Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaming Homer
I think a good example would be driving. If you rear end someone it's always your fault even if the other driver did something reckless. If your driving next to a merge lane not paying attention culpability is 50/50. That's how I equate some of these hits. If you have the puck you have to expect sticks and bodies are going to be coming at you. Keep your head up plain and simple.
|
People think this is the law. But it's not 100% correct. You can get joint liability out of it sometimes. And your merge example is also not exactly correct. In fact, that one is likely 100% merger's liability as long as you did nothing wrong.
But back on the rear ender example - the reason the driver from behind is usually at fault is that you are supposed to be far enough back that you can stop in time no matter what happens in front of you. So to equate that to hockey, maybe you should be hitting in a manner that accounts for your opponent doing something like turning away.