I agree Reaves didn't have to hit Hronek that hard, but players should keep their head up and protect themselves a bit. Even if Reaves didn't plough through Hronek he had no chance to protect himself cause his head was down.
Fast game. Hard to be perfect.
So as a result for a mistake in a single moment, a player could have their life altered because of a brain injury.
That math doesn't make sense.
Fast game. Hard to be perfect.
So as a result for a mistake in a single moment, a player could have their life altered because of a brain injury.
That math doesn't make sense.
There is no math involved. In every sport there is a chance you can get injured. Do the best you can to protect yourself cause you can't trust other players to do the right thing all the time.
There is no math involved. In every sport there is a chance you can get injured. Do the best you can to protect yourself cause you can't trust other players to do the right thing all the time.
Not good enough.
The league needs to take reasonable steps to protect their payers. Hits like that aren't necessary at all.
Reaves reaction is disgusting. He seems proud of what he did.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
It assumes that players don’t know that and keep their head down regularly and on purpose. These guys are in the NHL. Hronek has been playing contact hockey for like… what? 10? 15 years? He knows, so for whatever reason his head was down, it wasn’t because he didn’t.
That’s why it’s the responsibility of the hitter to let up. Not for when guys are ready for the hit, but for when they aren’t.
It really doesn’t assume anything and certainly not that his head is down on purpose.
Arguing that people should wear seatbelts doesn’t absolve bad drivers who cause accidents. In fact it has nothing at all to do with it. Forgetting to wear a seatbelt and intentionally not wearing one result in the same outcome. So wear a seatbelt.
Not good enough.
The league needs to take reasonable steps to protect their payers. Hits like that aren't necessary at all.
Reaves reaction is disgusting. He seems proud of what he did.
It sure feels like people are talking over each other.
The league should protect the players.
Players initiating contact should protect the player they’re hitting.
Players should protect themselves.
Why can’t it be all three?
The Following User Says Thank You to Strange Brew For This Useful Post:
It really doesn’t assume anything and certainly not that his head is down on purpose.
Arguing that people should wear seatbelts doesn’t absolve bad drivers who cause accidents. In fact it has nothing at all to do with it. Forgetting to wear a seatbelt and intentionally not wearing one result in the same outcome. So wear a seatbelt.
It doesn’t matter that they result in the same outcome. If we want to use bad analogies, it’s why there’s a difference between criminal actions that are intentional and criminal actions that are accidental or unintentional, even if they’re the same action. There’s a big difference when it comes to intent. Telling someone it’s wrong to do something they didn’t intend to do is useless information. Telling someone who did it on purpose? Sure, there’s merit in that.
So at best, “keep your head up” is a completely useless thing to say. It doesn’t add anything if we assume the player knows that and didn’t intend to have his head down at that moment. If you accidentally stubbed your toe on a chair leg and someone said “you should watch where you’re going,” would you see that as good, relevant advice you weren’t aware of? I hope not.
At worst, it does absolve the hitter. They’re the ones with intent, the responsibility not to hurt someone like that is 100% theirs. It absolves them because suggesting even 10% of the responsibility lays with the guy who got hit is nonsense. You see a player with their head down, you do not proceed directly through them, end of story in my opinion.
I get your angle that it’s just generally good advice, but to who? NHL players in their 6th full year of pro hockey? I sincerely doubt that’s an honest angle, let alone a valid one.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
A good clean hit should never be taken away from the game. What Reaves did was head hunting like Stevens used to do and has no place in the game anymore.
Hronek shouldn't be blamed at all but he should be told it was stupid of him to look backwards when carrying the puck up the most dangerous part of the ice. If he keeps looking up ice that hit doesn't happen as he'd easily be able to get out of the way.
It doesn’t matter that they result in the same outcome. If we want to use bad analogies, it’s why there’s a difference between criminal actions that are intentional and criminal actions that are accidental or unintentional, even if they’re the same action. There’s a big difference when it comes to intent. Telling someone it’s wrong to do something they didn’t intend to do is useless information. Telling someone who did it on purpose? Sure, there’s merit in that.
So at best, “keep your head up” is a completely useless thing to say. It doesn’t add anything if we assume the player knows that and didn’t intend to have his head down at that moment. If you accidentally stubbed your toe on a chair leg and someone said “you should watch where you’re going,” would you see that as good, relevant advice you weren’t aware of? I hope not.
At worst, it does absolve the hitter. They’re the ones with intent, the responsibility not to hurt someone like that is 100% theirs. It absolves them because suggesting even 10% of the responsibility lays with the guy who got hit is nonsense. You see a player with their head down, you do not proceed directly through them, end of story in my opinion.
I get your angle that it’s just generally good advice, but to who? NHL players in their 6th full year of pro hockey? I sincerely doubt that’s an honest angle, let alone a valid one.
So you complain about bad analogies and then trot out a stub your toe analogy? Not easy to contradict yourself so immediately. Are people coached from a young age how to walk through a room with out stubbing their toe? Is it an elite skill that needs to be learned over years and constantly reinforced?
I also reject the notion that it is about apportioning blame to all parties so that it adds up to 100%. I get there is a desire to find a throat to choke here and I have never suggested that the player being hit is to "blame". The hitter is 100% responsible for their actions in making the hit.
I really don't see it that different from seatbelt or helmet laws. Again your analogy about intentional and unintentional criminal acts misses the mark IMO. YOU wear a seatbelt to protect YOURSELF from both types of acts. It in no way absolves the other party. If you absentmindedly forget your seatbelt, does that change the outcome for you?
I'm not trying to dispense "good advice" to NHLers. But I have no desire to watch a league where players are able to skate freely with the puck, unencumbered by any concerns of body contact. So yeah, keep your head up. In my experience, coaches of elite hockey players still reinforce that message. and don't consider it "at best, a useless thing to say".
If your desire is to reduce injuries to players, I have a hard time understanding your angle here. Throw the book at the players making these hits, I don't disagree one bit.
The Following User Says Thank You to Strange Brew For This Useful Post:
Maybe i should put it another way. When you play hockey, getting hit hurts. Sometimes a lot. That is a big reason why you skate with your head up when you have the puck. That is why you might be reluctant to play the puck along the boards.
Skating with your head up, with great vision and awareness, with speed and agility. These are skills I want to see rewarded in hockey. The best players can do this and avoid hard contact. Take away the physical deterrent, and now we have a bit of a different game.
I want to reduce the risk of injuries full stop and interested in ideas on how to penalize dangerous hits in a way that reduces their frequency and magnitude. But to get to a point where you no longer have to worry about getting hit when you're carrying the puck? I personally don't want that.
The Following User Says Thank You to Strange Brew For This Useful Post:
So you complain about bad analogies and then trot out a stub your toe analogy? Not easy to contradict yourself so immediately. Are people coached from a young age how to walk through a room with out stubbing their toe? Is it an elite skill that needs to be learned over years and constantly reinforced?
I also reject the notion that it is about apportioning blame to all parties so that it adds up to 100%. I get there is a desire to find a throat to choke here and I have never suggested that the player being hit is to "blame". The hitter is 100% responsible for their actions in making the hit.
I really don't see it that different from seatbelt or helmet laws. Again your analogy about intentional and unintentional criminal acts misses the mark IMO. YOU wear a seatbelt to protect YOURSELF from both types of acts. It in no way absolves the other party. If you absentmindedly forget your seatbelt, does that change the outcome for you?
I'm not trying to dispense "good advice" to NHLers. But I have no desire to watch a league where players are able to skate freely with the puck, unencumbered by any concerns of body contact. So yeah, keep your head up. In my experience, coaches of elite hockey players still reinforce that message. and don't consider it "at best, a useless thing to say".
If your desire is to reduce injuries to players, I have a hard time understanding your angle here. Throw the book at the players making these hits, I don't disagree one bit.
lol I prefaced it with saying I was going to use bad analogies, and picking apart the toe stubbing analogy is bordering on an absurd missing of the point. If you can’t grasp the message of “if you made a mistake you knew you shouldn’t have made and paid for it, and someone said ‘you shouldn’t have made that mistake,’ how relevant would you have found that information?” The answer is obviously: not really. Hronek got rocked by Reaves, that’s a better “keep your head up” message than anything the internet has to offer.
Put it aside for a moment. Assume everybody agrees with the basic idea that players should keep their head up. Assume everybody knows the things like “getting hit hurts” that you should have already assumed they know anyways to make this a meaningful conversation. The discussion is whether it’s the hitter’s responsibility to let up and you seem to agree it is. So what in the world are you arguing for?
It’s not about having a throat to choke or turning hockey into some magical figure skating event where everyone can freely skate with their head down doing twirly whirls and puck tricks unimpeded so you can toss that straw man out the window. Keeping your head up is always going to be part of hockey, EVEN IF it’s against the rules for guys to run other guys with their head down. They have to keep their head up to… you know… pass, shoot, make plays in general, avoid incidental contact. You don’t have to worry, the good advice that everybody already knows will always be relevant. But people will still accidentally get caught with their head down sometimes. This happens, like any accident. So maybe it’s ok if we consider making it slightly less likely to that this accident results in people suffering some pretty traumatic contact on purpose, yeah? If the idea is to protect players, “keep your head up” is cool but maybe discouraging the events that can lead to brain damage, drug addiction, and suicide would be an idea worth considering?
You’re acting like making something a penalty to discourage it will take it out of the game. Why do so many penalties occurs in a game, then? Why does fighting still exist? Fighting, holding, slashing, they’re against the rules, aren’t they? It’s not an extreme thing to say a hit like that should be penalized and it should be the hitter’s responsibility to avoid it (hence the penalty if they don’t). You even seem to agree, so again, what are you arguing about?
Reaves is coasting for 10 feet in a straight line before the hit, doesn't take a stride for at least 5 seconds, you could say he did let up. People can put the onus on Reaves all they want but Hronek, for his own health needs to be more aware. Its like using a crosswalk, as a pedestrian you have the right of way, but if a car plows you over, you're going to be wishing you were more aware of what was happening around you before blindly crossing the street.
__________________
The only thing better then a glass of beer is tea with Ms McGill
Last edited by Derek Sutton; 12-16-2022 at 08:48 AM.
Maybe i should put it another way. When you play hockey, getting hit hurts. Sometimes a lot. That is a big reason why you skate with your head up when you have the puck. That is why you might be reluctant to play the puck along the boards.
Skating with your head up, with great vision and awareness, with speed and agility. These are skills I want to see rewarded in hockey. The best players can do this and avoid hard contact. Take away the physical deterrent, and now we have a bit of a different game.
I want to reduce the risk of injuries full stop and interested in ideas on how to penalize dangerous hits in a way that reduces their frequency and magnitude. But to get to a point where you no longer have to worry about getting hit when you're carrying the puck? I personally don't want that.
Yes hit hurt but we are not talking about a clean hit here. We absolutely should be striving for players to not have to worry about taking a headshot when carrying the puck. What part about that hit was good for the game? The play had to be stopped so it's not like the hit was a turning point in the play. It was simply a goon injuring a player. The whole head down thing is nonsense. The NFL which has been much more progressive in player safety penalizes all unnecessary hits to defenseless players. It still hasn't changed the fact that wide receivers get hit in the middle of the field after catching a ball. It just means they are not getting laid out and carted off after catching a ball in the middle of the field. It's pretty clear there's still a large portion of the old guard that loves to see a player laid out on the ice and that's sad.
Last edited by Erick Estrada; 12-16-2022 at 08:52 AM.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Erick Estrada For This Useful Post:
Yes hit hurt but we are not talking about a clean hit here. We absolutely should be striving for players to not have to worry about taking a headshot when carrying the puck. What part about that hit was good for the game? The play had to be stopped so it's not like the hit was a turning point in the play. It was simply a goon injuring a player.
Headshot is debatable on this hit. Reaves gets no suspension, no hearing, no fine, no penalty, hit deemed clean.
__________________
The only thing better then a glass of beer is tea with Ms McGill
Reaves is coasting for 10 feet in a straight line before the hit, doesn't take a stride for at least 5 seconds, you could say he did let up. People can put the onus on Reaves all they want but Hronek, for his own health needs to be more aware. Its like using a crosswalk, as a pedestrian you have the right of way, but if a car plows you over, you're going to be wishing you were more aware of what was happening around you before blindly crossing the street.
lol again, people know this. This would be a stupid thing to say to someone who has just been hit by a car.
The argument isn’t “pedestrians shouldn’t have to look both ways before crossing the street in a crosswalk!” the argument is “cars should not be legally allowed to hit pedestrians in a crosswalk EVEN IF they weren’t looking where they were going.”
And would you look at that, they aren’t! So what are you even pretending to say?
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
lol again, people know this. This would be a stupid thing to say to someone who has just been hit by a car.
The argument isn’t “pedestrians shouldn’t have to look both ways before crossing the street in a crosswalk!” the argument is “cars should not be legally allowed to hit pedestrians in a crosswalk EVEN IF they weren’t looking where they were going.”
And would you look at that, they aren’t! So what are you even pretending to say?
What am I trying to say? It doesn’t matter who is in the right or who is at fault, if you are the one getting hit, it’s not going to end well. Just because one might have “right of way” doesn’t mean you can blindly enter a crosswalk, or skate with your head down. You are ultimately responsible for you, trusting others doesn’t always work out so good.
__________________
The only thing better then a glass of beer is tea with Ms McGill
Last edited by Derek Sutton; 12-16-2022 at 10:14 AM.
What am I trying to say? It doesn’t matter who is in the right or who is at fault, if you are the one getting hit, it’s not going to end well. Just because one might have “right of way” doesn’t mean you can blindly enter a crosswalk, or skate with your head down. You are ultimately responsible for you, trusting others doesn’t always work out so good.
And you think this isn’t something that people don’t know, a lesson that hasn’t been learned here… what? What is the purpose of pointing out this very obvious fact like it’s relevant?
Again, the difference between your analogy and situation at hand is that it’s still illegal to hit someone in a crosswalk regardless of what they’re doing, but it isn’t even a penalty to run through an unsuspecting player. The discussion is whether it should be, not “should people have to keep their head up or not????”
As I already pointed out, players will have to keep their head up regardless of it’s a penalty or not. Passes will need to be made, shots delivered, hits taken. So we’re past “keep your head up,” it’s a given. Players know that. Mistakes happen. Should it be legal to take advantage of that mistake and purposely run a guy through when he isn’t looking?
To use your analogy, should I be able to run a pedestrian down if they don’t make eye contact in the crosswalk? Yes or no?
Reaves is coasting for 10 feet in a straight line before the hit, doesn't take a stride for at least 5 seconds, you could say he did let up. People can put the onus on Reaves all they want but Hronek, for his own health needs to be more aware. Its like using a crosswalk, as a pedestrian you have the right of way, but if a car plows you over, you're going to be wishing you were more aware of what was happening around you before blindly crossing the street.
Gotta say if he hadn't made contact with the head, that is exactly the type of play you want to see as a Minni fan. But the if is doing a lot of work there, as you said Reaves had all of the time in the world to get lined up with his chest but he was too high, and hit him in the brain damage zone we all want them to avoid.
