In the never ending saga of concussions
View Single Post
06-07-2011, 01:23 PM
Join Date: Jun 2006
Originally Posted by
An aside WRT Rome-Horton hit. It is very similar to the lateral direction that Joe Thornton took when he exited penalty box and positioned himself that (unsuspecting) player ran into him, which resulted in a two RS game suspension. I looked carefully at the replays and Horton was focused on shooting the puck and had no idea there was a guy coming from his side (which was behind his head which was turned to make the pass). So, given that, I think that a Rule 48 suspension is warranted.
Now, on to the more general issue...
Many of the possible "remedies" have been iterated in stories above in this thread.
My gut tells me that the owners never want to lose key players to concussions (Sidney Crosby -- league wide loss, for example #1) or other significant injuries, not only for pure business reasons, but also as sometimes they look on the players as their "kids"; however, some of their attempts to legislate more severe punishments or remedies have been met with resistance from the union.
The league/owners have wanted mandatory face shields to prevent (some) facial/eye injuries (not only because they'll have lower insurance premiums), but there has been push back from the union to even grandfather it in. (The AHL and ECHL have been able to mandate it for players in their leagues, although AIUI some of the NHL-contracted players are not subject to that rule in the A.)
The Q just mandated zero tolerance on head hits. The NHL could go this far as well (no "targeted" head hits has been on the books a while, but this would go further to even penalize inadvertent hits that ended up with head being hit).
That still does not fully address "legal" hits, i.e., open ice checks, that result in concussion from the collision, nor the situation where a "legal" hit results in player hitting something solid (i.e., glass, boards, ice) which causes a concussion. I don't know how to eliminate those two situations without banning hitting altogether, which would drastically change the game.
Thanks for the well-explained reply. It seems that we have a similar perspective.
I will add this though, it's been stated that such a hit could not be said as being typical of Rome... So I hope that the reality isn't that a great majority of players don't have to experience these kinds of hits, either giving or receiving, before they start playing in a such way that doesn't too often cross over from being aggressive to being dangerous.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by MoreOrr