Jujhar Khaira carried off the ice on stretcher

[nik-]

If we turn the NHL into figure skating, I demand at least a fourfold increase in lead pipes to the legs.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Knightslayer

I really doubt it as he is like Gaudreau where they seem to always have their head up.

I can remember one time Gaudreau got hit hard in open ice. Pavel Datsyuk caught him. Pretty amazing since he's been in the league for a long time and rarely ever gets hit.

Gaudreau's been hit more than the Datsyuk one. Gaudreau also plays a different kind of skating game. It will only take one time for McDavid to lose concentration or even misjudge his distances if he does have his head up. I could see him underestimating the footspeed or reaction of Kylington.

[kevman]

Originally Posted by TheSquatch

All Trouba had to do was realize the hit was blind, and let up a bit, but nah, he destroys the guy. Good ole hockey game, the best game you can name.

This. We've all played shinny where two guys collide and you simply brace each other so nobody hits the ice and gets hurt.

In the Khaira example Trouba could have still separated him from the puck creating a turnover without sending him to the hospital. They even had to blow the play dead which effectively nullified the turnover. Had he not rattled his brains they would have had possession of the puck and the play would have gone on.

I don't understand what part of ruining a guys life is considered a hockey play.

[Patek23]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

There's the figure skating blast!
Whew was worried we wouldn't get it.

You've been vocal that you'd eventually like to see checking completely removed from the game for years. I'm not sure why it's something you don't think is a fair comparison considering your hopes for the future of hockey.

[kevman]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

Nobody wants to see anyone get injured but that's why these guys get paid millions because its a high risk job.

The problem is it's not just guys getting paid millions that are having their domes ruined.

These hits happen at all levels of the sport and the majority of kids getting knocked out will never have millions to comfort them through a life of TBI side effects.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by kevman

I don't understand what part of ruining a guys life is considered a hockey play.

If this was true, my ex girlfriend is basically Wayne Gretzky.

[kevman]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

You've been vocal that you'd eventually like to see checking completely removed from the game for years. I'm not sure why it's something you don't think is a fair comparison considering your hopes for the future of hockey.

You don't have to remove checking, you just have to make all head contact illegal. No more excusing follow throughs, if you make contact with the head it's a major. In both hits, Trouba extends his legs through the hit and in both cases it's 100% unnecessary to separate the guy from the puck.

Make it like high-sticking, if you make contact to the head it's a penalty. It doesn't eliminate open ice hits, it just protects your players.

[Patek23]

Originally Posted by kevman

The problem is it's not just guys getting paid millions that are having their domes ruined.

These hits happen at all levels of the sport and the majority of kids getting knocked out will never have millions to comfort them through a life of TBI side effects.

Understandable. But it's a high speed, contact sport. Targeting the head is already a suspendable offence and is working it's way out of the game.

It reminds me of a recent Brad Marsh interview who wasn't campaigning to have helmets and shoulder pads taken back out of the game. However, he noticed injuries with himself and others go up as they were introduced as people's sense of security and liberties with sticks to heads went up. Ultimately the thing that will always keep players safe is awareness. If you never expect to get blown up your going to be vulnerable to even an incidental contact hit from time to time. And we see these almost as much as we see these Trouba like hits. There needs to be a happy medium between how you are allowed to make contact with a player. And at the same time, an emphasis on situational awareness amongst the player hitting and the player being hit.

[Patek23]

Originally Posted by kevman

You don't have to remove checking, you just have to make all head contact illegal. No more excusing follow throughs, if you make contact with the head it's a major. In both hits, Trouba extends his legs through the hit and in both cases it's 100% unnecessary to separate the guy from the puck.

Make it like high-sticking, if you make contact to the head it's a penalty. It doesn't eliminate open-ice hits, it just protects your players.

It's a slippery slope though. We get the benefit of slowed-down replays and hindsight. In a split second where your principal point of contact is aiming to be the body, it can change to the head pretty quickly unintentionally. We see it all the time with hits from behind as well where a guy turns his back at the last second. Guys are going to get hurt from time to time it's unavoidable even if you removed hitting. Someone blowing a tire or having their head down running into an opponent. We will never reach a point of seeing no concussions in hockey and I don't see an issue with the current rules.

[kevman]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

It's a slippery slope though. We get the benefit of slowed-down replays and hindsight. In a split second where your principal point of contact is aiming to be the body, it can change to the head pretty quickly unintentionally. We see it all the time with hits from behind as well where a guy turns his back at the last second. Guys are going to get hurt from time to time it's unavoidable even if you removed hitting. Someone blowing a tire or having their head down running into an opponent. We will never reach a point of seeing no concussions in hockey and I don't see an issue with the current rules.

Getting a penalty for hitting from behind is a perfect example. It's a major penalty and as a result guys let up all the time to avoid putting their team down a man. Sure, it still happens but it's far reduced because of the risk of a penalty.

Put in the same rule for contact to the head. It won't eliminate all concussions, but it helps with very little detriment to the actual gameplay.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

It's a slippery slope though. We get the benefit of slowed-down replays and hindsight. In a split second where your principal point of contact is aiming to be the body, it can change to the head pretty quickly unintentionally. We see it all the time with hits from behind as well where a guy turns his back at the last second. Guys are going to get hurt from time to time it's unavoidable even if you removed hitting. Someone blowing a tire or having their head down running into an opponent. We will never reach a point of seeing no concussions in hockey and I don't see an issue with the current rules.

Slippery slope arguments are a tacit admission that the actual rule or law is unobjectionable, and are also almost always not proven out when a law is passed.

Yes, accidents will continue to happen, and IMO they can be taken into account on the punishment. It's just a placing of further onus on a hitter to be careful.

In these cases there was probably no need for Trouba to blow up his opponent, legal or not. For example, he could have hit Khaira just as effectively, and even hard enough to make him sore, without trying to injure him, or at the very least, not caring if it happened.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Hell, Khaira was looking down so long he could have easily poked the puck free and had a down low 3 on 1. But obtaining the puck appeared to be not important to Trouba.

[Patek23]

Originally Posted by kevman

Getting a penalty for hitting from behind is a perfect example. It's a major penalty and as a result guys let up all the time to avoid putting their team down a man. Sure, it still happens but it's far reduced because of the risk of a penalty.

Put in the same rule for contact to the head. It won't eliminate all concussions, but it helps with very little detriment to the actual gameplay.

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.

[FlamesAddiction]

I could be completely wrong, but my impression is that football involves a lot of set plays and planning for almost everything that happens on the field. Taking unnecessary hits out of the game would be easier since almost everything is premeditated. Hockey, aside from occasional moments, is less about set plays and more about adapting to everything that is unfolding. Obviously that creates different challenges for these types of things.

My impression of football could be wrong as I don't have a lot of experience with it. I could be way off.

[GioforPM]

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.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I have no trouble with separating man from puck, shoulder to shoulder checks, and shoulder to chest.

That’s not figure skating

But shoulder to head? Driving through that kind of check?

Nope. Don’t want to see guys’ lives ruined. That’s not enjoyable

I totally agree. I never need to see a guy pulverized to the extend of being stretchered off the ice. However, I think its a tough line to draw and execute precisely in this sport. Headshots are already illegal. If a guy's head is down or he's somewhat low, there may be contact to the head area even if its completely unintended and the hitter is trying to execute a clean hit.

I think if the NHL wants to decrease incidents like this you basically are going to have to substantially decrease the role of hitting in the game. I just don't see it being possible without making the physical aspect of hockey a very "lite" version of what it once was. The idea of "finish your check" may be completely out the window. That's up to the league, players and fans to consider if its what they want.

I'm unsure of it at this point. There's part of me that could live with that. But there's a part of me that understands the role of punishing physicality and intimidation in the sport.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

You've been vocal that you'd eventually like to see checking completely removed from the game for years. I'm not sure why it's something you don't think is a fair comparison considering your hopes for the future of hockey.

Because hockey without big hits doesn't resemble figure skating in any way shape or form?

[Scroopy Noopers]

4 completely ridiculous retorts on the same page, this must be a record of some kind.

[Patek23]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Because hockey without big hits doesn't resemble figure skating in any way shape or form?

You would like to what amounts to the all-star game level of intensity 82 games a year. Is that better?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Flaming Homer

You would like to what amounts to the all-star game level of intensity 82 games a year. Is that better?

I'm hard pressed to think of the high intensity playoff games where someone did something similar, outside of Scheifele last year, which was also dirty. Players are more focused on playing the game instead of blowing up their opponents.