HFBoards

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

Bettman 5 step plan against concussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-14-2011, 09:22 PM
  #76
Captain Gorges
Registered User
 
Captain Gorges's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 211
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habaddict View Post
Seems like a problem of what came first.

The Chara or the Egg.
(and he does look a little like a misbegotten ostrich )


??

Captain Gorges is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2011, 09:31 PM
  #77
Le CH
Registered User
 
Le CH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,247
vCash: 500
I would like to see these aspects adopted...

- Ask the "victim" how he feels and how he saw the play unfold not just the perpetrator.
- The NHLPA should be involved with the final decision of whether a suspension is warranted and if so, the length of the suspension. Put some of the onus on the players association for the final verdict.

Le CH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2011, 09:38 PM
  #78
Sined
The AndroidBugler!
 
Sined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,528
vCash: 500



Last edited by Sined: 03-14-2011 at 09:45 PM.
Sined is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2011, 09:41 PM
  #79
Nashy
The Honey Badger
 
Nashy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,284
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sined View Post
Every time I see Bettman, I can't help but think why in the **** would you want to put a hockey team in the desert and call that good business?

Nashy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2011, 09:44 PM
  #80
MasterDecoy
Carlos Danger
 
MasterDecoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Beijing
Posts: 10,541
vCash: 500
concussions are a huge part of the problem, but 'accidental' knee-on-knee is also very bad and needs to be addressed

MasterDecoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2011, 09:51 PM
  #81
googlymoogly
Registered User
 
googlymoogly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nashy View Post
Every time I see Bettman, I can't help but think why in the **** would you want to put a hockey team in the desert and call that good business?
Sort of like putting a beach volley ball team in Yellowknife.

googlymoogly is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2011, 10:05 PM
  #82
Nashy
The Honey Badger
 
Nashy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,284
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by googlymoogly View Post
Sort of like putting a beach volley ball team in Yellowknife.
Pretty much...

Pretty cool that the NHL gets to own one of the teams....there's no conflict of interest there, but then again, they're no stranger to that game either.

Nashy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2011, 10:34 PM
  #83
bentheprop
Registered User
 
bentheprop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: St Catharines, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 600
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by googlymoogly View Post
Whenever a player is injured during an illegal on ice action that player shall be suspended minimum one game. You are allowed only three of those infractions during your career. On 4th infraction you are suspended for 40 games no matter the outcome. This will take out the cheapshot artists from the league.
The problem I have with this is that if someone is injured during a fight it will cause the other player to be suspended. Even if the injured player is the one that started the fight. If you want to avoid this scenario you need to tweak the wording a little bit to allow an exception.

bentheprop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2011, 10:47 PM
  #84
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 22,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeThreeKings View Post
This doesn't bother Boston as their players still don't get suspended.
Exactly.

It should a case by case basis. Fine the organization if the player is suspended from the get-go. Don't wait if the team has had multiple suspensions for their players.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sXe View Post
As useless as those proposals are, it's nothing compared to the insult of seeing the inertia of Pierre Gauthier. What happened to the Habs organization leading the way ? Our DG goes there and then becomes a sheep and just repeats the party line.
I've been saying this all year. Gauthier is a magor pansy. Nothing will get done with this guy on board, he's not a NHL GM. He should be some lowly administrator in an office somewhere.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2011, 11:08 PM
  #85
Forsead
Registered User
 
Forsead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Québec City
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
I've been saying this all year. Gauthier is a magor pansy. Nothing will get done with this guy on board, he's not a NHL GM. He should be some lowly administrator in an office somewhere.
How in hell can you say he is a major pansy ? Do you know him ? I beg to differ to your others points, the guy has been an NHL DG in two others organizations before and don't forget his career as head scout. He's in the hockey business for more than 25 years, how can you say he should be there when the guy had a successfull long career in hockey WTF ? Sorry, but your hate is irrationnal.

Forsead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2011, 11:43 PM
  #86
Newhabfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 2,050
vCash: 500
What I see is ...

"We do not want to reduce the incidence of injure causing behaviors (since this sells tickets). We just want to limit the potential damage they do (see changing the equipment, the doctor control and the arenas)" Point 3 is hypocritical (since they are the ones handling the suspensions and most of the major injuries got no suspensions) and point 5...have a commission make recommendations that we will ignore.

Basically: "What Chara did was OK, we want to make money out of this stuff. We'll just want to make it less probable that a players dies. Before my current contract expires."

Newhabfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2011, 08:39 AM
  #87
Maverik
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 579
vCash: 500
Can't wait to see the NHL fine a team like Phoenix, Colombus, Atlanta or any team running a loss right now...

That will never happen

Maverik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2011, 09:10 AM
  #88
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,288
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaseballCoach View Post
Smoke and mirrors.

If you don't suspend the players who cause the concussions, you cannot correctly fine the teams that get "lots of suspensions".
Precisely.

The proposed action plan is simply a means to outlast the attention span of media and get the league past the current furor.

In the interview segments I heard yesterday, when asked about the concussion epidemic the GM's simply rehashed statements about how great the NHL "product" is, how fans don't want the game changed, blah blah blah. I didn't get a sense there is an appetite to put in measures to protect the players at all, and many appear to want to forget that the players are "the product".

Among those that I was disappointed with was Pierre Gauthier, who did not sound like a man that had recently lost one of his most promising players to a career threatening injury. Methinks the disconnect between the league (Bettman and the BoG's) and the fans is widening daily and that's not good.

Agnostic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2011, 09:37 AM
  #89
HomaridII
Registered User
 
HomaridII's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Montreal, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,779
vCash: 500
I love the idea Gagnon just tweeted. Put in place Lemieux's suggested fine system, but make it count against the cap.

You'll see how quickly cheap shot artists like Gilles and Cooke would be either out of hockey or would have to change behaviour.

HomaridII is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2011, 09:43 AM
  #90
goman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RushDP View Post
Drinking KoolAid is what comes to mind when i read your post.

The purpose of the discussions are to find consensus on reducing concussions not how to ascertain the gravity of them after the fact. Although that is commendable regadless.

The content of the 5 year plan is full of hot air. That you see solid stuff in there means you are buying the "glass hurt Patches not Chara" spiel. Sorry to blow your bubble but I can't remember the last time somebody nailed the stanchion at the Bell Centre and broke his neck. Blaming Bell Centre glass and the stanchion is juvenile and ridiculous. Our players play there 41 games per season and they seem fine. Besides, they were changing the glass anyway so why do people focus on this so much?

If I wasn't already convinced that the 5 point plan was meaningless you just convinced me of its uselessness.
Whoa, whoa, I've just convinced you the 5 point plan is meaningless because...I think there's some good ideas in there? I don't understand.

And saying I think rinks should have better safety standards means I think the glass hurt Patches and not Chara? You're acting as if this 5 point plan was meant to specifically address that particular incident and not the issue as a whole.

For the record, I think Chara DID mean to do what he did...but I still think there's a safety hazard in the Bell Centre. I think both parts of the equation should be addressed.

And you don't think there's a problem with the rink because no one else has broken their neck there? So...if another guy breaks his neck in the same spot...will you consider it a problem then? I just don't understand how I'm being the illlogical one here. I'm not critisizing the organization, or defending the NHL's treatment of this Chara/Pacioretty hit. I'm not just saying we should be doing what we can to improve safety around the league and increasing safety standards for the rinks sounds like a good idea.

goman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2011, 10:01 AM
  #91
goman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Headshots lead to what exactly?..Broken legs?

Headshots and Concussions go hand in hand, I really don't understand how you defer both.

Those set of rules are good, but they don't touch the issue at hand.
If you need a test from a Doctor before stepping on the ice when having symptoms of a concussion, well, you already HAVE a concussion. So, there's no prevention.
Fixing the equipment seems a lot more like a joke than anything. Even in the NFL with much better helmets, they don't prevent concussions.
Fixing the arenas?..Well, that still doesn't touch all of the many situations that resulted in open ice. Also, many teams already have better hit-absorption glass.
Fining the coaches and owners for repeat offenders sounds like a rule that will be left for interpretation again, which seems to be the biggest problem revolving around the hits leading to concussions. How Savard, Richards and Chara escape suspensions made absolute no sense. It was actually contradictory when looking at other players that did get suspended for similar hits.

Having a small committee to ''further address the issue'', whatever that means, isn't reassuring either.

As many said, this seems a lot more like a ''let's do the minimum to appease the masses''.

To me it was simple. Give clear and strict punishments for hits involving the head. Make it extra clear so that it will never be left for interpretation. No matter the intent, you get a clear suspension. The players will have to start using their heads and be more careful, ya, boohoo. When someone crosses the street without looking at incoming traffic or the lights, people will slow down regardless because nobody wants to kill a jaywalker. So, if someone skates with his head down, down aim the head. Doesn't mean you can't deliver a good shoulder to shoulder hit, but make sure the head is not the prime target. Simple and clear.
I agree, headshots and concussions go hand in hand. But what the NHL was saying was there are also a lot of concussions that are happening as a result of things other than hits to the head. So all I was saying is let's evaluate the 5 step plan based on that.

That being said, I think there definitely does need to be something done about headshots. Specifically, I think they should be made illegal. It just doesn't make any sense to me. I don't think it reduces the physicality of the game. I can't picture a scenario where a player could hit someone in the head and nowhere else, meaning a player can still make a hit, and just choose to not target the head. In fact, forget "not target the head", the mentality should be "avoid the head".

I would make it an automatic 2 game suspension for any hit to the head. I think the players are too far and too strong and I don't think it would hurt the game to have them out.

For those who believe that headshots are part of the game and something the public wants...just show a casual fan the Cooke on Savard hit or the Paille hit, or the Richards hit...the result is always the same, they grimace and turn away. No one wants to watch that kind of brutality. If they do, they can watch MMA.

So that's how I would address headshots. But I also support looking at ways of preventing concussions that come as a result of something other than concussions, because that's the real issue.

If guys were getting hit the way they are and not getting hurt, it wouldn't be an issue. Clearly the issue is the fact that many players (including the best, most marketable players in the game) are getting hurt and having their careers shortened and seeing their quality of life diminish. So concussions IS the issue.

Seems like legislation to prevent headshots + measures to prevent concussions that occur from things other than headshots is the right way to go about addressing the issue. So now let's see the NHL's plan to prevent headshots...

goman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2011, 10:21 AM
  #92
neofury*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
I can't believe how every thread somehow leads to irrational hate of Gauthier. It really makes me being a hab fan sometimes.

Let's hate on our GM whose been solid because he doesn't openly say "**** you Chara, **** you the NHL, heck leafs you didn't even do anything but**** you too".

I mean come on, the guys professional and people complain. But if he did what all the haters are saying he should do, they'd all be hating saying that he's being so unprofessional blah blah blah.

People hate it when you're better then them, they ain't hate start worrying then

neofury* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2011, 10:31 AM
  #93
Noldo
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,023
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goman View Post
Seems like legislation to prevent headshots + measures to prevent concussions that occur from things other than headshots is the right way to go about addressing the issue. So now let's see the NHL's plan to prevent headshots...
I think the current situation surrounding the measures to prevent headshots and concussions is quite nicely presented in Globe and Mail article (sorry if that has been posted already.

I doubt that anyone would per se be opposed to measures that would remove headshots. But as discussion around the topic have quite nicely demonstrated, very many fans and apparently also league officials / owners / GMs do not want to change to game in order to achieve the goal (and to an extent rightly so).

The difficult question will be: how can such dangerous plays be reduced with minimal affect to the game in other regards? I think that league does the right thing if they look the issue carefully, what seems to be the purpose of the new committee.

Noldo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2011, 10:51 AM
  #94
ThaDevilGirl
Registered User
 
ThaDevilGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: YFC/YUL
Country: Portugal
Posts: 10,857
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomaridII View Post
I love the idea Gagnon just tweeted. Put in place Lemieux's suggested fine system, but make it count against the cap.

You'll see how quickly cheap shot artists like Gilles and Cooke would be either out of hockey or would have to change behaviour.
Yep. I came here to post about this. Make the fines big, and make them hurt.

ThaDevilGirl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2011, 10:53 AM
  #95
goman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noldo View Post
I think the current situation surrounding the measures to prevent headshots and concussions is quite nicely presented in Globe and Mail article (sorry if that has been posted already.

I doubt that anyone would per se be opposed to measures that would remove headshots. But as discussion around the topic have quite nicely demonstrated, very many fans and apparently also league officials / owners / GMs do not want to change to game in order to achieve the goal (and to an extent rightly so).

The difficult question will be: how can such dangerous plays be reduced with minimal affect to the game in other regards? I think that league does the right thing if they look the issue carefully, what seems to be the purpose of the new committee.
Thanks, good article.

I understand the concern about not wanting to change the game but I don't think eliminating checking to the head will do that. Either way, I know I'd much rather see Sidney Crosby lighting it up than see someone like Gilles nail someone. I know there's always the chance of a star player getting injured in another way but there aren't many stars who have to retire because of a hit unless it is a concussion.

What if Sid doesn't come back until next year, gets hit again and then has to retire? Hockey is a physical game and it's part of what makes the game great but we're talking about brain injuries. If we have to change the game to protect players from brain injuries I'm for it.

goman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2011, 01:04 PM
  #96
sXe
Yuuuuuup!
 
sXe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,734
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by neofury View Post
I can't believe how every thread somehow leads to irrational hate of Gauthier. It really makes me being a hab fan sometimes.

Let's hate on our GM whose been solid because he doesn't openly say "**** you Chara, **** you the NHL, heck leafs you didn't even do anything but**** you too".

I mean come on, the guys professional and people complain. But if he did what all the haters are saying he should do, they'd all be hating saying that he's being so unprofessional blah blah blah.

People hate it when you're better then them, they ain't hate start worrying then
I actually really like Gauthier, I think he's making good enough hockey decisions. That being said, we will see what happens and if the Molsons feel the same way.

But merely one week after his owner said they would play an important role in taking a stance on dangerous hockey plays and the same day that Goeff Molson meets with the players to insure everything will be done for their safety, he comes out saying he is doing nothing.
All of this is Bettman's ideas, it's all been discussed weeks before the Patches incident that is what is disappointing. I'm not saying it's easy doing anything but not even trying is kinda frustrating.

sXe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2011, 01:05 PM
  #97
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 24,603
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goman View Post
I agree, headshots and concussions go hand in hand. But what the NHL was saying was there are also a lot of concussions that are happening as a result of things other than hits to the head. So all I was saying is let's evaluate the 5 step plan based on that.
What other things from headshots lead to concussions?...Shoving someone's head in the turnbuckle??..Fine, but that wasn't discussed, unless I missed the part where they remove the stanchion between benches, or was that the ''expert will come evaluate rinks'' genius idea? but then, you will still always have the stanchion between the benches and the crowd at the extremities.
Hits from behind can lead to concussions, but these are already penalized. The boards are not the ones responsible and the NHL will never put in soft rubber boards, so let's start giving out harsher suspensions to the players. But no, that's not what was done, they, again, need an expert to evaluate the rinks. Shoving someone's head into the boards will, more often than not, lead to a concussion or injury, no matter how shaky you make the glass.

Finally, another main thing that is a major cause for concussions, headshots. That was not addressed.


I did evaluate the 5 point plan, and I find it laughable.
Let's blame the equipment and ''fix'' it, let's prohibit players from playing with concussion symptoms (wow, genius! ), let's blame the rinks and ''fix'' them, let's blame the owners/coaches and give them a phone call after one of their players give a concussion related hit only to hear them say ''it was an accident'' which would clear them from any fines. Finally, let's have a 4men committee to further discuss this urging matter because we don't want to think about it for now.

The plan is an absolute joke and was only put in place to appease the public/media/sponsors/etc..


I'm behind my computer, in front of my big screen TV, in my bed, and I can come up with a very fast, simple, clear, and effective rule to PREVENT head hits. Give out harsh suspensions + fines to any hit related to the head. That's it, that's all.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2011, 01:20 PM
  #98
goman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
What other things from headshots lead to concussions?...
From the TSN article...

Quote:
According to the league, 26 percent of concussions this season have been caused by 'accidental' collisions, while 44 percent occurred from what the NHL considers a 'legal' hit. Eight percent of concussions are caused due to fighting while 17 percent fall under the heading of an 'illegal' hit.

"My position is there should be no head hits," said Penguins GM Ray Shero. "That's the position of the Penguins, that's mine, and I brought it up today in our group."

The hits described add up to 95 percent. The league left five percent as "reason not available" since it could not locate video of every hit.

The good news is that only 17 percent of all man-games lost this season are due to concussions. That number is down from 44 percent last season.
Those are the NHL's numbers so take them as you will.

goman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2011, 01:39 PM
  #99
goman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
I did evaluate the 5 point plan, and I find it laughable.
Let's blame the equipment and ''fix'' it, let's prohibit players from playing with concussion symptoms (wow, genius! ), let's blame the rinks and ''fix'' them, let's blame the owners/coaches and give them a phone call after one of their players give a concussion related hit only to hear them say ''it was an accident'' which would clear them from any fines. Finally, let's have a 4men committee to further discuss this urging matter because we don't want to think about it for now.

The plan is an absolute joke and was only put in place to appease the public/media/sponsors/etc..


I'm behind my computer, in front of my big screen TV, in my bed, and I can come up with a very fast, simple, clear, and effective rule to PREVENT head hits. Give out harsh suspensions + fines to any hit related to the head. That's it, that's all.
It's not necessarily about blaming one thing or another. It's about doing what you can to make things safer. I know some of these things might seem obvious but none of them are currently happening so the implementation of these steps is a step in the right direction.

Also, I think you've simplified the steps as a way of marginalizing them. ie your comment about preventing players from playing with concussion symptoms.

That seems obvious, but updating league protocol is a real step. Currently, it is up to the team to decide what to do with a player. Normally, a player comes back to the bench, talks with a trainer in front of his coach and teammates and a decision is made right there. Obviously, that's a lot of pressure on the player to try to stay in the game and doesn't really offer a great opportunity to examine the player.

Sometimes players go back to the locker room to be examined but again, this is usually done by a trainer, not a doctor. While trainers are very knowledge of sports injuries, it stands to reason that a doctor would be able to provide a more accurate assessment.

So I think this step alone is a big deal. Again, it might seem obvious but it's not currently in place and had it been, we may still have Crosby and Savard playing.

As for your comments about the rink, again I think you've attempted to marginalize them despite the fact that the safety standards could play a huge role in preventing concussions. This includes the stancions, glass, boards and maybe nets. I don't have any answers as I'm not an expert but I think it would be a benefit, perhaps a great benefit, for this to be examined. For all we know it was the glass that really hurt Crosby or the boards that hurt Bergeron. We've seen many players hurt hitting the top of the boards, perhaps there's a better solution there.

I don't believe the league was suggesting they would phone teams and ask them if they thought there players were intentionally injuring other players with the hope that some teams would say "Yes" and accept a fine which is what you've suggested. I believe the league was suggesting additional penalties would be given to the team of any repeat offenders. ie if Matt Cooke is suspended again, the Penguins would be fined.

And if you don't know what to do about something I think it makes sense to create a group of people who might know best how to figure it out rather than just deciding to do something. No?

Finally, thank you for the description of where you are sitting while typing this.

By the way, how do you decide when to fine someone vs suspend them?

goman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-15-2011, 01:48 PM
  #100
29dryden29
Registered User
 
29dryden29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,937
vCash: 500
I agree something needs to be done about the equipment guys wear it would go a long way towards helping lower the number of concussions. That said I do not want to take many more steps in things we already have a headshot rule i do not agree with adding a north south ruling to it leave it with blindsides only much more tampering and they may as well take hitting right out of the game.

29dryden29 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 05:49 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.