Hit by Trouba on Dal Colle

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

So, this is a huge hit that happened earlier tonight.

Dtz7H-INyDo

The announcers are very sure that it's a bad hit. But is it really? Dal Colle has his head down and is looking for the puck in his feet. It's not a charge, it's not interference because the puck's there, and Trouba hits straight through him. The only reason why the head is involved is because he has it down - there's no way to hit the rest of Dal Colle without hitting his head first.

I want this type of hit to happen still. Am I wrong?

[Textcritic]

So, this is a huge hit that happened earlier tonight.

Dtz7H-INyDo

The announcers are very sure that it's a bad hit. But is it really? Dal Colle has his head down and is looking for the puck in his feet. It's not a charge, it's not interference because the puck's there, and Trouba hits straight through him. The only reason why the head is involved is because he has it down - there's no way to hit the rest of Dal Colle without hitting his head first.

I want this type of hit to happen still. Am I wrong?
You are not wrong. But I think the League still needs to penalize head contact, if for no other reason than optics, and with the hope that it helps to reduce head injuries, which have to be the priority.

[indes]

The only bad thing about that hit is that he had to fight afterwards. Heads up on the trolley tracks!

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

I think the League still needs to penalize head contact, if for no other reason than optics, and with the hope that it helps to reduce head injuries, which have to be the priority.
So what do you want the rule to be in that situation? Trouba should be required to try and poke the puck?

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Head was down for a while. Onus is on Trouba. Ugly, ugly replays around 1min mark of that vid.

[Caged Great]

Frankly, Dal Colle is just as responsible for this hit as Trouba was. Can't be looking at your feet with the puck at the blue line.

[Hockey-and_stuff]

To me it's a perfect hit. That being said the rules are different now.

Dal Colle with his head down share some of the blame. Trouba had enough time to not obliterate him like he did. It looks like the head is the primary point of contact, it should result in a suspension if the league actually cares about the rules.

[CaptainYooh]

Trouba jumped. Both feet off the ice. It’ll be a suspension, for sure. And it should be.

[81MC]

I have no issue with that hit at all.

[dissentowner]

Too me that is a beauty hit. Keep your freakin head up.

[undercoverbrother]

The only bad thing about that hit is that he had to fight afterwards. Heads up on the trolley tracks!

The need to fight after a big clean hit is ridiculous and is a poor look on the sport.

[Harry Lime]

Trouba jumped. Both feet off the ice. It’ll be a suspension, for sure. And it should be.
His feet came off the ice as a result of contact, not before contact. Everything about this hit is borderline legal. I'm curious how the league will respond.

[indes]

Trouba jumped. Both feet off the ice. It’ll be a suspension, for sure. And it should be.

He definitely didn't jump...he barely even pushed up during the hit. His feet are off the ice after the hit because of physics.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

It looks like the head is the primary point of contact, it should result in a suspension if the league actually cares about the rules.I don't think contact with the head was "avoidable", though, and that's part of that rule. That is, I really don't see how Trouba could hit him without contact to the head. And that's Dal Colle's fault, because he's put his head down.

Basically, I don't want it to be the rule in hockey that a guy can skate around with his head down and thereby make it illegal to hit him straight on.
Trouba jumped. Both feet off the ice. It’ll be a suspension, for sure. And it should be.
See, I understand that there's room for a difference of opinion on the hit itself, but this is just a bad, uninformed take. Every hit ever where two players are going in opposite directions will result in the hitter leaving the ice post-contact. That's just physics. He absolutely didn't jump into that hit.

[Hockey-and_stuff]

I don't think contact with the head was "avoidable", though, and that's part of that rule. That is, I really don't see how Trouba could hit him without contact to the head. And that's Dal Colle's fault, because he's put his head down.

Basically, I don't want it to be the rule in hockey that a guy can skate around with his head down and thereby make it illegal to hit him straight on.

Yeah, I loved the hit personally. I was simply musing on what the leagues reaction will be. To me it's a textbook open ice hit.

[jayswin]

Trouba jumped. Both feet off the ice. It’ll be a suspension, for sure. And it should be.

No way man, the announcers made the same mistake, a mistake that gets made by fans and media every time in this situation.

Watch the replay closely (ironically the replay where the announcer is saying "Look at this he gets both feet up!!!!") he hits him and then the contact lifts both his feet off the ice, as per physics.

[Red]

Trouba jumped. Both feet off the ice. It’ll be a suspension, for sure. And it should be.

No jump at all. Beauty hit. Miss those.

Reminds me of a Philly player, name escapes me now, #20 I think that go labelled in the playoffs some 2-3, maybe 15 years ago :-)

Looked out up. Umberger got hit by Campbell. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwi3mf_Gne7nAhVTHc0KHXKvAYoQyCkwAHoECAkQB A&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DNx YHZSl9Sno&usg=AOvVaw2dVu4AoPIZEpf-vOJM0hRL

[Cecil Terwilliger]

I don’t know if jump even matters. Like it or not predatory hits are being punished.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

No jump at all. Beauty hit. Miss those.

Reminds me of a Philly player, name escapes me now, #20 I think that go labelled in the playoffs some 2-3, maybe 15 years ago :-)
Here you go!

fiWn1k50Wv0

[jayswin]

I don’t know if jump even matters. Like it or not predatory hits are being punished.

It may not matter and he still gets suspended, but let's still get it right in the discussion rather than letting false info help guide the debate.

[Textcritic]

So what do you want the rule to be in that situation? Trouba should be required to try and poke the puck?
I think it gets chalked up to unavoidable.

[Red_Baron]

Good hit in my eyes. Keep your head up kids!

[Calgary4LIfe]

Looks like a clean hit to me.

[GullFoss]

No suspension:

1) the first point of contact was the head. However the principal point of contact was the chest. Not an illegal hit

2) feet do not leave ice until after contact made

Looks 100% clean to me.

[zukes]

I have zero problem with that hit. The announcers saying he left his feet are ridiculous. He left his feet well after contact. Dude has his head down, Trouba glides into him and only hit the head because it was down in his chest. Pageau makes the suicide pass and drops the gloves to save face, imo.

[Scroopy Noopers]

I don’t know how you can penalize this “because - head contact” and just ignore the fact that someone always comes in to repeatedly strike the perpetrator in the head.

[Mass_nerder]

I'm torn.
Trouba was watching Dal Colle the entire time and could see that his head was down; I think he probably should have let up a little bit instead of completely blowing him up. There are ways to make the same play without injuring a guy.
But at the same time, Dal Colle has to have a little more awareness about where he is on the ice, and he has to know that you can't watch the puck like that.

[Textcritic]

I don’t know how you can penalize this “because - head contact” and just ignore the fact that someone always comes in to repeatedly strike the perpetrator in the head.
Because you have to. We no longer have the luxury to ignore the incredibly serious damage that multiple concussions cause, and short of removing hitting from the game entirely, measures like this will be necessary. A player who is still dumb enough to lead with his head like that while staring at the puck in his feet is going to get badly hurt, and there is probably nothing anyone can do about it. Enforcing a 2-min penalty (it is 2 mins, right?) is essentially the minimal response to this.

[Steve Bozek]

To me the hit looks predatory. Of course Dal Colle has his head down and is looking at the puck - he has just lost control of it. Trouba’s better play would be to try to take control of the puck and keep it in the offensive zone.

[Joborule]

I'm interested in the league's response to this also. Dal Cole set himself up for it by having his head down for so long, but Trouba also had plenty of time to set up for the hit, yet head contact was still the primary point.

You still want big hits that gets the fans off their seats, but don't want the head to be the primary point of contact when it happens.

I could see Trouba getting displinced for this since the hit is in the danger territory due to head contact. In this new era of concussion awareness, hits like that aren't acceptable anymore.

[TheIronMaiden]

Never look at your feet when you have the puck in open ice.

[LiquidX]

Trouba jumped. Both feet off the ice. It’ll be a suspension, for sure. And it should be.

Pretty sure that's just momentum. His feet don't leave the ice until after the hit.

As much as you want to penalize headshots - the players have to be aware and protect themselves.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Fence sitting I suppose, but to me the new rules mean you can still hit Dal Colle, but not with the intent to blow the guy up. The onus is on trouba to recognize he’s vulnerable (trouba definitely recognizes it) and not take advantage to destroy him (not so much).

Despite all the nonsense, I think Tkachuk showed this perfectly with meathead. Yes he was aggressive and hit him. He did it to embarrass, not injure.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

I'm torn.
Trouba was watching Dal Colle the entire time and could see that his head was down; I think he probably should have let up a little bit instead of completely blowing him up. There are ways to make the same play without injuring a guy.
But at the same time, Dal Colle has to have a little more awareness about where he is on the ice, and he has to know that you can't watch the puck like that.

These are exactly my thoughts verbatim. I've always seen Trouba as a bit of a predator, and this further cements those thoughts. This is 100% a legal hit, but he doesn't need to do it to that level. It shows that he doesn't really respect the other players on the ice.

That being said...Dal Colle...dude...this ain't shinny. Protect yourself in the middle of the ice.

[Scroopy Noopers]

of course he stepped in because he looked down. You don’t step in on forwards who are looking at you... that’s how you don’t make the NHL.

Marleau, looks down, Sarich engaged. It can’t be predatory for an individual when that’s what they teach you. That’s the play.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Because you have to. We no longer have the luxury to ignore the incredibly serious damage that multiple concussions cause, and short of removing hitting from the game entirely, measures like this will be necessary. A player who is still dumb enough to lead with his head like that while staring at the puck in his feet is going to get badly hurt, and there is probably nothing anyone can do about it. Enforcing a 2-min penalty (it is 2 mins, right?) is essentially the minimal response to this.

I mostly agree with you. My point is only that it has become dumb for the league to say this hit is suspendable, as they are concerned about concussions, but beating Trouba over the head isn’t a problem.

[gt4flames]

Massive hit. Looks legal to me. The size difference of the players doesn't help the cause either. Cant blow a guy up anymore without there being a he should be suspended call.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

Totally fine hit. Just looks bad when your head snaps back a bit after getting rocked. Unless they take hitting out of the game it's going to be pretty tough not to see big hits like that once in a while.

Worst part of that hit was Trouba having to fight instantly.........just absolutely ridiculous, one of the worst parts of the game today.

[soulchoice]

Clean hit and it’s hockey 101. Keep your head up and aware of your surroundings. Hard hits are a part of hockey and intimidation. Back in the day I would have never let up on someone in that position. Good hard hockey. The fight after is dumb, agreed, clean hits are a part of the game.

Even if it was a Flames player receiving the hit, I’d say keep your head up. Even if it is a predatory hit(Trouba or any player looking to line someone up), it was clean. Nothing wrong with assessing the play/player and looking for a big check.

[DoubleK]

https://media.giphy.com/media/119fHU6V541T9u/giphy.gif

[DJones]

I don't even think it's a penalty

[manwiches]

100% clean hit. Buddy has his head down for a solid 3-4 steamboats, through open ice, with the puck. straight shoulder to chest, head is incidental contact, no elevation, just straight through him. Textbook open ice hit, and he deserved it. What else is Trouba supposed to do? Play touch bum with him? Sorry bud, you got your butt handed to you, but this is the big leagues now. It'll remind him exactly what every player is taught from minors, which is don't skate with your down, especially in a situation exactly like that.

Sent from my SM-N975W using Tapatalk

[81MC]

I take issue with the notion that players should ‘let up’. What, take 25% off and hope you still lay an effective hit? So we have guys going in for checks that have to pull up, and risk making an ineffective play?
I remember Gio standing Kadri up one year, and it totally got under his skin (I think he actually had a suspension or a fine for some retaliatory action). I can’t imagine what that play would have been like if Gio has to stop and think “hm, this legal hit might be more than necessary to separate the player from the puck, I better dial it back”. Or Ferland in the Nucks series, where he literally took a player out of the play by laying him on his ass, promptly scoring thereafter.
Or Tkachuk on Kassian. Imagine expecting Matty to lay off a bit because he didn’t ‘need’ to lay into it.
You don’t want guys trying to injure players, and I don’t believe most players ever do. But to hurt your opponent? Yeah, you want them to know when you’ve hit them, not just bounce off the puck.

I think at that point you start asking players to give less than 100%, and I don’t support that in professional sports.

[indes]

I honestly think he did let up on the hit, Trouba is a big guy and he could've exploded through on that hit. Looked to me like he just braced for impact instead of going all out and going right through Dal Colle.

[Yoho]

If these type of hits are being taken out of NFL you can bet they will be taken out of hockey.

[Enoch Root]

Trouba had him lined up for a while (i.e. was in control of his actions), and drove his shoulder right onto Dal Colle's head. Principal point of contact. I would guess he will probably get 2 or 3 games.

[Samonadreau]

Keep your head up son

[CaptainYooh]

...he hits him and then the contact lifts both his feet off the ice, as per physics.
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/WelcomeFalseIndianspinyloach-size_restricted.gif

I'll just pick on this post, because a few posters are saying the same thing. Seriously, what "physics" are you talking about? Action-reaction? Impulse? Mass transfer? The hit does not by itself cause the body to lift off. It can cause a ricochet effect, if a lightweight player (e.g. Gagner) hits a heavyweight player. Or, it can cause a forward motion in the direction of a hit, when a heavy player steamrolls another player in vulnerable position. In order for the body to get up int he air, the hitter must initiate the jump, which may occur before or after the hit itself.

Trouba absolutely was in a "jump mode". And the fact that he smirked and fist-bumped his teammate when sitting in the box, tells me he wanted to do it. I will be very surprised if he doesn't get a hearing and a game.

[iloveicedhockey]

He didn't jump into the hit.

[dissentowner]

If these type of hits are being taken out of NFL you can bet they will be taken out of hockey.

Then take hitting out of hockey. Serious, if that is the way it heads you might as well just eliminate the physical element. You will also lose a large portion of the fanbase.

[N-E-B]

Put me in the camp that thinks Trouba couldn’t have done anything differently and Dal Colle needs to keep his head up.

[Mattman]

I think it's clean too. Sucks to see that happen, but you can't be looking at the puck like that in the middle of the ice.

Slowing it down from the camera angle that runs along Dal Cole's frontal plane (0:56), the point of contact is the high center of Dal Cole's chest, and the head is going to snap back as a result, making it look like his head was hit. It's still very dangerous as that can cause injury to the neck and spine.

But as far as hockey rules go it's a clean hit.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Primary contact is the head, so I think a penalty is warranted now. Not the case a few years ago, and I really don't think he did much wrong to warrant a suspension, but he might get a game. It wasn't like dal Colle changed his head angle at the last minute.

[81MC]

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/WelcomeFalseIndianspinyloach-size_restricted.gif

I'll just pick on this post, because a few posters are saying the same thing. Seriously, what "physics" are you talking about? Action-reaction? Impulse? Mass transfer? The hit does not by itself cause the body to lift off. It can cause a ricochet effect, if a lightweight player (e.g. Gagner) hits a heavyweight player. Or, it can cause a forward motion in the direction of a hit, when a heavy player steamrolls another player in vulnerable position. In order for the body to get up int he air, the hitter must initiate the jump, which may occur before or after the hit itself.

Trouba absolutely was in a "jump mode". And the fact that he smirked and fist-bumped his teammate when sitting in the box, tells me he wanted to do it. I will be very surprised if he doesn't get a hearing and a game.
I’m no physicist, but I’m pretty sure it’s momentum.
Cars can’t jump at all, yet you will almost almost see the rear of a vehicle lift when involved in a powerful collision. Roll a ball on the ground towards a wall, and it will almost always go up before coming back. Maybe an actual physicists can chime in, but I believe your premise that a jump must be initiated is entirely wrong.

[sempuki]

So what do you want the rule to be in that situation? Trouba should be required to try and poke the puck?

If you hit a guy in the head with your stick, it's a penalty -- regardless. If you hit a guy in the head with your shoulder, it's a penalty -- if you want concussions out of the game.

I'd rather see a high stick than a high hit. At least you can get new chicklets and they work just the same as the old. Ain't no replacing your brain.

[combustiblefuel]

https://media.giphy.com/media/119fHU6V541T9u/giphy.gif

Legally, yes you can. I don't see that as predatory at all. He had the puck there for your fair game outside intentionally hitting the head.

[The Yen Man]

I had no issues with Chucky's hits on Kassian, so how can I have any issues with this one? Clean hit, shouldn't even be a penalty.

[Mike F]

Watch point 2 to understand why this isn't a penalty, nevermind a suspension.

c-49929203

As others have said, Trouba shouldn't have to fight after a clean hit.

[flames_fan_down_under]

Seems like a pretty clean hit to me. Dal Colle put himself in a vulnerable position and Trouba tucked his arm and finished the check. But I truly have no idea whats clean or not anymore after the whole Kassian-Tkachuk incident.

[topfiverecords]

The elbow to Pageau after was worse.

[Itse]

If you hit a guy in the head with your stick, it's a penalty -- regardless. If you hit a guy in the head with your shoulder, it's a penalty -- if you want concussions out of the game.

I'd rather see a high stick than a high hit. At least you can get new chicklets and they work just the same as the old. Ain't no replacing your brain.

This. Players are going to be vulnerable. Making hits to the head just because their head is down can't be okay.

Does it make it more difficult to make hits? Yes. Too bad. Brain (and neck) injuries are not worth those hits.

No one is ever going to put their head down deliberately "to protect themselves" , it's ridiculous to suggest that could ever be a thing.

[Erick Estrada]

He lined him up with his head down. It's a predatory play and they type of play that they are getting rid of in football and hockey should probably follow suit.

[transplant99]

1232641050575081474

[Fan in Exile]

Trouba jumped. Both feet off the ice. It’ll be a suspension, for sure. And it should be.

Didn't jump. Didn't charge. No idea what you're talking about. However the primary point of contact was definitely the head. That's because it was out ahead of him and down while he had the puck but will likely be punished for that reason. High risk of serious injury from hits like that.

[delayedreflex]

I don't think contact with the head was "avoidable", though, and that's part of that rule. That is, I really don't see how Trouba could hit him without contact to the head. And that's Dal Colle's fault, because he's put his head down.

Basically, I don't want it to be the rule in hockey that a guy can skate around with his head down and thereby make it illegal to hit him straight on.

See, I understand that there's room for a difference of opinion on the hit itself, but this is just a bad, uninformed take. Every hit ever where two players are going in opposite directions will result in the hitter leaving the ice post-contact. That's just physics. He absolutely didn't jump into that hit.
I agree, if Trouba was a bit shorter he probably wouldn't have even hit Dal Colle's head even though it was down. It definitely looked like Trouba was aiming for the shoulder and got as low as he reasonably could. I suppose he could have thrown a hip check instead but not sure if that's really any safer.

This sort of thing has me conflicted, as I can definitely see how this sort of hit can be dangerous, but at the same time it seems ridiculous to suggest that Trouba just shouldn't have hit him. Suggesting that he could have let up more also seems to be too much of a grey area - just how big of a hit is reasonable to throw at a vulnerable player?

[Displaced Flames fan]

Pageau's fault. Horrible pass.

Clean hit

[8sPOT]

Keep. Your. Head. Up.

That was the #1 rule when playing hockey growing up, and for your own safety it should still be the #1 rule.

Beautiful open ice hit. You can't eliminate this type of hit without eliminating hitting.

[Textcritic]

Keep. Your. Head. Up.

That was the #1 rule when playing hockey growing up, and for your own safety it should still be the #1 rule.

Beautiful open ice hit. You can't eliminate this type of hit without eliminating hitting.
This is also the premise for those who sincerely believe that for the good of the players and to ensure the long-term viability and safety of professional hockey, these types of hits do need to be removed from the game. I don't know that I am necessarily one of those people, but I am greatly concerned about the issues surrounding hitting in the game today and in the future.

If you are as conflicted about head-hits like these as I am, then I think it makes sense to penalize them, even if they are unavoidable or not deliberate. I don't think there can be any grey-area where grey matter is concerned: if you make contact with another player's head, that should be a penalty every time.

[sempuki]

Keep. Your. Head. Up.

That was the #1 rule when playing hockey growing up, and for your own safety it should still be the #1 rule.

Beautiful open ice hit. You can't eliminate this type of hit without eliminating hitting.

If hits to the head with your shoulder would be treated like hits to the head with your stick, it may incidentally ban big open ice hitting, but the idea it would bad all hitting, or even any physicality, is absurd.

The purpose of a hockey check is to separate player and puck. You don't need to put people in the trolley tracks to play hard physical hockey.

Not that I make the rules, or play hockey -- my brain (mostly) works just fine.

[Erick Estrada]

Keep. Your. Head. Up.

That was the #1 rule when playing hockey growing up, and for your own safety it should still be the #1 rule.

Beautiful open ice hit. You can't eliminate this type of hit without eliminating hitting.

They have done it in football so I fail to see why they can't do it in hockey.

[soulchoice]

If hits to the head with your shoulder would be treated like hits to the head with your stick, it may incidentally ban big open ice hitting, but the idea it would bad all hitting, or even any physicality, is absurd.

The purpose of a hockey check is to separate player and puck. You don't need to put people in the trolley tracks to play hard physical hockey.

Not that I make the rules, or play hockey -- my brain (mostly) works just fine.

I get what youre saying Sempuki, but if you have played hockey on a contact level, you would also realize its not just about separating the player from the puck during the game. There is an element of intimidation and fear one wants to instil on an opposing player with an ability to put people out on the tracks.

Most puck carriers who know they may get lit up will tend to play scared or may make a bad play with the puck when there is a chance to get hammered. If a player knows there is someone out there who will demolish you the moment you put your head down or try to dangle him, there is a tendency to play differently. This happens in all level of hockey.

I would hope if it was a Flames Dman in the same situation as Trouba to not let up and give a message, just like Sarich did to Marleau. Just as if a Flames player got hit in that manner, I would say, keep your head up and be aware of your surroundings. Its a fast game.

[Erick Estrada]

I get what youre saying Sempuki, but if you have played hockey on a contact level, you would also realize its not just about separating the player from the puck during the game. There is an element of intimidation and fear one wants to instil on an opposing player with an ability to put people out on the tracks.

Most puck carriers who know they may get lit up will tend to play scared or may make a bad play with the puck when there is a chance to get hammered. If a player knows there is someone out there who will demolish you the moment you put your head down or try to dangle him, there is a tendency to play differently. This happens in all level of hockey.

I would hope if it was a Flames Dman in the same situation as Trouba to not let up and give a message, just like Sarich did to Marleau. Just as if a Flames player got hit in that manner, I would say, keep your head up and be aware of your surroundings. Its a fast game.

Things are different now though. Some players simply don't like to get hit and there's nothing wrong with laying the body on those guys in hopes of getting them off their games. However no player should ever play out of fear that his head may get taken off if he has possession of the puck on open ice.

[metroneck]

They have done it in football so I fail to see why they can't do it in hockey.

I don’t disagree, but in football the ball carrier’s head level, stays relatively consistent, unless they lower the shoulder for impact.

On the ice, a players head can be anywhere, as the look for, twist or reach for the puck, plus the speed and change of puck possession add a whole other layer.

It is hard for a ‘hitter’ to anticipate where the head will be at the time of contact.

That being said, I think more needs to be done to protect the head.

[stone hands]

I don’t disagree, but in football the ball carrier’s head level, stays relatively consistent, unless they lower the shoulder for impact.

On the ice, a players head can be anywhere, as the look for, twist or reach for the puck, plus the speed and change of puck possession add a whole other layer.

It is hard for a ‘hitter’ to anticipate where the head will be at the time of contact.

That being said, I think more needs to be done to protect the head.
not in this case

[wretched34]

Things are different now though. Some players simply don't like to get hit and there's nothing wrong with laying the body on those guys in hopes of getting them off their games. However no player should ever play out of fear that his head may get taken off if he has possession of the puck on open ice.

Fast paced contact sport.... Every player should absolutely fear his head may get taken off while he has possession of the puck. That's how you protect yourself.
If you feel like you're untouchable, you put yourself in vulnerable positions.

Until the NHL says there is no hitting allowed, players should protect themselves at all times while on the ice.

If you choose to earn millions of dollars by playing hockey, you are accepting the risks that come along with it. Just like any other profession with dangers.

[CaptainYooh]

1232641050575081474
https://y.yarn.co/91e5f9de-3ad6-4ea5-8c74-6b5fcb570e44_text.gif

[sempuki]

I get what youre saying Sempuki, but if you have played hockey on a contact level, you would also realize its not just about separating the player from the puck during the game. There is an element of intimidation and fear one wants to instil on an opposing player with an ability to put people out on the tracks.

Most puck carriers who know they may get lit up will tend to play scared or may make a bad play with the puck when there is a chance to get hammered. If a player knows there is someone out there who will demolish you the moment you put your head down or try to dangle him, there is a tendency to play differently. This happens in all level of hockey.

I would hope if it was a Flames Dman in the same situation as Trouba to not let up and give a message, just like Sarich did to Marleau. Just as if a Flames player got hit in that manner, I would say, keep your head up and be aware of your surroundings. Its a fast game.

Of course there's that element, but I don't think big open ice hits fundamentally contribute to that element, since by definition players never see the hit coming.

And it's about player brain damage -- not audience pearl clutching.

[soulchoice]

Of course there's that element, but I don't think big open ice hits fundamentally contribute to that element, since by definition players never see the hit coming.

And it's about player brain damage -- not audience pearl clutching.

Agreed on the audience aspect. True

However as someone that played a decent level of hockey, although a while ago, it certainly does play a part in how one carries or will lunge at the puck in the open ice. In this case the onus is clearly on Dal Colle to realize its best not to stare down at the puck especially in the neutral zone. It’s not like he was bending over near the boards. I can assure you unless he wants a short career he will probably not take a hit like that often.

In junior he may have had an extra second to get his head back up while retrieving the puck but in the show it’s just too fast and the players are that much bigger and stronger.

[Azure]

To me it looks like a fair amount of shoulder / chest contact which I found remarkable considering his head was so far down.

I think Trouba did a great job at trying to keep the hit as clean as possible while not holding back. Almost a hit that should be used as an example of what a good hockey hit is if a player is in that position.

[soulchoice]

To me it looks like a fair amount of shoulder / chest contact which I found remarkable considering his head was so far down.

I think Trouba did a great job at trying to keep the hit as clean as possible while not holding back. Almost a hit that should be used as an example of what a good hockey hit is if a player is in that position.

It was a textbook hit.

[Itse]

To me it looks like a fair amount of shoulder / chest contact which I found remarkable considering his head was so far down.

I think Trouba did a great job at trying to keep the hit as clean as possible while not holding back. Almost a hit that should be used as an example of what a good hockey hit is if a player is in that position.

I'm not sure I'd go that far, but despite my earlier criticism, I do agree that Trouba likely did try to keep it cleanish at the very least.

I'm more in the camp that these should be called more like highsticking, penalized even when there's clearly no malice.

[Lubicon]

So, this is a huge hit that happened earlier tonight.

Dtz7H-INyDo

The announcers are very sure that it's a bad hit. But is it really? Dal Colle has his head down and is looking for the puck in his feet. It's not a charge, it's not interference because the puck's there, and Trouba hits straight through him. The only reason why the head is involved is because he has it down - there's no way to hit the rest of Dal Colle without hitting his head first.

I want this type of hit to happen still. Am I wrong?

This hit isn't illegal but it should be (in my opinion). It's not malicious so probably warrants a minor penalty.

With our better understanding of head injuries the league probably needs to move towards something similar to minor hockey - any head contact is a penalty regardless of intent. And in this case if there is no way to avoid hitting the head then the check should not be made at all, there are other ways to get the puck (poke check for example), a body check is not necessary.

And yes I get it that hitting is part of the game. And yes people need to keep their head up but it isn't always going to happen and a player should not be penalized by injury for failure to do so.

So no, this hit does not warrant further action by the league as it was within the rules and was not malicious. But I do feel the league needs to change the rules around head contact.

[8sPOT]

This is also the premise for those who sincerely believe that for the good of the players and to ensure the long-term viability and safety of professional hockey, these types of hits do need to be removed from the game. I don't know that I am necessarily one of those people, but I am greatly concerned about the issues surrounding hitting in the game today and in the future.

If you are as conflicted about head-hits like these as I am, then I think it makes sense to penalize them, even if they are unavoidable or not deliberate. I don't think there can be any grey-area where grey matter is concerned: if you make contact with another player's head, that should be a penalty every time.

I think there should be more onus put on the players who put themselves in the vulnerable position like that. The only issue with this hit is that Dal Colle took a hit to the head.

Trouba didn't appear to target the head, but the head was in the line of fire. I agree shots to the head are dangerous, but hockey is an inherently dangerous and physical sport.

Maybe open ice hits should be removed (penalized)?

I like the hit.

[Resolute 14]

Honestly Lubicon, and despite what you are trying to say, everything about your post is arguing the removal of body contact from hockey. Full stop.

Because if you take away the ability to throw a body check because someone who isn't aware of his surroundings makes a bad decision, you're punishing the wrong behaviour.

If we're going to make that hit an automatic penalty, then we need to start throwing idiots who skate with their heads down in the penalty box too. Because if you can't touch such a player, that is exactly how they are going to play.

[Mike F]

They have done it in football so I fail to see why they can't do it in hockey.

They've done what in football? If you mean outlawed any hits to the head, that's certainly not true except in some clearly defined situations.

[Erick Estrada]

They've done what in football? If you mean outlawed any hits to the head, that's certainly not true except in some clearly defined situations.

It's even a penalty in the NFL to lead with your helmet as a ball carrier;

The new rule says: "It is a foul if a player lowers his head to initiate and make contact with his helmet against an opponent." This rule, like the crown-of-the-helmet rule, could apply to a ball carrier who initiates a blow on a potential tackler, as well as to a defender making a hit

They are taking all head contact out of the sport because we know it's bad.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Honestly Lubicon, and despite what you are trying to say, everything about your post is arguing the removal of body contact from hockey. Full stop.

Because if you take away the ability to throw a body check because someone who isn't aware of his surroundings makes a bad decision, you're punishing the wrong behaviour.

If we're going to make that hit an automatic penalty, then we need to start throwing idiots who skate with their heads down in the penalty box too. Because if you can't touch such a player, that is exactly how they are going to play.

It's an automatic penalty for high sticking, whenever a guy makes contact. The onus is on the player with the stick not to make contact whether there is intent or not. This isn't much different. Will it reduce open ice hits? Maybe. Will it eliminate hits? Doubtful.
I have no problem with how this hit was ruled. I just suspect that the NHL will likely tweak/enforce the rule whereby it is almost automatic that a head shot will be a penalty. (With the exception if the guy moves his head in a manner that makes it impossible to avoid.) I believe that is the rule in minor hockey, and frankly may be the rule in the NHL now.

[Enoch Root]

Hockey is a contact sport, so yes, when it comes to physical play and being hit, everyone that says the onus is on a player to keep their head up and protect themselves, is correct.

However, contact to the head can cause permanent damage. And the league wants to, and needs to, reduce the number of hits to the head. Not only for player safety, but also for their own liability. And if you want to accomplish that, you have to put the onus on the player making the hit to not hit the head.

Period. This isn't about a 'code'. It isn't about keeping your head up. It's about head trauma. And that will require different rules.

The only way to stop hits to the head is to put the onus on the person delivering the hit, not the person receiving it.

[Mike F]

It's even a penalty in the NFL to lead with your helmet as a ball carrier;



They are taking all head contact out of the sport because we know it's bad.

It's a penalty to lead with the helmet, but if a defender otherwise hits the ball carrier in the helmet it's fine in almost all situations.

[Mike F]

Hockey is a contact sport, so yes, when it comes to physical play and being hit, everyone that says the onus is on a player to keep their head up and protect themselves, is correct.

However, contact to the head can cause permanent damage. And the league wants to, and needs to, reduce the number of hits to the head. Not only for player safety, but also for their own liability. And if you want to accomplish that, you have to put the onus on the player making the hit to not hit the head.

Period. This isn't about a 'code'. It isn't about keeping your head up. It's about head trauma. And that will require different rules.

The only way to stop hits to the head is to put the onus on the person delivering the hit, not the person receiving it.

That's what you want the rule to be. And you're entitled to your opinion.

But the NHL took a long look at head injuries and decided some head contact was inevitable to keep the desirable level of contact in the game. As a result, hits like this are not penalized, as explained in the video I posted above.

And FWIW, it's my opinion that they struck the right balance.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

It's an automatic penalty for high sticking, whenever a guy makes contact. The onus is on the player with the stick not to make contact whether there is intent or not. This isn't much different.
Yes, it is very different, because there is absolutely nothing you can do to avoid getting a stick in the face. It's entirely on the other player to control where their stick is. It's also not an automatic penalty - it's only a penalty when the stick makes contact above shoulder-height. If, for example, you lean over to swat at a puck and your face is at waist-level, and someone accidentally hits you with their stick, they will not get a penalty for that.

Of course, it almost never happens, because it's not that often that a guy has his face at waist level, while players often put themselves into vulnerable positions where they might get rocked.

It's really hard to hit guys as it is. If you make it so that any head contact is illegal, you are definitely legislating open ice hits out of the game, because there's just no way to know for sure that there won't be head contact when you commit to a hit.

I don't want Dal Colle to be immune to being hit in that situation. I don't want him to get a free pass to carry the puck out of the zone, unless someone can poke the puck off his stick, just because he's got his head down. That feels like the wrong outcome.

[Enoch Root]

That's what you want the rule to be. And you're entitled to your opinion.

But the NHL took a long look at head injuries and decided some head contact was inevitable to keep the desirable level of contact in the game. As a result, hits like this are not penalized, as explained in the video I posted above.

And FWIW, it's my opinion that they struck the right balance.

Not what I want at all. Just where I think they have to go (even though they haven't gotten there yet)

[CalgaryFan1988]

The elbow to Pageau afterwards was almost worse than the hit itself.

[Manhattanboy]

Nice of Pageau to stick up for his new teammate and fight but man what a reckless pass.

[getbak]

Yes, it is very different, because there is absolutely nothing you can do to avoid getting a stick in the face. It's entirely on the other player to control where their stick is. It's also not an automatic penalty - it's only a penalty when the stick makes contact above shoulder-height. If, for example, you lean over to swat at a puck and your face is at waist-level, and someone accidentally hits you with their stick, they will not get a penalty for that.
Also, if a player is hit with a high stick by a player who is in the process of following through on a shot, there won't be a penalty.

Even with high-sticking, there is still an expectation that players must anticipate situations and not put themselves in an area of danger.

[GirlySports]

I've never played hockey so I have a really stupid question.
If Dal Colle doesnt look down to play the puck then what is he supposed to do? Just wave at it and skate by? Trouba would then pick up the puck and blast it.

[Scroopy Noopers]

I've never played hockey so I have a really stupid question.
If Dal Colle doesnt look down to play the puck then what is he supposed to do? Just wave at it and skate by? Trouba would then pick up the puck and blast it.

But, you watch it right? You see players staring at their feet for prolonged periods often? When you do you get Marleau, Kassian, DalColle...

He doesn’t look up ice once in the clip shared above. This is also why people are rightly blaming Pageau, you don’t suicide pass a guy like that.

[Lubicon]

It's really hard to hit guys as it is. If you make it so that any head contact is illegal, you are definitely legislating open ice hits out of the game, because there's just no way to know for sure that there won't be head contact when you commit to a hit.

I don't want Dal Colle to be immune to being hit in that situation. I don't want him to get a free pass to carry the puck out of the zone, unless someone can poke the puck off his stick, just because he's got his head down. That feels like the wrong outcome.

I see a small distinction between these two statements. On the first I would disagree and say that Dal Colle should be immune from a hit in this situation. The second statement is not the same and I'm not asking him to get a free pass to skate the puck out of the zone with his head down.

This hit occurred because the puck was in his feet and he was looking down to find it. He did not have control and thus was not a threat to carry it out of the zone until he did gain control. So in this situation my feeling is the hit is unnecessary and there were other options to take the puck away. If a guy clearly has control of the puck and is skating with his head down that is a different situation.

I don't know how you enforce it because I agree some players will take advantage and try to draw a penalty. It would also be tough for the ref to determine intent (to either draw a penalty or to hit the head) so maybe the solution is to review all head shot penalties (either real time or after the game) and take further action if necessary.

[Textcritic]

I don't know how you enforce it because I agree some players will take advantage and try to draw a penalty. It would also be tough for the ref to determine intent (to either draw a penalty or to hit the head) so maybe the solution is to review all head shot penalties (either real time or after the game) and take further action if necessary.
I don't think making these infractions discretionary is the answer. The referees already have to make way too many impressionistic decisions, and it's a mess (what even is "charging", anyways?).

I still think all head hits need to be penalised. "Intent" is impossible to determine.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk

[foshizzle11]

Honestly Lubicon, and despite what you are trying to say, everything about your post is arguing the removal of body contact from hockey. Full stop.

Because if you take away the ability to throw a body check because someone who isn't aware of his surroundings makes a bad decision, you're punishing the wrong behaviour.

If we're going to make that hit an automatic penalty, then we need to start throwing idiots who skate with their heads down in the penalty box too. Because if you can't touch such a player, that is exactly how they are going to play.

100% this, these players should know looking at your feet in open ice while the puck is there, should be a sign you are going to get nailed. This is taught from a young age, these guys should know better. Can't remove a hit like this from the league if they want body contact. I like body contact, I like those big hits, I loved it when Tkachuk nailed Kassian with a few borderline hits. Keep your head up and you wan't get run over. These guys know the consequences and know they could end up with chronic issues after they retire, but they also get paid millions of dollars to do so, they know the risk. Start a new league with no hitting if that is what these guys want. Until then, keep these hits in the game. Clean, hard body checks. No intent to injure.

[Textcritic]

100% this, these players should know looking at your feet in open ice while the puck is there, should be a sign you are going to get nailed. This is taught from a young age, these guys should know better. Can't remove a hit like this from the league if they want body contact. I like body contact, I like those big hits, I loved it when Tkachuk nailed Kassian with a few borderline hits. Keep your head up and you wan't get run over. These guys know the consequences and know they could end up with chronic issues after they retire, but they also get paid millions of dollars to do so, they know the risk. Start a new league with no hitting if that is what these guys want. Until then, keep these hits in the game. Clean, hard body checks. No intent to injure.
Yes, high-school educated guys in their mid-twenties are famous for making well-thought out, responsible decisions after weighing all the consequences.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk

[Scroopy Noopers]

Yes, high-school educated guys in their mid-twenties are famous for making well-thought out, responsible decisions after weighing all the consequences.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk

The sport isn’t safe, there is no way to make it ‘safe’.

The NHL needs to continue making strides in educating players and supporting the players health. Pulling players from a game for concussion protocol is a great start. Not to mention, everyone is watching them so we are all learning more about concussions as a result. Eliminating targeted head shots is the right move as well. But, you aren’t immune to a concussion because you got hit in the chest instead of the head. These guys are flying, whiplash can cause concussions, hitting ice/end boards/posts can cause concussions.

They need to be upfront about the risk and offer education, assistance, and reasonable protection, and people who want to play in the league need to accept that to play.

[Jiri Hrdina]

100% this, these players should know looking at your feet in open ice while the puck is there, should be a sign you are going to get nailed. This is taught from a young age, these guys should know better. Can't remove a hit like this from the league if they want body contact. I like body contact, I like those big hits, I loved it when Tkachuk nailed Kassian with a few borderline hits. Keep your head up and you wan't get run over. These guys know the consequences and know they could end up with chronic issues after they retire, but they also get paid millions of dollars to do so, they know the risk. Start a new league with no hitting if that is what these guys want. Until then, keep these hits in the game. Clean, hard body checks. No intent to injure.

Any league, or for that matter employer, has the obligation to do whatever they can to avoid risking the long-term health of their employees. Given what we know about concussions now - it isn't enough to say "keep your head up kid".
The fact they get paid millions is 100% irrelevant in my view. I bet Steve Montador's family would trade all of that wealth to have him back.

To be clear though, under the current definition of body checking the Trouba hit is in my view 100% clean.

But it also points to exactly why the definition of hitting needs to evolve. As I've said before, it should be about getting possession of the puck back, and anything beyond that should be a penalty.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Any league, or for that matter employer, has the obligation to do whatever they can to avoid risking the long-term health of their employees. Given what we know about concussions now - it isn't enough to say "keep your head up kid".
The fact they get paid millions is 100% irrelevant in my view. I bet Steve Montador's family would trade all of that wealth to have him back.

To be clear though, under the current definition of body checking the Trouba hit is in my view 100% clean.

But it also points to exactly why the definition of hitting needs to evolve. As I've said before, it should be about getting possession of the puck back, and anything beyond that should be a penalty.

It gets so complicated though. The obvious ones stand out, but here would be my argument for this hit:
- Trouba starts the play flat footed on the point, Dal Colle is quick.
- Trouba saw an opportunity to keep the puck in on a bobbled pass, so he takes a hard stride in and sets his body
- any reasonable person would expect a professional athlete to look up, Trouba commits to the play immediately. Once committed he has a split second to realize Dal Colle is day dreaming.
- Then what? Pull up and allow a 2 on 1? “Poke check him”? (fixation on the puck is another way you never make the NHL as a defenseman). Quick toe drag on a poke check and he’s gone.

[Jiri Hrdina]

It gets so complicated though. The obvious ones stand out, but here would be my argument for this hit:
- Trouba starts the play flat footed on the point, Dal Colle is quick.
- Trouba saw an opportunity to keep the puck in on a bobbled pass, so he takes a hard stride in and sets his body
- any reasonable person would expect a professional athlete to look up, Trouba commits to the play immediately. Once committed he has a split second to realize Dal Colle is day dreaming.
- Then what? Pull up and allow a 2 on 1? “Poke check him”? (fixation on the puck is another way you never make the NHL as a defenseman). Quick toe drag on a poke check and he’s gone.

Totally agree.
I'm not sure on how to solve for this type of incident, as I don't know that there's much Trouba could have done. I don't see him taking multiple steps, i don't see him leaving his feet, I don't see him targeting the head.
With the speed of play, I'm not sure what he could have done to avoid what happened.

But there's a different in recognizing those challenges and saying "I like big hits" as a previous poster did.
If big hits remain, it should be because they were unavoidable, not because it is perceived to add to the game. Even if one likes the physicality of big hits, we have to start recognizing that it is more important that the sport evolve to mitigate the long-term tragedies.

[Resolute 14]

Truthfully, I can't see any reasonable definition of hitting that can remove this play from the game. In any scenario, Trouba was objectively trying to separate his opponent from the puck.

Argung the removal of this kind of hit is arguing the removal of body checking entirely.

[foshizzle11]

Yes, high-school educated guys in their mid-twenties are famous for making well-thought out, responsible decisions after weighing all the consequences.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk

Then it is on the parents, coaches, leagues and volunteers of all hockey organizations to educate the players about the risks. With all this talk these days about concussions, you don't think they have been told "it could happen to you" over the years. Sorry but they have been educated to make an informed decision about continuing to play. Many athletes will choose the play now, deal with injuries when I retire motto because they enjoy playing the sport so much that they would rather sacrifice their future.

Education is out there, someone entering into the NHL knows the risks in the year 2020. Maybe not 10 years ago, but I highly doubt any kid going to the NHL thinks they won't get hurt playing professional hockey.

[Jiri Hrdina]

^There is a difference between getting hurt and coming away from the sport with life-altering issues.

[foshizzle11]

Ya, I get that. But you have to look at sport all over the place, there is an example of a NFL star in the making hanging up his boots because he cares about his future. It happens, the education is out there, people still choose to play rough and tough sports like rugby, lacrosse, hockey, football, MMA, boxing because they love it and they know the risks. Education about this stuff is only getting better.

[Erick Estrada]

Truthfully, I can't see any reasonable definition of hitting that can remove this play from the game. In any scenario, Trouba was objectively trying to separate his opponent from the puck.

Argung the removal of this kind of hit is arguing the removal of body checking entirely.

Come on man. That type of hit doesn't even happen once a game. Eliminating that won't change anything. How many times have we seen a Flames player flattened like that this season? I recall Backlund last season from Dumba but that type of open ice hit isn't something that happens a lot these days and can be easily removed without changing anything.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Come on man. That type of hit doesn't even happen once a game. Eliminating that won't change anything. How many times have we seen a Flames player flattened like that this season? I recall Backlund last season from Dumba but that type of open ice hit isn't something that happens a lot these days and can be easily removed without changing anything.

Okay, how? No open ice hits? Honest question, what’s the easy rule to remove the Dumba and Trouba puck separating hits? What’s the criteria?

[Resolute 14]

Come on man. That type of hit doesn't even happen once a game. Eliminating that won't change anything. How many times have we seen a Flames player flattened like that this season? I recall Backlund last season from Dumba but that type of open ice hit isn't something that happens a lot these days and can be easily removed without changing anything.

You're missing the forest for the trees. The argument here is quite literally that you can't use body contact to separate a guy from the puck if his head is down.

That hit was not a charge. it was not blind side. Nor an elbow nor any other dangerous or illegal action. it was not unnecessarily violent. All Trouba did was step into Dal Colle's path and let Dal Colle's own momentum create the contact.

Literally the only thing wrong with that play was on Dal Colle's end. Yet you are talking about punishing Trouba. So yes, if you are going to remove a completely clean hit from the game, then you are arguing the removal of body checking entirely. Because what you argue creates scenarios where players too afraid to make a hit in case someone drops their head at the last moment and players leading with their domes to gain that shield of invincibility. And at that point, you might as well just remove hitting altogether.

[GirlySports]

Whether a person has the puck in his feet or has control is less than a second. How can a defender make a hit?

[Erick Estrada]

You're missing the forest for the trees. The argument here is quite literally that you can't use body contact to separate a guy from the puck if his head is down.

That hit was not a charge. it was not blind side. Nor an elbow nor any other dangerous or illegal action. it was not unnecessarily violent. All Trouba did was step into Dal Colle's path and let Dal Colle's own momentum create the contact.

Literally the only thing wrong with that play was on Dal Colle's end. Yet you are talking about punishing Trouba. So yes, if you are going to remove a completely clean hit from the game, then you are arguing the removal of body checking entirely. Because what you argue creates scenarios where players too afraid to make a hit in case someone drops their head at the last moment and players leading with their domes to gain that shield of invincibility. And at that point, you might as well just remove hitting altogether.

Regardless of it being within the rules it was a predatorial hit end of story. Trouba lined him up and fully intended to crush him. I can guarantee separating the puck was secondary in Trouba's thought process there as he primarily looking at running him over. I assume if you played hockey you would know players eyes get real big when they see a player with their head down carrying the puck and they aren't thinking about separating pucks, they are looking at an opportunity to flatten a guy. We have to remove this thought process so when players see that they focus more on the puck than taking out the player.

[Lubicon]

I don't think making these infractions discretionary is the answer. The referees already have to make way too many impressionistic decisions, and it's a mess (what even is "charging", anyways?).

I still think all head hits need to be penalised. "Intent" is impossible to determine.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk

100% agreed, which is why I would say take this decision out of their hands. Head contact = penalty, there is nothing to decide. Then the league video reviews and determines if further action is required.

[Resolute 14]

Regardless of it being within the rules it was a predatorial hit end of story. Trouba lined him up and fully intended to crush him. I can guarantee separating the puck was secondary in Trouba's thought process there as he primarily looking at running him over. I assume if you played hockey you would know players eyes get real big when they see a player with their head down carrying the puck and they aren't thinking about separating pucks, they are looking at an opportunity to flatten a guy. We have to remove this thought process so when players see that they focus more on the puck than taking out the player.

Stepping into a guy's path to hit him square-on is predatory now? I guess we're into the phase of modern internet arguments where we broaden the scope of what defines a concept to the point where the word itself becomes meaningless.

You're really just making my argument for me. What you are asking for is the removal of body contact. You just lack the courage to admit it.

[Hot_Flatus]

Frankly, Dal Colle is just as responsible for this hit as Trouba was. Can't be looking at your feet with the puck at the blue line.

This is the point exactly. The onus isn't on Trouba to softly skate up to Dal Colle and try to stick check the puck away in a contact sport. Doing as much would basically give the Islanders a clear path out of the zone and down the ice on the attack.

If you can't make this hit in the NHL anymore, hitting has no place in the sport. Trouba even lowered himself to be more aligned shoulder to chest, where in the past some guys would have just plowed through his head from an angle.

[Textcritic]

...If you can't make this hit in the NHL anymore, hitting has no place in the sport...
I don't understand how some posters leap to the conclusion that removing—or at minimum penalizing—heavy, open-ice hits like this, which makes clear initial contact to the head, is the same thing as removing hitting altogether from the game. IT'S NOT. It is a false-equivelancy. There is a huge difference between checking along the boards between two players jockeying for puck possession, or in front of the net between two players contesting space, and a blind-side hit at centre-ice that catches the recipient completely unaware. The former can and will still happen even if the League does eventually decide to crack down on the latter.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

That's true, it doesn't completely eliminate hitting. It eliminates big open ice hits, and big hits along the wall (i.e. a player coming up the wall out of his own end, or out from behind his own net). So, highlight reel hits, basically. Other hits are still possible. But I think people still have a problem with losing those.

[Textcritic]

That's true, it doesn't completely eliminate hitting. It eliminates big open ice hits, and big hits along the wall (i.e. a player coming up the wall out of his own end, or out from behind his own net). So, highlight reel hits, basically. Other hits are still possible. But I think people still have a problem with losing those.
And I get that. I myself am conflicted about it, but nothing is helped in this discussion by retreating into hyperbole.

[The Boy Wonder]

Come on man. That type of hit doesn't even happen once a game. Eliminating that won't change anything. How many times have we seen a Flames player flattened like that this season? I recall Backlund last season from Dumba but that type of open ice hit isn't something that happens a lot these days and can be easily removed without changing anything.

Go watch beer league hockey if you don't like hits like this...

THere is no other way for trouba to have hit him, and liek Resolute said "if you want to get rid of this hit then you have to eliminate all body checks."

[Jiri Hrdina]

Why should he have to "go watch beer hockey" instead of arguing for how the sports needs to evolve?

[The Boy Wonder]

Why should he have to "go watch beer hockey" instead of arguing for how the sports needs to evolve?

The whole point is that the sport doesn't need to evolve to remove hits like that. It is part of hockey and I for one don't want to watch a game without hits like that and I propose that for someone who feels very strongly that hockey would be better without that kind of hit, he should maybe try watching non-contact beer league hockey

[Jiri Hrdina]

The whole point is that the sport doesn't need to evolve to remove hits like that. It is part of hockey and I for one don't want to watch a game without hits like that and I propose that for someone who feels very strongly that hockey would be better without that kind of hit, he should maybe try watching non-contact beer league hockey

But people enjoy a lot of different parts of the sport, and want to see it change to remove the unnecessary dangers.
Someone shouldn't have to give up something they enjoy just because there is part of it they don't.

[dissentowner]

Big hits are part of the game, it is a physical sport and you know what you signed up for when you got into it. That is like saying we should remove tackling from football and have them play flag football instead.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Big hits are part of the game, it is a physical sport and you know what you signed up for when you got into it. That is like saying we should remove tackling from football and have them play flag football instead.

The reckoning is coming for football.
Hockey can and will evolve.
I'm not sure what the path forward is for football.

Big hits do not need to be part of hockey.

[The Boy Wonder]

But people enjoy a lot of different parts of the sport, and want to see it change to remove the unnecessary dangers.
Someone shouldn't have to give up something they enjoy just because there is part of it they don't.

I guess we will have to disagree that hitting is an "unnecessary danger"

Probably should make them remove the knife boots they wear as well, those are pretty dangerous

[Jiri Hrdina]

I guess we will have to disagree that hitting is an "unnecessary danger"

Probably should make them remove the knife boots they wear as well, those are pretty dangerous

These are such lazy and cliche arguments.
No - because you need skates to be able to play the sport. You also need sticks.
You don't need big hits.

[dissentowner]

The reckoning is coming for football.
Hockey can and will evolve.
I'm not sure what the path forward is for football.

Big hits do not need to be part of hockey.

Well that is just ridiculous. You think they are going to take hitting out of football? Not bloody likely. Hockey may evolve but the fans love the big hits and it isn't going anywhere, guaranteed. Again, players know what they are getting into, they don't have to play in the NHL. A lot of people choose careers that contain a risk to their health. I am not even sure how you stop big hits? What constitutes a big hit? Is it to the officials discretion? That would be a cluster bleep. I think you would have totally eliminate body checking in which case the game will be crap and half of the NHL fanbase would quit watching.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Well that is just ridiculous. You think they are going to take hitting out of football? Not bloody likely. Hockey may evolve but the fans love the big hits and it isn't going anywhere, guaranteed. Again, players know what they are getting into, they don't have to play in the NHL. A lot of people choose careers that contain a risk to their health. I am not even sure how you stop big hits? What constitutes a big hit? Is it to the officials discretion? That would be a cluster bleep. I think you would have totally eliminate body checking in which case the game will be crap and half of the NHL fanbase would quit watching.

As I've said, for hockey - the definition of checking needs to evolve to be about getting possession of the puck and anything more than that - is a penalty. So more about angles and stick checks than physical body checking.

For football - I'm not sure but I see it as a significant long-term risk to the sport that is already playing out at the grassroots levels where participation rates are falling. The tipping point will be as we learn more about the damage of not single huge hits, but the cumulative impacts of hundreds and thousands of small hits.

But know I don't know how football evolves.

[dissentowner]

As I've said, for hockey - the definition of checking needs to evolve to be about getting possession of the puck and anything more than that - is a penalty. So more about angles and stick checks than physical body checking.

For football - I'm not sure but I see it as a significant long-term risk to the sport that is already playing out at the grassroots levels where participation rates are falling. The tipping point will be as we learn more about the damage of not single huge hits, but the cumulative impacts of hundreds and thousands of small hits.

But know I don't know how football evolves.

As I said, I believe if you took body contact out of the NHL the league is done. You might disagree but I seriously think half the fan base walks. Then somebody else would start a league with hits and the NHL would be hooped. So many fans relate to physical play, Flyer fans, Boston fans, hell the Preds fans call their city Smashville. Taking body checking out would not evolve the game, it would kill it

[soulchoice]

As I said, I believe if you took body contact out of the NHL the league is done. You might disagree but I seriously think half the fan base walks. Then somebody else would start a league with hits and the NHL would be hooped. So many fans relate to physical play, Flyer fans, Boston fans, hell the Preds fans call their city Smashville. Taking body checking out would not evolve the game, it would kill it

Intimidation and physical play by way of heavy hits are just as much as part of the game as skill and shooting. It doesn’t have to be a dirty crushing hit nor is the purpose just to separate the man from the puck.

For example when the puck is on your stick and you see Lucic or even a player like Forbort coming at you. There is an element which will cause some players to not go hard in the corner or corral the puck. If you do, there is a heavy big clean crushing hit coming.

That is a part of the game. Just as an open ice hit to ensure an opposing player doesn’t feel they can drop their head to make a toe drag.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Intimidation and physical play by way of heavy hits are just as much as part of the game as skill and shooting.
I mean, this is just clearly not true. The only core requirements to make the game make sense is to be able to score goals. Shooting is how you do that. You can very easily make body checking illegal and still have a game that is recognizably the sport of ice hockey - in fact, lots of junior leagues, amateur leagues and women's hockey do exactly that. If you were to remove "skill" and "shooting", there wouldn't be a game.

The problem is that people wouldn't find the game as entertaining, or at least enjoyable, if it didn't have the hitting in it. The argument that the other side of this is making is that losing that enjoyment / entertainment value to the people for whom that is important (and it is a lot of people) is a sacrifice that must be made so that there is considerably less head trauma involved in playing the sport.

[soulchoice]

I mean, this is just clearly not true. The only core requirements to make the game make sense is to be able to score goals. Shooting is how you do that. You can very easily make body checking illegal and still have a game that is recognizably the sport of ice hockey - in fact, lots of junior leagues, amateur leagues and women's hockey do exactly that. If you were to remove "skill" and "shooting", there wouldn't be a game.

The problem is that people wouldn't find the game as entertaining, or at least enjoyable, if it didn't have the hitting in it. The argument that the other side of this is making is that losing that enjoyment / entertainment value to the people for whom that is important (and it is a lot of people) is a sacrifice that must be made so that there is considerably less head trauma involved in playing the sport.

Let me correct myself, I should have clarified in that I dont mean its as important as skating and shooting. For that I agree with you. However in my opinion, and that is what we both have are opinions, its a part of the game. To put it in comparison as to what you used as an example, as to what would be in the game. There are some beer leagues that have outlawed slap shots, now removing it can work for some, as the game of hockey is still for the most part recognizable, much in the same realm as removing intimidation and physical play. I personally would not have wanted to play in either game during my competitive hockey playing days.

As I said I dont know what the future holds, but for now its not like there is a large majority of players/fans who want to eliminate the physical and intimidation from the game. Though until more polls and studies are done with the players, fans and owners. The onus I feel is on the side of those who want to remove it from the game to do the work to have it gone.

With respect to the junior leagues which have outlawed checking and made it illegal Corsi, which leagues do you speak of and how many of those leagues are drawing numbers or feeding the pro leagues with players? I am actually curious to know. I understand the womens game being illegal to check, but the popularity of the pro sport from a business perspective is abysmal, though that has as much to do with the overall quality of the game(which is teenage boys level), not just the lack of checking.

[Gaskal]

Certainly can't speak for everyone, but I've personally zero interest in watching NFL Touch Football or NHL under IIHF rules

[dissentowner]

Yes, there is no checking when women had their own league. How did that work out for them? I bet if there was hitting that league would still be here and making a profit.

[Resolute 14]

But people enjoy a lot of different parts of the sport, and want to see it change to remove the unnecessary dangers.
Someone shouldn't have to give up something they enjoy just because there is part of it they don't.

Proposal: Give players like Dal Colle a 10 minute misconduct for putting themselves in such a dangerous position.

[soulchoice]

Yes, there is no checking when women had their own league. How did that work out for them? I bet if there was hitting that league would still be here and making a profit.

To be honest with the amount of games in addition to a multitude of better hockey options available (NHL, CHL, Jr. A, Jr. B, CIS, ACAC, AAA midget, Ranchlands Senior Mens, The now limited Chinook league and to a lesser extent Jr. C), it would still not be profitable, even with Checking.

[sempuki]

Intimidation and physical play by way of heavy hits are just as much as part of the game as skill and shooting. It doesn’t have to be a dirty crushing hit nor is the purpose just to separate the man from the puck.

For example when the puck is on your stick and you see Lucic or even a player like Forbort coming at you. There is an element which will cause some players to not go hard in the corner or corral the puck. If you do, there is a heavy big clean crushing hit coming.

That is a part of the game. Just as an open ice hit to ensure an opposing player doesn’t feel they can drop their head to make a toe drag.


You can intimidate with a hit that doesn't involve a padded armored shoulder to the head. You can hit someone in the open without giving them whiplash. It just means you can't put someone on the trolley tracks and blow them up -- same way you can't hit from behind currently, because it's just known to be too dangerous.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

You can intimidate with a hit that doesn't involve a padded armored shoulder to the head. You can hit someone in the open without giving them whiplash. It just means you can't put someone on the trolley tracks and blow them up -- same way you can't hit from behind currently, because it's just known to be too dangerous.
This argument just doesn't work. You don't know whether someone is going to be "blown up" before committing to an open ice hit. It's not at all like hitting from behind - in that situation, you see numbers, and you hold up. An open ice hit that doesn't end in someone getting destroyed and one that does look very, very similar before the collision occurs. You have a split second to go for a hit, and half of that is just instinct - you do not have time to analyze if this is the type of hit that will be traumatic. You just know you're about to run into them at speed. What determines whether someone is going to get hit, or get creamed, is at least as much in the control of the person being hit as the person doing the hit.

If your rule outlaws an outcome from an open-ice hit that I only have partial control over, I'm just not going to line anyone up for that type of hit at all anymore. And I understand that for some people, that's an acceptable outcome to make the game safer... I'm just not sure I agree that the cost / benefit is enough to justify that change, for me.