Quote:
Originally Posted by kevman
If the three major safety concerns are fighting, hitting and pucks to the face wouldn't it make sense to eliminate fighting first? Here's my logic: - There were 508 fights in the regular season last year. Let's say 10 resulted in concussions (very conservative) then we would have a serious incident frequency of 2%.
- There were 49,200 hits in the regular season (assuming 20 per game per team) and lets say each team lost 10 players to concussion during the season there would be 300 concussions resulting in a serious incident frequency of 0.6%
- There were 73,800 shots last season (assuming 30 per game per team) and if each player got hit in the face once that's 600 pucks to the face or a serious incident frequency of 0.8%
So, exaggerations of removing hitting from hockey and forcing players to wear cages aside would you not agree that in the name of player safety fighting should be the first to go? After all it has the highest injury frequency out of all other "plays" in hockey. Plays in quotes because a fight is not a hockey play. |
Why should frequency of injury matter? Body checking and getting hit by the puck results in a lot more injuries to NHL players. If it's truly about reducing injuries for insurance purposes then the NHL needs look at those first. Picking on fighting is ridiculous.