Update (1:27 PM, 11. Nov): Dave at Gorilla Crouch has a good idea: “I think the league needs to look into developing better helmets.” That would definitely help, but I wonder how the players would react. We’ve already seen how little they want to have visors imposed on them, and a new helmet may get a similar reaction. That doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be worth doing, however. – Matt
According to CBC, the League GMs met in Toronto on Tuesday, and viewed a tape of various hits similar to that of Raffi Torres on Jason Williams. They were asked whether or not they thought the NHL was handling the issue of hits to the head properly. The answer, apparently, was yes.
“… we have to be careful because we’re not allowing low hits, if we eliminate all hits to the upper body, what’s left? Hits to the belly button? We can’t forget we are a physical game.”
Wait a second. I thought we were talking about hits to the head. Who said anything about eliminating “all hits to the upper body”? No one, as far as I know.
My position on the issue is this: the NHL is in danger of being crimminally negligent if they insist on hiding behind the assertion that hits to the head are inseperable from upper body hits. How can anyone say or imply that with a straight face?
In football, a sport even more physical than hockey, a defensive player cannot lay out a quarterback with helmet-to-helmet contact, nor can he hit the QB after the release of the ball if he has any ability to avoid the hit. This is especially true in college football but it goes for the NFL as well. In no way do such rules detract from the physical nature of football. Rather, they protect players from unnecessary violence and keep the hitting within certain bounds while still allowing for some pretty spectacular contact.
There is no helmet-to-helmet contact in the NHL, but there are sometimes body checks to the head, such as what Torres dealt to Williams. Contrary to what the GMs might think, legislating these hits to the head would not mean removing upper body contact. It would mean a safer game and, by that, I mean a game without a potentially deadly, or seriously injuring, element. It woudn’t be safe like golf, if that’s the concern. Hockey can be physical without hits to the head, believe me. We see it all the time.
The traditionalists in authority within the League can try to further institutionalize potentially scandalous violence in the game, or they can protect their players (not just the stars) by punishing head contact regardless of intent. As of now, they look for intent to injure only, rather than punishing all such hits.
How does it help the game’s image when someone flipping through the channels Wednesday night might have come across the picture of Williams lying limp in the corner with a team of paramedics, trainers, and doctors kneeling by him with a stretcher? If such a person were to have seen the replay and stuck around long enough to find out that Torres was not penalized in any way, they may very well have been shocked and perhaps their pre-existing Slap Shots-esque perception of hockey would have been enforced. A similar situation in the NFL or NCAA would have at least resulted in a 15-yard penalty, leaving the same viewer with at least sense of justice administered.
If a defensive lineman in football can be expected to pull up on a QB, who, mind you, he is supposed to tackle with all the speed and intensity in his being, an NHL player can be expected to avoid head contact when trying to knock someone off the puck.
Torres’ hit was legal within the current NHL rules. That doesn’t mean those rules are right.
What is it going to take for the League to see it?