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

Carbo says league not severe enough about head hits

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-28-2008, 09:10 PM
  #1
rocketlives
Registered User
 
rocketlives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 793
vCash: 500
Carbo says league not severe enough about head hits

RDS polled its viewers during tonight's game against the 'Canes and 95% of them agreed with Carbo.

I've always hated those Scott Stevens type of hits where a player stalks an opponent rushing with his head down, gathers speed and then glides into his prey with his entire weight behind him and tries to decapitate him.

One day a player will be killed or paralysed for life. These attacks are most of the time on the border of being criminal acts. The league must be more severe with head hits if it wants to keep the law out of its business.

If the players are not adult enough to respect one another, the league should hurt them where it counts, i.e. in their pocketbook.

rocketlives is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-28-2008, 09:11 PM
  #2
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 25,483
vCash: 500
If this is about Weight your opinion of the hit is really stretching.

ArGarBarGar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-28-2008, 09:16 PM
  #3
rocketlives
Registered User
 
rocketlives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 793
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holiday View Post
If this is about Weight your opinion of the hit is really stretching.
It's not only about Weight. It's about all head hits where intent to injure is evident.

rocketlives is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-28-2008, 09:30 PM
  #4
Fire Brunet*
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: .-.
Posts: 5,388
vCash: 500
RDS polls are for bandwagoners

Fire Brunet* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-28-2008, 09:35 PM
  #5
Pierre Dagenais
RIP Mr. Hockey
 
Pierre Dagenais's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,577
vCash: 500
RDS polls is the best ressource for statistics

Pierre Dagenais is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-28-2008, 09:39 PM
  #6
BadHammy*
MSL For Hart!
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Right Behind Me!
Posts: 10,444
vCash: 500
I agree, I don't like allowing straight up head hits. But banning them entirely might stop hitting almost entirely, they should go for the middle ground and not penalize for incidental/accidental hits or really minor glancing blows. We want to prevent such injuries but not turn it into basketball...

BadHammy* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-28-2008, 09:52 PM
  #7
Guillemin
Registered User
 
Guillemin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,110
vCash: 500
I'm on the fence.

Sure, punish intentional hits to the head. But it's impossible to define intention, and even if there's stronger sanctions it's basically unenforceable.

And the day they take Scott Stevens'- type open ice hitss out of the league is the day I stop watching hockey.

Guillemin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-28-2008, 09:54 PM
  #8
keepcalmandbeninja
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,093
vCash: 500
.

I always advocated that the art of the bodycheck or hitting...should exclude contact with any part of the human head...

Furthermore bodychecking or hitting should be:

A shoulder to body contact...
Hip/Ass to body contact...
Torso to Torso contact...

I agree with Carbo, however I also agree with the gen pop that hits to the head is a gray area, that quite frankly should be addressed sooner than later...in fact, in hindsight...this should have been sorted ages ago...

keepcalmandbeninja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-28-2008, 09:59 PM
  #9
CoupeStanley
Registered User
 
CoupeStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Nicolet
Country: Martinique
Posts: 2,536
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to CoupeStanley
The rulebook is ridiculous.

You can probably kill someone with a legal bodycheck.

CoupeStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-28-2008, 11:09 PM
  #10
ChemiseBleuHonnete
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 9,404
vCash: 500
We're still with the same rules they used when the guys were smaller and slower. The reality changed, they have better equipement, they skate a lot faster, they're about 15 pounds of muscle heavier and therefore they hit 100 times harder. But they can smash another player's head at full speed... Ridiculous.

ChemiseBleuHonnete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2008, 12:42 AM
  #11
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 24,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guillemin View Post
And the day they take Scott Stevens'- type open ice hitss out of the league is the day I stop watching hockey.
Good. You're obviously watching hockey for the wrong reason.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2008, 05:09 AM
  #12
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,948
vCash: 500
Let's face it giving hits, it's not like it was 10, 15, 20 years ago because the game has gotten faster, the guys with special regiments have become machines on ice and the checking has become more agressive from top to bottom. Not to mention the protective gears have become like mini armors. So that when you go at full speed with the kind of body and condition the guys are these days and with these gears and hit a region of the body like the head that is less protected it can become as dangerous as a car accident. Not only that but the guys have less respect toward one another like they used to. What used to be hard open ice body checks given by the likes of Normand Rochefort, Ray Bourque, Denis Potvin where they were hitting only the chest on purpose(cause that's what a good check is), now the guys are aiming for the the head without remorse. Not to mention that the boards are harder than the old rinks so when you have a mix of all of this, the result is what happened to Andrei Kostitsyn.

Change the Rules. That's pretty much it. Checking someone on the head has now become outlawed. I've always thought the hit on Lindros by Stevens was cowardly when others were saying "classic". And now people are realising it.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2008, 05:10 AM
  #13
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,948
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by franchise player View Post
We're still with the same rules they used when the guys were smaller and slower. The reality changed, they have better equipement, they skate a lot faster, they're about 15 pounds of muscle heavier and therefore they hit 100 times harder. But they can smash another player's head at full speed... Ridiculous.
Exactly.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2008, 07:04 AM
  #14
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 25,483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
Let's face it giving hits, it's not like it was 10, 15, 20 years ago because the game has gotten faster, the guys with special regiments have become machines on ice and the checking has become more agressive from top to bottom. Not to mention the protective gears have become like mini armors.
Then changet the equipment, not the rules.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
So that when you go at full speed with the kind of body and condition the guys are these days and with these gears and hit a region of the body like the head that is less protected it can become as dangerous as a car accident.
That is why you keep your head up. If someone goes for the chest and they somehow hit your head who's fault is that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
Not only that but the guys have less respect toward one another like they used to. What used to be hard open ice body checks given by the likes of Normand Rochefort, Ray Bourque, Denis Potvin where they were hitting only the chest on purpose(cause that's what a good check is), now the guys are aiming for the the head without remorse. Not to mention that the boards are harder than the old rinks so when you have a mix of all of this, the result is what happened to Andrei Kostitsyn.
Boards give way to pressure and aren't completely rigid so there is no reason why you should mention them. Plus the issue isn't even about hits on the boards, it is about open ice hits.

Plus if someone intentionally goes for the head then yes there should be a penalty and there is on in place. However just because someone is hit in the head does not mean there should be an automatic penalty/fine in place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
Change the Rules. That's pretty much it. Checking someone on the head has now become outlawed. I've always thought the hit on Lindros by Stevens was cowardly when others were saying "classic". And now people are realising it.
Lindros had his head down. Stevens didn't use an elbow or his arms to make a check. It was clean but Lindros put his head down and got clipped by his shoulder. Nothing cowardly about it. Checking someone in the head has always been outlawed but if there is no intent there isn't a penalty and there shouldn't be.

ArGarBarGar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2008, 07:21 AM
  #15
rocketlives
Registered User
 
rocketlives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 793
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holiday View Post
Then changet the equipment, not the rules.

That is why you keep your head up. If someone goes for the chest and they somehow hit your head who's fault is that?

Lindros had his head down. Stevens didn't use an elbow or his arms to make a check. It was clean but Lindros put his head down and got clipped by his shoulder. Nothing cowardly about it. Checking someone in the head has always been outlawed but if there is no intent there isn't a penalty and there shouldn't be.


Doc, one important factor you seem to forget is the number of steps taken before making the hit. When you gather speed and then try to take someone's head off with a hit, it matters little to me whether you do it with your shoulder, your forearm or your elbow.

rocketlives is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2008, 07:37 AM
  #16
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 25,483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketlives View Post
Doc, one important factor you seem to forget is the number of steps taken before making the hit. When you gather speed and then try to take someone's head off with a hit, it matters little to me whether you do it with your shoulder, your forearm or your elbow.
Well considering that is a penalty then I have no problem with calling that.


What exactly does a charge have to do with changing rules?

ArGarBarGar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2008, 08:01 AM
  #17
Blind Gardien
Global Moderator
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 19,685
vCash: 500
Soften up some of the external surfaces of the body armour, maybe. I dunno. You can't wrap them in pillows or put airbags in. For sure players are faster and stronger and capable of inflicting more damage. But I don't like the idea of taking hitting out of the game. Or encouraging players to risk their own health for a competitive edge by seeking to be victims of headshot penalties.

I'm still thinking I'd settle for fines/suspensions based purely on injury outcomes as the lesser evil compromise in all this. Yeah, some guys are going to get suspended mostly out of bad luck. But maybe it will make the guys who really do have some malicious intent think twice on the ice. While still not taking as much of the game-action hitting away, or encouraging players to make victims of themselves.

Blind Gardien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2008, 05:19 PM
  #18
rocketlives
Registered User
 
rocketlives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 793
vCash: 500
It should be a surprise to no one that the two hockey executives who recently complained about the league not being serious enough in their efforts to curtail head hits were Guy Carbonneau and Jim Rutherford.

I believe the idea isn't to change the rules and impose heavy suspensions to all players guilty of head hits indiscriminately. There are various degrees of infractions and the guilty players should be penalized accordingly.

Intent to injure is sometimes difficult to evaluate but in most situations it should be possible, like it's done in football, to find where there is unnecessary roughness in the course of the action.

I have nothing against solid body checks to stop incoming puck carriers but when several strides are taken and the perpetrator glides into his victim with his shoulder, forearm or elbow at head level, there is definitely an intent to injure and the penalties and suspensions should be more severe if the league is serious about protecting its players.

The game is exciting enough and doesn't need these ugly and dangerous head hits to keep its fans' interest.


Last edited by rocketlives: 10-30-2008 at 04:09 AM.
rocketlives is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2008, 09:14 PM
  #19
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,105
vCash: 500
McGuire was talking about it during his bit today and I think that he's onto something. What he calls the kill shot is a big part of things, more players seek out the big hit. Players can let up if the guy is vulnerable.

For all the living room brave, 'hockey's a physical game' talk, there has never been as many hits with evil intent as you see now. There are probably a lot of factors but there's a lack of regard for players. To even suggest that hockey has always been like that suggests that you haven't watched very long.

Carbo doesn't like it, neither does Rutheford, but for all my talk, I don't have any solutions. Maybe parents not high fiving when their 12 year old lays somebody out
would be a start but who knows.

mcphee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2008, 09:37 PM
  #20
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 24,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holiday View Post
Then changet the equipment, not the rules.
Why?..the equipments are better, but more dangerous.
It's called evolution, the equipment got better, now it's time to adapt to it and new rules.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holiday View Post
That is why you keep your head up. If someone goes for the chest and they somehow hit your head who's fault is that?
I'll give you 1 000 000 000 000 000$ if you can play hockey without looking down once.
The ''keep your head up'' argument is the dumbest one anybody can use.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holiday View Post
Plus if someone intentionally goes for the head then yes there should be a penalty and there is on in place. However just because someone is hit in the head does not mean there should be an automatic penalty/fine in place.
Yes, that's exactly what it should mean. Why in God's name should head shot be permitted??..What is the point of hitting the head other than Knocking someone out?? Legal or not, it's dumb and cheap.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holiday View Post
Lindros had his head down. Stevens didn't use an elbow or his arms to make a check. It was clean but Lindros put his head down and got clipped by his shoulder. Nothing cowardly about it. Checking someone in the head has always been outlawed but if there is no intent there isn't a penalty and there shouldn't be.
There's a reason why Stevens was renowned to be a beast. He loved open ice hit and always made sure the head was the Bull's eye, that's why he injured so many people.
It doesn't matter whether he used his shoulders, elbows, or wtv. Point is, he always for some reason went for the head.



To me, there's nothing better than a clean open ice hit and see the guy get back up to finish his shift. That's truly great.
But how can anybody be for seeing a player lay motionless on the ice with some blood dripping every now and then?..Whether it's a ''clean'' hit or not is completely irrelevant. It should be penalized so that the players become more sensitive to this issue.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2008, 09:45 PM
  #21
Habbadasher
Registered User
 
Habbadasher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: My couch
Country: Germany
Posts: 1,656
vCash: 500
The OHL has banned hits to the head, I would like to know how it is working out.

So far as I can tell, there are still good hits, and fights. Sounds good to me.

Habbadasher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2008, 09:56 PM
  #22
CoupeStanley
Registered User
 
CoupeStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Nicolet
Country: Martinique
Posts: 2,536
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to CoupeStanley
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holiday View Post
Lindros had his head down. Stevens didn't use an elbow or his arms to make a check. It was clean but Lindros put his head down and got clipped by his shoulder. Nothing cowardly about it. Checking someone in the head has always been outlawed but if there is no intent there isn't a penalty and there shouldn't be.
Stevens hitted him legally but he knew very well that Lindros was becoming a force in the series and that he was a rocking check away from a carreer-ending concussion.

You can say legal hit but clean hit?

and thats not good for the league, they would be much better with guys like Lindros, Lafontaine, etc

Change the rulebook!

CoupeStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2008, 11:10 PM
  #23
Istvan
Registered User
 
Istvan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,293
vCash: 500
What is the intent behind a head shot? Is there a series of reasonable, rational intentions that i've overlooked? If player A smashes player B in the head and says "I didn't intend to hurt or injure him" then you've got to ask "what did you intend?" If player A can neutralize player B with a solid body check or a good poke check or just plain great positioning why go for the head?

It's amusing how many "bad ass" posters are happy to spew macho crap about someone else's head getting rattled. I am including prior threads on this topic.


Last edited by Istvan: 10-29-2008 at 11:58 PM. Reason: add.
Istvan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-30-2008, 06:36 AM
  #24
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Istvan View Post
What is the intent behind a head shot? Is there a series of reasonable, rational intentions that i've overlooked? If player A smashes player B in the head and says "I didn't intend to hurt or injure him" then you've got to ask "what did you intend?" If player A can neutralize player B with a solid body check or a good poke check or just plain great positioning why go for the head?

It's amusing how many "bad ass" posters are happy to spew macho crap about someone else's head getting rattled. I am including prior threads on this topic.
Part of the equation is the feeling of invincibility that the headgear gives them. Part of it is the high tempo short shifts that have to give som eplayers a sort of frantic attitude on the ice, whereas in the past, the game and play would develop a bit rather than the point a to point b style we see now.

I think th ekey is that there are a lof of factors and to dwell on one ignores the big picture. A basket full of issues have resulted in hockey being a more dangerous game. I agree that a clear attempt to hit high should be deemed an attempt to injure and shoulod be dealt with severly. I wish it was more cut and dried though.

When Robinson was still in Nova Scotia, he was called up to bolster the junior Canadiens along with Bob Murdoch [?] and a goalie to play an exhibition against a Soviet team. The Jrs. won, despite being heavy underdogs and a turning point was a huge hit in open ice. My recollection is that it was side to unsuspecting forward, separating him from receiving a pass. Probably interference these days. There was the predictable outcry, Canadian goons etc., but it changed the game, it didn't hurt Robinson as he was soon called up.

The point of the above is that the $ is so significant now, a lot of kids will do just about anything to make it.

mcphee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-30-2008, 07:12 AM
  #25
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 25,483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Why?..the equipments are better, but more dangerous.
It's called evolution, the equipment got better, now it's time to adapt to it and new rules.
No, it is called stop putting plastic in shoulder pads.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
I'll give you 1 000 000 000 000 000$ if you can play hockey without looking down once.
The ''keep your head up'' argument is the dumbest one anybody can use.
When you see a guy coming after you and you decide to lean in then yes, it is his fault. It was a terribly bad mistake of him to put his head to low to reach for the puck when someone was heading his way.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Yes, that's exactly what it should mean. Why in God's name should head shot be permitted??..What is the point of hitting the head other than Knocking someone out?? Legal or not, it's dumb and cheap.
Ummmm duuur, those people don't go for the head. However either the player is very short or they lean in, such as in this example. That isn't the hitter's fault.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
There's a reason why Stevens was renowned to be a beast. He loved open ice hit and always made sure the head was the Bull's eye, that's why he injured so many people.
Based on what?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
To me, there's nothing better than a clean open ice hit and see the guy get back up to finish his shift. That's truly great.
But how can anybody be for seeing a player lay motionless on the ice with some blood dripping every now and then?..Whether it's a ''clean'' hit or not is completely irrelevant. It should be penalized so that the players become more sensitive to this issue.
Then lets fine anyone who makes an open ice hit and it injures someone. No, that is dumb logic.

Injuries happen. When they are the result of an error by the person receiving the hit then there is no reason to punish the person making the hit. That is the reality.

ArGarBarGar is online now   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 02:02 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.