| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 03/24/2010 : 21:51:22
Not sure there's a link to it yet and don't have time to search for it but did anyone see the hit Backes threw on Rafalski? Rafalski had just dumped the puck in and he got nailed. Reminded me of the Richards / Booth hit a bit but Rafalski was fine and didn't miss a shift apparently?
*I really only saw a quick clip of it and wasn't able to see it a few times so don't really wanna make a judgement on it, but it was very close to being a crushing head shot. I'm not even sure, it might have been more shoulder to shoulder but with the new rules, you have to wonder if a guy will throw a hit like this anymore?? |
| 22 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| irvine |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 21:32:08
To begin... no, i'm not getting tired of the debate/conversation.
In fact, I am enjoying it quite a bit. We have managed to discuss this back and forth, without anyone belittling the others opinion, name calling, or being rude to the other. It's nice! :)
And yes, we are more on the same page now. In fact, I agree completely with your opinion of allowing/having the refs use their discretion more than they do now. And actually making those calls, of 2 or 5 minutes, for 'hits gone wrong.'
We should not (as you mentioned), base them on the outcome of the hit. (IE: Injuries receive more notice, higher suspensions, etc...)
Each bad hit (blind side), should be treated equally. No matter the outcome. Injury or not, automatic penalty. Suspensions, i'd like to see limited. Based on the actions though, not the outcome.
Irvine/prez. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 10:11:42
If you are getting tired of this friendly debate, just let me know, and I'll leave it alone, I am enjoying it myself, and I think we are getting closer to common ground than we would have thought at the onset.
I totally agree that there doesn't need to be any new rules initiated, and I believe I have posted such, numerous times. The only 'change', I would prefer, would be for referees to use their discretion, that their postion allows, more liberally, to at least curb some, never all, of these incidents.
The referee who called the 5 and a game on Ovechkin for example, very brave, debateable call. He used his discretion, and the league offices, supported it, by adding additional discipline, The talking heads, on the idiot box, fell all over themselves chastising the call, and ref, for ruining a good game, and removing the game's biggest star from the fans for the rest of the match.
This is the kind of 'change', I am referring to, not a rule change, but a metality shift amongst players and referees, play hard, play physical, but don't take unnecessary liberties.
I'll also rebut, that if all we are seeing is a half dozen, out of thousands of hits, that go bad, that is all the more reason they need to identified and penalized harshly, it becomes a responsiblility issue, the message sent that, your are responsible for your actions, accidental or not. If you are intending to throw the check, the check isn't accidental, only the result, you are still responsible for intitiating the physical play.
I don't mean, judge from result of the hit, and only make the call, if there is an injury, there is a whole Campbellized department for that, but a bad/cheap hit is just that, and the call should be made. Again, what would it hurt to call a 2 minute minor for roughing, or unsporstmanlike conduct, and begin sending the message, using already existing rules, that these hits, which you agree, have no positive place in the game, need to start being sent the wayside.
The hits in question, regardless of contact to the head, were not accidents, they just had bad results, and I'll even go so far as to say that the league may be overkilling what could have been a simpler solution, that being mandating the referees to use more discretion, because as you said, and I agree, sadly, they will continue, regardless of the threat of the new rule. |
| irvine |
Posted - 03/26/2010 : 01:04:40
This is true, these hits should never have happened.
But as we're all aware of, they do. They will continue to happen also, with or without penalties and suspensions in place for them. Sadly.
I am all for removing them from the game. I even support the discipline involved (2 or a 5 + game) and the additional suspensions to be determined based on other factors involved. I truly do support this, especially for the head shot rule going in affect.
But, to now add another one for 'blind side hits' alone is starting to stretch things. We're just adding rule after rule these days, for any and everything we do not see fit. No matter how little they actually happen.
Lately, we are throwing example after example out. To the new hockey fan, it makes it seem like our sport is just wreckless. Nothing but guys slapping each other with sticks, and taking peoples heads off. Because lately all they see are these terrible examples of hits in hockey.
I mean, how many of these hits really occur during a year in the NHL? I'm not seeing a major lack of disrespect or disregard for others, i'm seeing accidents (and sometimes, moronic plays) that are bound to happen at some point.
Now, there are 30 teams in the NHL. All 30 teams, play 82 regular season games during the season.
So that's 2460 games per year. (not counting playoffs.)
I'm unsure of the actual average, but let us say there are 15 hits on average per game. (something tells me, it's likely a lot higher with both teams being considered.)
So we're now at 36,900 hits per NHL season. Out of those 36,900 hits laid out every NHL year, how many 'bad' hits are we seeing?
By 'bad', I mean those that have been brought to all of our attention lately. 5? 10? 15? 20? I'd say around 5-10 per year are that of just awful nature. Where it should never have happened, but did.
That is a very, very small percentage of hits. Should we create another rule for something that yes, costs a team (and player) a lot. But, is a very, very small percentage.
I'm guessing other, legal plays, actually hurt players just as much. But, we should certainly not create a rule to stop those.
--
As I said numerous times... I am all for removing those hits from the game. But I really do not see a way of doing it. Adding a new rule with discipline will certainly penilize the guy making the hit... but I don't see it stopping these types of hits, nor do I see it reducing blind side hits. The reason I do not, is because I don't see them as intentional to begin with. I believe they are very rare occurences, that happen on accident.
So a penalty/suspension, won't reduce something that isn't intentional to begin with. But if it will, then let us write about another rule I suppose.
(PS... I am not talking about hits to the head. Or, blind side hits to the head.) I am only talking about blind side hits, where shoulder to shoulder contact is involved. Where a player, I believe, does not realize it's at an angle the other player can not see them coming, if they were even paying attention to begin with.
Irvine/prez. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 23:54:51
quote:
Originally posted by irvine......
You can not honestly say, every hit you have ever laid in a hockey game has been 100% perfect, and an elbow, head contact, side hit, whatever, has never happened... or can you? I'm doubting that.
You can try at all times, and I'm sure guys do, to make the hit very clean. But it's not always going to happen, sadly. So many things factor in......
Irvine/prez.
I agree, and it has been a couple decades since I played hockey competitively, but I do say with confidence, I never hit a player from behind, ever, and I never hit a player from the blind side. Was every check perfect?, no, you are absolutely right, those come along, maybe 5 percent of the time for any player, regardless of level of play, too many variables to contend with as you say.
All I can say, is that of the recent examples of questionable hits that are the poster children for these discussions, the hits on Booth and Savard(I'll not continue with the Rafalski hit, legal from the replay), and the 'hits' on Campbell and Nichols, I have trouble seeing how any of those examples, couldn't be avoided, and unfortunately, they all, to a one, resulted in significant injuries. That's 4 seperate inidents costing a combined, so far, what? 60+ man games already, in injuries, with the final tally unknown as 2 of the players suffered season ending results.
Out of the 4 hits, there were a combined total of 1- 5 minute major, and accompanying misconduct, and 6 additional game suspensions the bulk of which came from Lapierre's 4 gamer.
Seems like a mathematical mismatch to me, for plays that didn't have to happen,had nothing to do with anything other than bad judgement, instead of legitimate, split second game situations. |
| irvine |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 23:09:51
quote:
Did either of you play or do you still play hockey? Would you take the oppurtunity to hit another player in the same position? I know I wouldn't and never did. I knew all along, a hit like that would be cheap and dangerous, why can't they?
No, I would not take the oportunity to hit an unsuspecting player from the side or behind, in any situation if I were given the choice in the moment. And I don't believe these guys (NHL players), would either.
We can't always distinguish a check or hit, in the moment. Many things factor in, during that 1-2 seconds before the hit. Players can change position very quickly, and suddenly.
If players at the caliber of weekend hockey (beer league, etc..) can hit perfectly every time (as I'm noticing people suggest more and more) then i'm sure the best in the world could too. But it's just not the case. These things happen, due to different circumstances and instances. They are not perfect, mistakes happen.
I don't deem these players to be out there to ruin another players career, by taking advantage of an unsuspecting player from behind.
One thing though, that really irks me during NHL games is the play of protecting the puck between your self and the boards.
What I mean by this, is when you see a player turn his back towards center ice (face is facing the boards), standing 2-4 feet from the boards, with the puck between themselves and the boards. I understand the purpose, to protect the puck. But this leaves them in a very, very vulnerable position. If they are hit, they are going head first in to the boards. How about players protecting themselves, before protecting the puck? Please!
A player coming in for a hit, should ease up when they see a player in this position. And, they do. If they can. But they may be coming in for that hit, long before the guy 'protecting' the puck, turns to that position. Thus, the hit still happens. I'd like to see players protecting themselves more too.
But anyways, back to your question.
You can not honestly say, every hit you have ever laid in a hockey game has been 100% perfect, and an elbow, head contact, side hit, whatever, has never happened... or can you? I'm doubting that.
You can try at all times, and I'm sure guys do, to make the hit very clean. But it's not always going to happen, sadly. So many things factor in.
Irvine/prez. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 21:48:46
Before I group myself into something I'm not, I am NOT a supporter of bringing in new rules to address situations. I am suggesting that there are already rules in place to cover the questionable situations that arise, they just, IMO, need to be enforced , for the safety of the players, a little more stringently.
Thanks Alex for the clip, and after watching it a few more times, it tells me the same as what I said in my first post, with the exception of the possible blindside, as it appears Backes caught up to, and hit Rafalski more from a side. Unfortunate for Rafalski in that he had just made a nice dump in on Conklin, and got cranked for his trouble.
What I will reiterate though, is that it was a cheap hit, legal, legal, legal, but cheap. That's the type of plays that are causing me such consternation as of late.
I'll agree Irvine, these plays have always gone on, true, but does that mean they should? No new rules, just enforce the existing ones. Would a 2 minute minor for roughing for a hit like that really be that out there? At least the message, however minor, would begin to be sent, and that could just save a major accident later on.
Leigh is right, they are paid athletes and have no obligation to play with my interpretation of civility, I just wonder why they can't.
Did either of you play or do you still play hockey? Would you take the oppurtunity to hit another player in the same position? I know I wouldn't and never did. I knew all along, a hit like that would be cheap and dangerous, why can't they? |
| irvine |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 21:06:00
@ Beans:
I believe we are discussing blind side hits (not directly from behind, but at an angel) and not directly to the head either. So basically a hit from the side, that hits any spot on the body. Not the blind side shots to the head, that we have already discussed.
@ Fat_Elvis_Rocked
I have not said I would not support such a rule, to be included. Infact, my very first statement in my very first post about the issue, was that of support for it.
But, I am trying to understand where things are going lately.
More and more people are wanting new rules in place. They want this taken from the game, that removed from the game, etc...
These are things that are not a part of our game, that's for certain. There are no need for blind side hits, hits to the head, hitting from behind, etc.. etc...
But for every issue that arises, must we really re-write the rule book?
Adding a two minute penalty for everything, isn't going to remove it from our game. These are not things that are specifically targeted, or meant to be done. They are accidents/mistakes that tend to happen, in the high paced game of hockey.
I don't believe any player goes out there and decides to nail a guy from a bad angle, to the head or otherwise. It happens. So writing in the rules that it requires a penalty isn't going to stop it, since I believe (personally) they are accidents more so than anything.
Unlike things such as slashing (as an example) that is normally done out frustration or a form of retaliation.
Irvine/prez. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 20:00:07
I am very capable of conceding to the opinions of others, as I am sure they are mine.
You both, Irvine and Leigh, state your opinions in the manner that forces me to give such concession. I only want to reiterate a couple things,
Yes, this is nothing new and it seems like the response is somewhat over the top, not so much for the particular change to head hits, but to the physical game itself. I'll even admit that I am one of the bigger proponents of stiffer penalties and policing by the referees, for hits from behind for example.
I just wonder, what took so long? We may not have heard about these types of hits, due to less media coverage, and they may always have been there, but where does it stop? There are many players that have already had shortened careers because of these types of plays, Lafontaine, Keith Primeau, the Lindros Bros., Adam Deadmarsh, etc.... are they not examples of lessons that should have already been learned?
And you are correct Leigh, from your rebuttal, it appears I may have taken the 'U' out of assume.
The instigator rule doesn't save the concussion, it only adds the oppurtunity for another one in return. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 19:42:29
Beans, i've been looking all over for it and this is the best i can find thus far. It's not a great look at is cuz it happens real quick and from the angle shown, it looks very well like it could have been a headshot but from looking at it on the tv last night and rewinding the pvr multiple times from different angles you could see it was in fact shoulder to shoulder.
The clip, if you watch the whole thing (it's not long) shows near the end a close up but pans away just before the hit. Even later in the clip, it shows another angle but still not a great one. I'll keep looking for a better view but here's this for now.
http://www.kuklaskorner.com/index.php/hockey/comments/blindside_hit/ |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 17:52:44
I think some people might be taking this change a little to far. Let's not for get that the new 'rule' is talking specifically about blindside or lateral hits TO THE HEAD. Period.
No one said anything about a guy skating with this head down who gets hit from the front.
No one said anything about a blindside hit that does not strike the head.
The rule is fair and reasonable and it's designed to ensure safety for the players and so the poor suckers don't end up eating their meals through straw when they are 40 because they have nothing left upstairs.
When the games needs to be changed for the welfare of the players it's never a bad thing. We have all agreed that the players simply can not, will not, or do not police themselves so the NHL has to.
In regards to this hit, I can't seem to find it on youtube. Any links?? |
| Guest0854 |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 17:48:36
quote:
Originally posted by leigh
As for headshots, I don't necessarily think they should be illegal either...so be careful of answering your own questions, you know what they say about "assuming". If you really want my opinion, frankly I don't think the checking rules need to change; I think gear needs to be changed and I think the instigator rule should be removed.
Wait a minute. This is going a little off topic but...
Let's say we develop this magical new padding that is soft on contact yet protects the wearer. We can use this magic material on everything in hockey, helmets shells, elbows, knee pads heck even hockey sticks.
Now with this new material on the equipment would you allow, slashing, elbowing, kneeing and head butting? Why not? I mean the orignial rules probably didn't have these acts as illegal until people got hurt from it. Blind side hits and hits to the head just doesn't belong to the game just like slashing, elbowing, kneeing and head butting, regardless of equipment.
As for the hit. It looks clean. |
| leigh |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 17:30:19
quote:
Originally posted by fat_elvis_rocked
quote:
Originally posted by leigh
So what if the player is coming straight at you but his head is down? Can he be hit? I sure hope so. It's fine in football isn't it?
See what is happening...we start with removing the headshots, but even before the headshots are gone we're discussing removing any hit if the guy doesn't see it coming. It's rediculous, our tolerance levels just keep dropping and dropping to a point where we're watching a homogenized version or our beloved sport. Deal with it people, it's a rough game. That's why we love it! It's one of the reasons why I don't watch baseball.
Leave the game alone!!! Or better yet, those of you who don't like it, start your own sport - you can't call it hockey though, because it wouldn't be.
Oh and to stay on topic, the hit was clean, shoulder on shoulder. Rafalski didn't see it coming...but he should have.
Never said any of that, you are making assumptions. I must then assume you are then saying that headshots should be an acceptable part of the game and I should suck it up. , didn't think so.
A clean legal hit is exactly that, regardless of outcome and result. If a player has his head down, and gets nailed, that is a hockey play and part of our beloved game.
A hit from behind, is not a hockey play, it's a lazy, disrespectful cheap shot.
A hit from the blindside, is not a hockey play, it's also a lazy, disrespectful cheap shot.
They have penalties for the other, sometimes, lazy, disrespectful plays, slashing, hooking, crosschecking, tripping, etc...why would these plays be exempt.
Personally I love the physical aspect of the game,as well as the grace, just not the lazy, disrespectful cheapshots.
There was no way Rafalski could see that hit coming, it was from semi-behind, after he made an innocent dump in. Not only no way he could have, but no reason he should have, had to see it coming. It made for a nice highlight reel hit, but it certainly fell in to that lazy, disrespectful thing.....
I wouldn't classify it as lazy but you're entitled to your opinion Fatty  . As for disrespectful, I wouldn't dispute it...but they aren't paid bajillions to be nice or be able to coast - which Rafalski was doing.
As for headshots, I don't necessarily think they should be illegal either...so be careful of answering your own questions, you know what they say about "assuming". If you really want my opinion, frankly I don't think the checking rules need to change; I think gear needs to be changed and I think the instigator rule should be removed.
My point in my previous post is that every time you make a rule the line of acceptability moves. Over time people adjust to it and then the raging debate begins again - and the cycle repeats. It takes time, but it happens. I am merely pointing out that we are already discussing changes, interpretations, modifications and adaptations to this new rule before it is even in place (although I believe it has just been instituted now: http://www.pickuphockey.com/hockeynews.aspx?article=7018213550 )
Specifically about this hit. It was shoulder on shoulder and within a reasonable time frame. Judging by the cartwheel that Rafalski did the momentum clearly came from the side. You have to be aware of your surroundings and Rafalski was clearly the "lazy" one here. Having said that, I have no doubt that because of the "spectacular" nature of the hit Backes would have received a suspension under the new rule.
|
| irvine |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 17:16:31
I'm not saying anything about the game being softer, or less physical by removing blind side hits. I've even gone as far as to say that the game would not change, if they were removed.
However,
the point I was getting at with reference to the game being the same for so long, is that until the past few months (or year at the latest), very rarely did we see so many people requesting a change to the rules regarding these types of hits. Yet, they have happened (i'll even say as often) since hockey progressed to the level it is at now. (The past 15-20 years) these hits have always been there, just as often, with the same effect on those receiving them.
Only until now though, with the online and media attention, do we see such an amount of people requesting a change in rules for it.
What's wrong with the way it has always been, common sense.
Even with penalties and suspensions in place for them, they will still happen as mistakes do take place in the game. No one means to blind side a guy, to the point of him leaving the game on a stretcher, and having a penalty for it will not change the outcome.
Personally, I do not see a substantial drop in the lack of respect within the National Hockey League, only the amount of coverage within the game. We're only now noticing all of these terrible hits more so, because the media has made it a point to show us.
Do we really think guys are meaning to make a big, blind side head shot to the opposition? Especially right now, with all of the attention surrounding it? I don't believe so. If anything, it's one of the last hits they want to make. But they happen... we just notice more, because of the spotlight shined upon it.
So I guess what I am trying to say, amongst my ramblings are that I just do not see a need for a rule to put in place every time some thing comes to the media spotlight, that is not approved of. Guys are not intentionally doing so, atleast not the majority. And common sense has been used since the inception of hockey, regarding these exact plays... and I don't believe the numbers of headshots / blindside hits have increased today, more than any other time in hockey.
We just notice more
Irvine/prez. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 17:01:55
I'm not entirely sure how removing these types of plays would be considered less tolerant to the physicalities of the game. a dangerous and dumb play, does nothing to bolster the game, in any way. For me, it has nothing to do with making the game any 'softer', and everything to do with making the game a better showcase for it's inherent physical play.
I will disagree, only slightly, in that because our game has been similar for a number of years, that doesn't make it above reproach, and I hope players losing dozens of games to avoidable injuries isn't acceptable just for the sake of maintaing status quo.
Again, just my opinion, but making these bad hits, accountable, doesn't make the game softer, more homogenized, or some bastardized variation of hockey requiring a new name, it only makes the game safer, by eliminating stupidity, how can that be a bad thing?
If the player has his head down, crush him(there are other posters who question the necessity of that even, as a check is more to remove the player from the puck), it is legal, and indeed acceptable to most. If an injury happens because of this type of hit, that is also an acceptable situation due to the ability to bodycheck. But part of having rules, is to create fair play, it is still, after all, a sport, and hitting someone when they can't even see you coming isn't sporting and fair, it's thuggish and dirty, and shouldn't require tolerance.
|
| irvine |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 16:23:12
I'm not opposed to removing blind side hits all together.
With that being said, I do agree with Leigh.
More and more our society is non accepting of any thing that is not straight forward in the views of even the most non-extreme loving of people.
Even before a new rule is fully implemented, some are proposing rules be issued for banning certain types of physical play / hitting.
Our game of hockey, which we all love, has been similar for years upon years in the sense of what is or is not acceptable. Until the past 6ish years, when things are now changing... new rules being added, less acceptance of certain types of hits, etc...
For the small percentage of these plays that happen, should we really be changing the entire game every time a situation happens that (some) deem to be unacceptable?
Should a blind side hit be a 'legal' part of our game? I don't see the true value in allowing, thus it can be removed without any real consequence of the game it self. But, shouldn't some things be left to the players to decide? I don't see a new rule set in place every time something happens that some, not even all, find to be unnessecary.
Perhaps we need to allow the players themselves more freedom in using their own opinions, respect and heads in enforcing the 'rules'.
Yes, we can argue... players are lacking that respect today that was once shared among players previously. But, you will always have a few that lack that respect... now or previously, they were and always will be there. These type hits also happened before this season, but due to the circumstances of late, we're only seeing and hearing about them more so in the media and online. They do not happen very often, so I'm not seeing it as a big of an issue that is being brought to our attention.
The only reason it seems to be happening more and more, is because the media and the likes are bringing it to our attention, more and more.
Irvine/prez. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 14:54:22
I'd prob actually be okay with a hit like this if in fact it's shoulder to shoulder. The main reason Rafalski was able to get up and continue was because he WASN'T hit in the head! All i was trying to get at was it'll be interesting how many hits like this we'll see considering the fine line between this and a headshot! Will guys risk missing or misjudging this sort of hit if they know suspension will loom if they catch the guys head? |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 12:31:47
quote:
Originally posted by leigh
So what if the player is coming straight at you but his head is down? Can he be hit? I sure hope so. It's fine in football isn't it?
See what is happening...we start with removing the headshots, but even before the headshots are gone we're discussing removing any hit if the guy doesn't see it coming. It's rediculous, our tolerance levels just keep dropping and dropping to a point where we're watching a homogenized version or our beloved sport. Deal with it people, it's a rough game. That's why we love it! It's one of the reasons why I don't watch baseball.
Leave the game alone!!! Or better yet, those of you who don't like it, start your own sport - you can't call it hockey though, because it wouldn't be.
Oh and to stay on topic, the hit was clean, shoulder on shoulder. Rafalski didn't see it coming...but he should have.
Never said any of that, you are making assumptions. I must then assume you are then saying that headshots should be an acceptable part of the game and I should suck it up. , didn't think so.
A clean legal hit is exactly that, regardless of outcome and result. If a player has his head down, and gets nailed, that is a hockey play and part of our beloved game.
A hit from behind, is not a hockey play, it's a lazy, disrespectful cheap shot.
A hit from the blindside, is not a hockey play, it's also a lazy, disrespectful cheap shot.
They have penalties for the other, sometimes, lazy, disrespectful plays, slashing, hooking, crosschecking, tripping, etc...why would these plays be exempt.
Personally I love the physical aspect of the game,as well as the grace, just not the lazy, disrespectful cheapshots.
There was no way Rafalski could see that hit coming, it was from semi-behind, after he made an innocent dump in. Not only no way he could have, but no reason he should have, had to see it coming. It made for a nice highlight reel hit, but it certainly fell in to that lazy, disrespectful thing..... |
| leigh |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 11:11:16
So what if the player is coming straight at you but his head is down? Can he be hit? I sure hope so. It's fine in football isn't it?
See what is happening...we start with removing the headshots, but even before the headshots are gone we're discussing removing any hit if the guy doesn't see it coming. It's rediculous, our tolerance levels just keep dropping and dropping to a point where we're watching a homogenized version or our beloved sport. Deal with it people, it's a rough game. That's why we love it! It's one of the reasons why I don't watch baseball.
Leave the game alone!!! Or better yet, those of you who don't like it, start your own sport - you can't call it hockey though, because it wouldn't be.
Oh and to stay on topic, the hit was clean, shoulder on shoulder. Rafalski didn't see it coming...but he should have. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 07:59:03
quote:
Originally posted by fat_elvis_rocked
What a difference an inch or two makes......but enough of my wife's complaints..
LOL
Great post fat_elvis.....not just the crack above  I couldn't agreee more. Those hits are so close to being illegal and reckless that i'd like to see them banned. You are correct that it was shoulder to shoulder but like i said, i wonder if guys will take the risk of a hit like that missing and putting a guy out a la Booth, Savard, Toews, etc in the future, once this headshot rule comes into play? I'd like to think not, seldom at the very least?
It's odd, NHL.com has a couple hits from the game in it's vid's section but not this one? |
| Guest9298 |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 06:07:24
I'd just like to note that Savard, Booth AND Rafalski are on MY hockey pool team. Damn it, I've had the worst luck this year... |
| Guest6057 |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 00:18:20
Fat Elvis - I agree 100%. It's the "blindside" part of the hit that is the problem. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 03/25/2010 : 00:10:14
What a difference an inch or two makes......but enough of my wife's complaints..
I saw the hit and it was shoulder on shoulder, perfectly legal, inarguably a blindside, and that is what I, anyways, wonder about. Is a blindside hit going to become part of the problem as well as a headshot, which in this case, thankfully, it wasn't.
The danger of such a hit, IMO, isn't so much, where the contact is made, shoulder to shoulder, head, etc., but more to the point that the hitee has no idea it is coming, or should be coming, as in all the cases so far, Savard, Booth, and now Rafalski, the hitter, came from a blindsided angle. Maybe that should be called as the dangerous, somewhat cheap hit, that it is.
Straight from the side, face to face, these are hits that at least allow the hitee, to look, see and react to the oncoming contact. Hits from behind, and these blind, almost 45 degree angle, off balance hits, are not necessary, and overtly, gratuitously violent and cheap. Taking them out of the game, hurts it in no way, and improves the physical game, by allowing the players to take the big legal hit when it's there, and by letting the game continue, when it isn't, instead of these incessant delays to check for the players' pulse, when the questionable hits are allowed to be used and almost always result in an injury, or at the very least, another useless scrum. |
|
|
