet was tossed down to back up the accusations that clean hits are being called suspendable offences, and as of yet, nary an example, just nit picking at opinions and posts.
I would go so far as to say they don't suspend harshly enough, if the point is to change the physical play of the game from the illegal to the legal only.
The original poster asked about the World Juniors and why the NHL isn't more like that, with all the passion and physicalities it showcases, and I throw the question back, why isn't it indeed?
Perhaps, because in that particular tournament, they discipline harshly, and cause a true deterrent because of it.
But, apparently some of us, feel the game as is at the NHL level is getting to 'watered down' to compare.
Funny, I am tired of the daily injury updates as I mentioned, but more from dismay that the game has gotten so gladitorial that it hardly resembles hockey any more.
I'd rather see Crosby back, Savard back, Pronger back, Giroux get those 7 games back, Kariya not have finished his career at less than what he could have been, etc, etc, etc.
Does that make me less manly? I don't think so. |
| Guest9504 |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 15:02:44
Beans, let me dissect the post the other guest was referencing when he called you a certain adjective. quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Wow, what a perfect example of some who just doesn't get it.
Clearly you feel as though there can be only one opinion.
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Are you saying they should not be punished because of how much hockey players get paid? How dumb is that?
Now you are calling the poster dumb - well more to the point his thoughts are dumb (a personal matter for most people however)
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15[/i]
Horrible analogy to a police officer as well. If I were an officer I would be embarassed that my noble profession was used as such a poor comparison.[/i]
Again, there can only be your opinion and in your case here a very self-rightous opinion. As if you are more enlightened and aligned with the good beliefs of our men and women at arms. Beans it's ok to disagree but there is no need to be so aggressive. How about "I don't agree with your analogy, and I don't think police officers would either". Not that it matters but I think the analogy is bang on actually.
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15[/i]
Could you please provide one example of one of these so called legal hits where a player has received a suspension? I'll sit back and listen to the crickets chirping.[/i]
Ok this is a little funny. Point taken and I love the dramatic overtones. |
| Guest8492 |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 13:48:10
Beans, your arrogance shows in the presentation, not the content, of your arguments. By daring someone to show one example of a 'legal' hit that was punished by the league (in my opinion kinda Marchand's tbh) is irrelevant to the main thesis of the original poster.
He's saying that hockey players, such as other professions assume a degree of risk as part of their jobs. This isn't unlike police officers, firefighters, rescue helicopter pilots, etc. And he is also implying that there is a culture of 'babying' by the media, demonizing every one of these hits and incidents 20x on Sportscentre every morning.
In short, stop feeling bad about guys getting hurt doing their job (Beans most concussions come from LEGAL hits), since they get a ridiculous salary that far outpays other similarly dangerous professions in society. And if you don't like it, don't play or watch hockey, because the rest of us enjoy the rough parts of the game.
FIN |
| Guest2978 |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 13:46:53
Oh and by the way... I see how you like to quote my previous posts so I thought I would show you something else that i said (in case you missed it).
The game has been great for a very long time and a BIG HIT that leaves someone in some discomfort shouldn't automatically be given a penalty and/or automatically sent to Shanny for a review.
Meaning that I don't believe illegal shots should be accepted and that when they OBVIOUSLY occur that action should be taken. I'm talking the general "Oh no the game is too rough and lets try to fix every situation everytime anyone gets hurt" mentality that seems to be running the league. Of course I want players protected and cheap "non hockey" plays removed from the game.
Hope this makes sense to you. If not... Oh well, I tried. :)
|
| Guest2978 |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 12:04:08
Oh yeah, and if BEANS doesn't AT ALL understand the point that I am trying to make then thats his choice.
Just like its a players choice to play.
I'm sorry if some of my viewpoints were completely lost on you BEANS. But I respect your right to misinterpret my intentions. It's difficult to get down exactly what one wants to say without writing a much longer post. Especially with this topic.
I hope you don't start disecting my punctuation, or grammar, because I can already tell you that it isn't very good.
Take care and BE SAFE!! |
| Guest2978 |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 11:51:27
Shouldn't even be responding but the only reason I am is to say that I never meant any disrespect to Police officers anywhere.
I just meant you don't have to do a job that you don't want to (NHL players CHOOSE to be athletes). There are ALOT of other professions (Police, Firefighters, Bus Drivers, etc, etc) that are alot more dangerous that don't get the adulation, attention, or financial rewards that they deserve and that pro athletes get. Sometimes I get tired of the pedestal professional athletes get put on because they can skate, or throw, or run, etc. There are alot of other people in society that deserve recognition for the jobs they do. Many of which are dangerous jobs that don't come with multi-million dollar salaries. That's what I meant.
I just get a little tired sometimes with the never ending rhetoric of how to bubble wrap (or protect) the NHL. It just seems that all this micro managing is taking the passion, assertiveness, and FUN out of the game. Players get paid ALOT of money to do what they do and to play a GAME. IF (and I say IF) its the players that are steering the bubble wrap movement then all I'm really saying is if they don't enjoy playing HOCKEY they should quit and find a career elsewhere.
As far as the the powers at be go (managers/owners etc). Could you PLEASE let who ever remains be hockey players and quit micromanaging a great game into a game that, on alot of nights, can be tough to watch?? In saying that, I would bet most players in the NHL would like to see the shackles off too. Remove the cheap shots and bring back accountability, respect, and responsibility (players police themselves INCLUDING policing their own team). Back in the day you wouldn't see a fringe player taking liberties with others just because of the response, and lack of respect, they would get from their own team mates!! Nevermind the oppostion!! ;)
Did anyone watch the world juniors? Holy cow!! Did you see the passion and aggression and big hits that went on there? Kind of looked like how hockey is suppose to look like. It's sad when the NHL looks like a watered down version of what many people think hockey should be.
Once again, I'm sorry if I offended anyone. That was not my intention.
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 11:28:59
Firstly, a police officer does take a job that has risks and knowingly accepts risk. The job of a police officer is not anywhere near comparable a hockey player because criminals have no rules. There is no way to define the risk that a police officer accepts. Hockey does have rules. A hockey players risks are measureable. A hockey player is accepting the risks within the confines of the rules, not those risks that are associated with actions outside of the rules.
Huge difference.
Secondly, and most importantly. Before people start throwing stones and name calling, let's do this. Give me one example of a hit that lead to a suspension that was legal. Start with that. If you can't do that Odin, who is the arrogant one??? Seriously.
Now, do I agree that the 'good hockey hit' is a think of the past and that the players take things into their own hands far, far too often. Absolutely. However, if the league punishes and severely punishes illegal plays than I am all for it. The issue at had, from the original poster, is this (and I quote):
Then maybe when someone in the league does deliver a CLEAN but very heavy body check (one that might even hurt a player) he won't automatically receive a penalty or have to get a call from Shanny,
As I said, show me one example of a legal hit that was punished by the Shanahan??
|
| Guest2872 |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 10:41:20
I agree with the message of the original post. The knee jerk reaction of the league is getting a little out of hand....the pendulum is beginning to swing too far to the left.
Yes concussions and needless injuries from cheap shots should be a concern but there definitely are inherent risks to the profession.
Lastly, I also would like to support one of the other posters that mentioned the melees that occur after totally legal hits. I understand if one player is "running" another but it seems like any hard hit causes a scrum. Drives me nuts!!! |
| Guest4178 |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 10:38:29
Excellent post Guest2978!
For the most part, I share your point of view, but even in areas where I don't have the exact same point of view, I respect your opinion!
With respect to your comments about the police, I thought your comments were quite respectful about their profession. In most ways, you actually put their profession up on a pedestal, and your comments about them getting less respect and adulation than hockey players is quite accurate. They definitely deserve better. I have a number of friends who are police officers, and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be embarrassed at all by how you compared overpaid hockey players to their noble profession.
I've read a lot of posts on this forum, and I must say that your posting was one of the best I've read in a long time! (And there's been some good ones.) |
| Guest8492 |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 10:22:23
First off, Beans can't possibly be more arrogant, for the most part. This is fairly obvious to anyone who regularly uses this site.
Second, most of the concussions (THE prevailing injury this season in particular) are coming from perfectly legal hits. Now we have a mountain of evidence that fighting (again, legal) can have long-term health risks associated with it.
That said, I agree with the spirit of the original post. Hockey has risks, sure, but it also has rewards. How many guys would take a few million a year salary in exchange for a little danger pay? Most, myself included. And unlike the NFL, these guys are getting paid whilst recovering from their injuries, so suck it up buttercups. |
| Odin |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 08:14:05
Beans, can you be any more arrogant??
Good gravy.
Are you honestly saying the poster doesn't have any valid points?
Are you just ignoring the obvious point he is making about the police? He is saying that both professions have inherent risks. I don't think there is any arguement against that. He is making the further valid point that it is a choice of people to get into these professions, nobody is holding a gun to their head.
I am not going to go sifting through a pile of hits just to get into a circualr discussion with you about whether a hit is legal or not. I am positive that will be the next step should somebody take you up on your offer.
However, I WILL point out what has become a VERY annoying development in the game. Why must there always be the milling about after a good hit?
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 05:38:27
Wow, what a perfect example of some who just doesn't get it. Hockey is an inherently dangerous sport and I think everyone understands that. Unfortunately there are hits that are not hockey plays and provide a high likelihood of injuries. Are you saying they should not be punished because of how much hockey players get paid? How dumb is that?
Horrible analogy to a police officer as well. If I were an officer I would be embarassed that my noble profession was used as such a poor comparison.
Could you please provide one example of one of these so called legal hits where a player has received a suspension? I'll sit back and listen to the crickets chirping. |
| Guest2784 |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 05:33:45
Couldn't agree more. Bring back 1970 style hockey please. This stuff now is just so boring. When there is no room for Colton Orr in the game you know hockey is in trouble. |
| Guest4548 |
Posted - 01/10/2012 : 03:34:43
Amen! |
|
|
