View Single Post
Old
10-08-2011, 02:05 AM
  #10
Ribban
Registered User
 
Ribban's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: USA
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Systemfel View Post
The exciting hits are basically gone already in the SEL. Now anytime there's a big hit, there's a big uproar and Aftonbladet's writers go nuts.
If you say so (I no longer watch enough SEL to have an educated opinion). But, I believe the # of big hits in the NHL, for example, will decline drastically as well. I can't find the link to a TSN article that I read last season, or maybe offseason, discussing the trend of less "physical penalties," and whether it is a good or bad thing for hockey in general and the NHL in particular. The stats were nicely outlined and illustrated the trends well.

At any rate, as the game is getting faster, the "big" hits are tougher to execute, hence they might jeapordize one's own team, as it more or less means that a defender is now out of position whether he nails the other guy or not.

In Sweden, I honestly feel, that the examples of "scandalous" "molestations" & "assaults" on ice ( ) we see in Swedish hockey today, should tell us that we are not as successful as we should be in teaching our young players to be prepared and absorb checks. Part of it is the larger ice surface, which let's you get away with less attention to head & body positioning, but in general, people are taught to hold on to the puck for too long (keeping possession), which makes them easier targets.

As I watched the NYR - LA game tonight (TiVO), the NBC clowns were discussing the MZA hit from behind and how it most likely will result in a couple of games suspension. They were saying that it wasn't a matter of how hard or soft the hit was, but rather the lack of respect shown by MZA when hitting a guy from behind, with no intent to seperate the opponent from the puck (the puck was nowhere near).

I can't say I disagree with their assessment of MZA's idiotic move (Mike Milbury argues the opposite, which really supports my idea of being on the right track). I mean, why would MZA be suspended only if the other guy gets hurt, but walk away without or with a lesser penalty if the check doesn't result in an injury? That's not "protecting" the players. That's simply utilizing an eye for an eye, or maybe a Crosby for a goon. In that case, scrap all suspensions and bring in the no-skills-goons to have bench clearing brawls all night, every night, to "settle the issues." This might entize Milbury and a handful of other rednecks, but I believe it would be terrible news for the business of hockey.

Checking might very well be more or less gone from all of hockey in just a few years because it yields no benefit then, much like big open ice hits are today just as rare as mid-range backhand shots.

Ribban is offline   Reply With Quote