HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Pittsburgh Penguins
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

GM's head shot solution

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-11-2010, 11:51 AM
  #51
Jag68Sid87
Nothing Else Maattas
 
Jag68Sid87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 30,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HandshakeLine View Post
What I will say that I like about the rule, is that it does give a bit of lee-way for players to learn how to adapt to it-- e.g. where you make the first point of contact. I don't think it's going to solve the problem of big hits that lead to concussions, but what it is going to do is change the style of hitting. How well players like Cooke adapt is something to be seen, and will certainly be a factor in his value as a UFA, I think. I'm just glad we're spared KHL rules for all the Mrs. Lovejoys in the audience.

But we're still going to see people get lit up and get concussions directly from these hits. And then people will demand that GM's find some other aspect of the league to tinker with. It's a cycle that I don't see ending any time soon.
Yep, I fear the same thing. In my opinion, they should have started the crackdown on concussions with equipment, not a specific type of hit that is going to cause all kinds of grey areas to referees.

Why isn't every chin strap fastened tightly on helmets? Why doesn't everyone wear a mouthguard, no questions asked? Why aren't visors mandatory yet? Why did they soften the elbow pad but not the shoulder pad? If a guy gets a hard-shell elbow to the head, he should be banned for life. Easy solution. Instead, they soften the part of the equipment that's illegal, rather than the legal part.

The league has really dropped the ball here, imo.

Jag68Sid87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-11-2010, 11:58 AM
  #52
Jag68Sid87
Nothing Else Maattas
 
Jag68Sid87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 30,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorpseLW View Post
I like Burke's comment in there about a guy who earns a living doing this ought to be doing something else for money:

"It's a predatory act," added Burke. "If it's a case where this is how a player is making his living, he should be making his living doing something else."
I love Burke, and I've been vocal about that, but that's a pretty hypocritical statement from him. He's going to be the first one to offer Cooke a four-year contract this July 1. He LOVES guys who make a living as a hitter/predator. So, this is silly.

Jag68Sid87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-11-2010, 12:16 PM
  #53
Ugene Malkin
GOING FOR DRUNK
 
Ugene Malkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 23,358
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag68Sid87 View Post
Yep, I fear the same thing. In my opinion, they should have started the crackdown on concussions with equipment, not a specific type of hit that is going to cause all kinds of grey areas to referees.

Why isn't every chin strap fastened tightly on helmets? Why doesn't everyone wear a mouthguard, no questions asked? Why aren't visors mandatory yet? Why did they soften the elbow pad but not the shoulder pad? If a guy gets a hard-shell elbow to the head, he should be banned for life. Easy solution. Instead, they soften the part of the equipment that's illegal, rather than the legal part.

The league has really dropped the ball here, imo.
I like those choices you bring up on the softer shells on the shoulder and elbow caps.
Players ultimately have to commit to protecting each an every player on the ice, no matter which team they may be on should be #1. Cooke new exactly what he was doing.

Ugene Malkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-11-2010, 02:05 PM
  #54
SkullSplitter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 4,845
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag68Sid87 View Post
What this eliminates, almost completely, is a forward hitting an opponent in open ice. Think about it. How many instances will a forward be face to face with an opponent? Forwards hit in open ice when they are side to side with them. This means that a forward will have to be skating backwards, standing still or well in their own end to get a chance to hit an opponent in open ice. That, in itself, promotes more neutral-zone trapping. If you think about it.

Don't like this rule at all. I understand why they're doing it, but it's an overreaction in my view.
How many times are those hits also directed to the head? It's not all blindside hits, just blindside hits that are directed to the head.

If that is too harsh how about let refs call Toronto and ask for hits to be reviewed. . . or just have all hits resulting in injury be reviewed.

SkullSplitter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-11-2010, 02:34 PM
  #55
Jag68Sid87
Nothing Else Maattas
 
Jag68Sid87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 30,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by spectraljulian View Post
How many times are those hits also directed to the head? It's not all blindside hits, just blindside hits that are directed to the head.

If that is too harsh how about let refs call Toronto and ask for hits to be reviewed. . . or just have all hits resulting in injury be reviewed.
So, they're going to give a two-minute minor penalty to a blindside hit to the head? Highly unlikely. The 2 minutes they incorporated in the rule is likely for a blindside or back-pressure or lateral hit that wasn't a damaging blow to the head.

Otherwise, there really is no purpose to the two-minute minor now is there?

Jag68Sid87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-11-2010, 09:10 PM
  #56
Uncle Jorgi
Registered User
 
Uncle Jorgi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Cranberry Twp, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,485
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag68Sid87 View Post
So, they're going to give a two-minute minor penalty to a blindside hit to the head? Highly unlikely. The 2 minutes they incorporated in the rule is likely for a blindside or back-pressure or lateral hit that wasn't a damaging blow to the head.

Otherwise, there really is no purpose to the two-minute minor now is there?
I could totally have misread it, so take this with the grain of proverbial salt, but from what i've read i thought the difference between the two was the 2 minute penalty was for a blindside or lateral hit that resulted in a headshot, even if it was unintentional, and the 5 minute major was reserved for plays where the ref judged that the player delivering such a hit was intentionally targeting the head, almost like a variation of a match penalty specifically reserved for headshot hits.

Uncle Jorgi is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:23 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.