Lindros calls for significant changes to reduce concussions

[EVERLAST]

The equipment more than anything has to make these guys feel like they are invincible.

The players wearing this equipment are bigger and faster . I’ll never forget watching that mother f’er Hatcher kill Matthew Lombardi and change him forever with that cheap shot.

Watching Kariya get destroyed and come back and score was awe inspiring at the time but we lost a great great player shortly after.

I worry about Big Ern and all the hits he took. Gary Roberts was tough as Nails and took a ton of punishment and came back and I worry about him too.

Marc Savards career .....yeah I admired these guys and cheered them on and worry about them all.

I love the game and hate seeing it without the players that put butts in seats.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

"The only voices I am interested in hearing are those that agree with me."

Again that’s not what I said but putting words in others peoples mouths is nothing new from you

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Again that’s not what I said but putting words in others peoples mouths is nothing new from you

You literally said "I don't care what the players think overall", then went on to add that the only ones whose opinions you want to hear from is those likely to agree with your position.

You can play games with semantics all you want, that is what you meant. The opinions of thousands of players who may not agree with you don't matter to you.

[Jiri Hrdina]

They don’t matter to me because I think they are not able to make rationale choices about their own safety
Which I explained
Stop telling people what they meant. I know what I meant.

[Resolute 14]

Saviour complex at its finest.

[codynw]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Is anyone in the NHL quitting now when they all know the risks?

Rick Nash is retiring early. And I'm sure there will be more in the future.


I could see Letang walking away early too.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Saviour complex at its finest.

Grow up dude and address things head on instead of speaking for people.

It’d be just as easy to reduce your posts down to ”I don't care if athletes die because they make a lot of money and they’re my entertainment.” So get back to having a normal conversation, or bail.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Saviour complex at its finest.

Neophobia at its finest.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Grow up dude and address things head on instead of speaking for people.

It’d be just as easy to reduce your posts down to ”I don't care if athletes die because they make a lot of money and they’re my entertainment.” So get back to having a normal conversation, or bail.

Oh you're one to talk. Am I supposed to take your hypocrisy seriously when you call me out for allegedly speaking for people in a comment where you go out of your way to speak for me? So, to send your attitude back at you - grow up.

Particularly when you already have numerous posts of mine in this thread where you can tell what I've said. Notably: I disagree with removing contact as it won't make much of a difference (and which I provided links to two scientific studies to back it up) - but I've also offered suggestions on slowing the game down. I've also brought up examples of players who have chosen to retire over injury fear, in opposition to the apparent opinion you've assigned to me.

The difference between you and I is that you have invented opinions out of whole cloth and assigned them to me - which is what Jiri was alleging, and I'm sure he's going to be fair and call you out for doing that any minute now - and me commenting on what he literally said.

And when Jiri literally states that he doesn't care about the opinion of players who don't agree with his point of view because he believes they are incapable of making a "rationale (sic) choice", why are you surprised that I call that out as saviour complex? He's arguing that the only rational conclusion is the one he's come to, and - far be it from me to assume what he meant - he seems to feel it is important to teach others the error of their ways and save them from themselves.

[PepsiFree]

Actually, the difference between you and I is that I was being facetious to prove a point. You were being serious. And I'm nice.

[Scroopy Noopers]

The part I haven’t understood about your stance is, you would prefer the game slow down than remove contact?

I would rather the game have contact, but if they start introducing rules that bring in more whistles or slower play forget about it.

I’m all for softer equipment. Players use them as weapons and there are studies to back that.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

And when Jiri literally states that he doesn't care about the opinion of players who don't agree with his point of view because he believes they are incapable of making a "rationale (sic) choice", why are you surprised that I call that out as saviour complex? He's arguing that the only rational conclusion is the one he's come to, and - far be it from me to assume what he meant - he seems to feel it is important to teach others the error of their ways and save them from themselves.

Employment in North America, in almost all fields, has been met with legislated safety measures because those inside the industry will scoff at any safety recommendation. So laws were passed. It’s not a saviour complex, it’s how it is done.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

Neophobia at its finest.

I'm not sure why you think that is accurate given we're not discussing doing new things, but whether or not thousands of players deserve a voice.

But to address your allegation, I'm not opposed to doing new things. I am opposed to needless change when the evidence suggests that it won't solve the problem. There's also a bit of an irony here given that some of the negative effects can be (at least anecdotally) traced back to new things that were tried, such as removing the two line pass and the consequence of players coming up the middle a hell of a lot faster than they used to.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

The part I haven’t understood about your stance is, you would prefer the game slow down than remove contact?

I would rather the game have contact, but if they start introducing rules that bring in more whistles or slower play forget about it.

I’m all for softer equipment. Players use them as weapons and there are studies to back that.

If we are discussing how to reduce head injuries as our only motivating factor in changes, then yes, I prefer slowing the game down rather than removing contact. Because the latter doesn't work. I've posted two studies that noted that banning contact doesn't reduce concussions by comparing concussion rates in men's hockey vs. women's.

So, yes, if we're going to to reduce head injuries, then slowing the game down is almost necessarily going to be part of it. And yes, that means more whistles. Hockey survived 60 years of the two line pass and the whistles it caused, after all.

I also very much agree that the padding needs to be seriously looked at.

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

Employment in North America, in almost all fields, has been met with legislated safety measures because those inside the industry will scoff at any safety recommendation. So laws were passed. It’s not a saviour complex, it’s how it is done.

Obviously, if legislation forces contact out of the game, then there's not much anyone can do. Also, much of the legislation you are referring to would have resulted from the desires of employees to improve protections against the will of employers, usually due to the cost of enforcement. The NHL is in the ironic position where the employers are often more interested in player safety than employees.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Obviously, if legislation forces contact out of the game, then there's not much anyone can do. Also, much of the legislation you are referring to would have resulted from the desires of employees to improve protections against the will of employers, usually due to the cost of enforcement. The NHL is in the ironic position where the employers are often more interested in player safety than employees.

It’s the exact same. Old retired employees who faced unknown (or not widely accepted) consequences fought for safety, and retired players who faced consequences are doing the same for athletes.

[sempuki]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Saviour complex at its finest.

TIL knowing what research says about CTE or human bias is a "savior complex".

I guess ignorance really is Freedom.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

It’s the exact same. Old retired employees who faced unknown (or not widely accepted) consequences fought for safety, and retired players who faced consequences are doing the same for athletes.

Fair enough, but that takes us back to the original problem: The evidence argues that the change Lindros wants doesn't work. Despite the opinion manufactured and assigned to me, I'm not pushing for it to be Roman gladiators out there. I'm arguing that any changes we do make need to make sense. This change doesn't.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Fair enough, but that takes us back to the original problem: The evidence argues that the change Lindros wants doesn't work. Despite the opinion manufactured and assigned to me, I'm not pushing for it to be Roman gladiators out there. I'm arguing that any changes we do make need to make sense. This change doesn't.

And I’m arguing that every suggestion you’ve made is an old idea and you’re afraid of new ideas.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

And I’m arguing that every suggestion you’ve made is an old idea and you’re afraid of new ideas.

There must be a joke I'm missing here, because not a single new idea has been expressed in this thread.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

There must be a joke I'm missing here, because not a single new idea has been expressed in this thread.

Taking hitting out?