Exactly, where does it end? This is a slippery slope.
- ClaudeFather

For sure, I just want to avoid the outcome where there is no real means to counter a team that plays dirty in those more subtle things that I mentioned (besides referees, who vary wildly in willingness to call penalties, and a good pp). Big hits create space and there has to be some room for recklessness in the game if guys are gonna be allowed to maul each other as they go to the net and in the corners.

Having said that, flying elbows to the head should be punished harshly and honestly I'd be ok with the nhl giving Wilson a 1 or 2 game suspension for being reckless (even though saying that the head was the principal target here for Wilson and not for Johansen on Barrie, is absurd)

I said the same thing years ago concerning a possible Chris Pronger hit on Nathan Gerbe. Just by laying a clean shoulder hit, Pronger would be making contact with Gerbe's' head based on their height.

That is why I have an issue with automatic suspensions. You have to at least use some common sense, something which the NHL/NHLPA fight against tooth and nail.
- jmatchett383

Plus if a guy's skating with his head down then what are you supposed to do? Get out of the way? Not to say that you should try to put him on a stretcher, but head contact is likely to happen.

but i think the nhl has it right on that. this is an example of bigger playing blowing up a smaller player who has is head down.

it's a well executed body check that results in head contact; but no suspension. not at all like what wilson did.



- Tumbleweed

I agree. I think it really comes down to "targeting" which is why you have to use a small bit of common sense. In this video, the PPOC was the head, but that was due to the player's height disparity. In the Wilson hit on ZAR, the PPOC was the chest, but he targeted the head.

Yes, and 20 years ago I'd have agreed with you based on worldwide ignorance. Presently, we know that violent trauma to the head can lead to all sorts of medical impairments decades into the future. At the time, the Stevens hit on Lindros was deemed legal because we didn't know what a concussion really was or could lead to.

If Wilson really wanted to destroy him with a hit, he could have led with his hip, dipped his shoulder, or generally not exploded up through a guy to the point where he launched himself onto his own bench and still hit him just as hard without breaking his face and concussing him.

Heck, as much as Zac Rinaldo was a POS at times, he's half the size of Wilson and hit just as hard, but generally cleanly and without targeting a player's head. The fact that Wilson violently targeted the head (whether or not it was the PPOC is a different story) is the issue.
- jmatchett383

This is 100% true. Hell, 10 years ago I agreed with Don Cherry about everything. I thought hockey should be tough as hell, tougher than any other sport, that players all agreed about the risks and that OLD SCHOOL NHL was the best.

But then I learned all sorts of stuff. I grew up, I went to school, I have a son who plays hockey. But more than anything, we learned about CTE. We learned that a terrifying percentage of people who take repeated hits to their head rapidly lose their quality of life and that many of them go on to die early or kill other people.

Instead of facing up to the reality of what they helped do to Chris Benoit, the WWF erased him from their history. The NHL hasn't properly responded to what happened to John Kordic, Bob Property, Wade Belak and tons of other guys. Does the NHL want to be the mf WWF?

Head Shots need to be completely eradicated and if that means a less physical, more skill based game that is unrecognizable to previous generations, what of it?

In my life I can think of at least four distinct styles of games - 80s and early 90s, mid nineties clutch and grab dump and chase which lead to the dead puck era and then the post lockout scoring 'explosion' followed by whatever it is we have now where teams play for overtime points.

The point is, the game changes over time, and now that we know what concussions do to people, we have a responsibility to change the game accordingly.

Immediately outlaw fighting. Immediately outlaw any headshot.

Being from another culture and only starting following hockey in 2010 I really never understood why some of you guys cheer those types of hits.

Then I started learning about Hockey History and watch old games and I understood how the game was played 20, 30 years ago. I think some people are stuck in the past, specially when its about head trauma and what it can do to someone's life.

To me a big hit can look cool, but if it's at the cost of breaking someone's jaw or giving a concussion it should be toned down for the good of the players and preservation of the sport. If you lose a Kuznetsov, a Crosby, a Kucherov to a "clean" hit like this, its us fans of the sport who are also losing. You are taking a star player out of the game for a long period of time and threatening his health for a 2 seconds flashy hit. Is it really worth it? You dont need to eliminate all hitting from the game, just the predatory ones.

I don't know, just my opinion as someone who grew somewhere where there's 0 hockey being played and started to love the game for other reasons than big hits.

I agree with you in principle but there are priorities. Hits to the head are a much higher priority than slew foots and crosschecks.

This hit didn't have a massive impact on the game. ZAR's not a super important player for us and the chances that we would have capitalized on the PP are a smallish 25%. The slew foot on Maatta impacted the game way more. But we're not talking about game impacts here we're talking about player safety.
- Victoro311

Player safety is important, but so is the product on the ice...a game without big hits can get really tight and boring when interference, hooking, tripping and slashing aren't called. So if we are gonna legislate reckless hitting out of the game, we are gonna have to find ways to keep the game from suffocating itself.

I'd say that overall, this post-season has been pretty exciting though, so maybe this balance is good right now.

I agree. I think it really comes down to "targeting" which is why you have to use a small bit of common sense. In this video, the PPOC was the head, but that was due to the player's height disparity. In the Wilson hit on ZAR, the PPOC was the chest, but he targeted the head.
- jmatchett383

i think wilson lost is case on PPOC not being the head when he only used his shoulder to hit.

if he stayed upright like zadorov did, he would have had chest and hip contact; basically full body and probably still some head contact.

@claudefather whats wrong with trying to destory a player is that players have lives and families and people who depend on them. why would you want a player to get seriously injured and have the rest of their lives potentially ruined. what is wrong with you?

I think part of the issue on the ice is the NHL officials general disdain for assigning blame in the moment. The number of offsetting penalties resulting in 5v5 or 4v4 after a questionable hit reduces the immediate impact of penalizing a player for a bad hit.

Case in point, game 3 of Preds/Jets. Watson hits Wheeler. Not a high hit, but it looked bad because Wheeler was reaching for the puck & his helmet flew off. The Referee did not put his hand up until Sheifele came in and grabbed Watson and took him down. Then, Watson was given a penalty for charging? Charging? He took two strides towards the puck and made contact with the puck before hitting the player with his shoulder. How can that be charging? But the hit looked bad & the refs didn't want to give an advantage to anyone so they called offsetting penalties. Ridiculous. (That didn't cost the Preds the game...the team did that to themselves - so I don't blame the refs for the loss).

But this happens all the time. A guy gives a bad hit, a teammate comes in to stick up for his guy & the ref sends them both off. The NHL can talk all it wants about player safety. But until the guy initiating the bad hit consistently takes a bigger consequence for his actions than the second guy in...the problem will persist. I'd rather the refs get a few of them wrong, than to always offset them.

For example in the scenario above for the Preds/Jets, I would rather have seen Watson get an extra two for the perceived "bad" hit, than for it to be offsetting. Then, even if the ref saw it wrong, that can be corrected with retraining and video coaching. By constantly calling offsetting penalties, it has little to no impact on the game, and nothing gets addressed. It perpetuates the problem.

This is 100% true. Hell, 10 years ago I agreed with Don Cherry about everything. I thought hockey should be tough as hell, tougher than any other sport, that players all agreed about the risks and that OLD SCHOOL NHL was the best.

But then I learned all sorts of stuff. I grew up, I went to school, I have a son who plays hockey. But more than anything, we learned about CTE. We learned that a terrifying percentage of people who take repeated hits to their head rapidly lose their quality of life and that many of them go on to die early or kill other people.

Instead of facing up to the reality of what they helped do to Chris Benoit, the WWF erased him from their history. The NHL hasn't properly responded to what happened to John Kordic, Bob Property, Wade Belak and tons of other guys. Does the NHL want to be the mf WWF?

Head Shots need to be completely eradicated and if that means a less physical, more skill based game that is unrecognizable to previous generations, what of it?

In my life I can think of at least four distinct styles of games - 80s and early 90s, mid nineties clutch and grab dump and chase which lead to the dead puck era and then the post lockout scoring 'explosion' followed by whatever it is we have now where teams play for overtime points.

The point is, the game changes over time, and now that we know what concussions do to people, we have a responsibility to change the game accordingly.

Immediately outlaw fighting. Immediately outlaw any headshot.
- james_tanner1

this. 100% this

Exactly, where does it end? This is a slippery slope.
- ClaudeFather

It ends where it logically ends, the slippery slope argument is considered a logical fallacy. The issue people are discussing here is reckless hits causing head trauma, not slapshots that hit people in the head or any other made up consequence of changing how the NHL handles these hits.

Also, how bad are the NHL refs? If the hit warranted a 3 game then it should have been called a penalty, by 1 of 4! refs on the rink. I don't understand how these calls are polar opposite, no call on ice but you get suspended. Makes no sense at all.

Its no wonder poop still happens because the rules change from game to game.

Must be a cold day in Hell, I actually agree with/like something Tanner said.

Idiotic post of the day goes to....
- IRON.MAIDEN

BRO IM LISTENING TO MAIDEN NOW! what a coincidence!

You can support your team but still call out garbage play.
- cap1681

100%

A horsepoop play is a horsepoop play. Doesn't matter if it's my favourite player or not. Never once was upset over the Kadri suspension, and IMO, Wilson got off lightly considering he has been under the microscope a few times this year. Makes me wonder what it will actually take to see a 5, 10, 15 game suspension in this new NHL.

Seems the league is more serious about performance enhancing drugs than performance limiting actions.

BRO IM LISTENING TO MAIDEN NOW! what a coincidence!
- Leniwm1

Seems to be a mod sneaking around

Do we all understand that this is a contact sport and when two players engage there might be head contact? Aston Reese did his part, he just ended up taking the brunt of it. Wilson was not thinking I'm gonna smash this guys face in, two players lined up and one ended up getting hurt. End of story.
- ClaudeFather

Claude, the adults are talking, please go back to your hole. Also, consult the following link.


https://aretheflyersoutyet.com/

Totally agree with this.

The headshot part is obvious. Should be the same as a high stick in that if you make significant contact with the head on a check, it is a penalty. If you destroy a guy's head its 5, a game and a suspension. Even if it was not their "intent".

Also completely agree with the cross checking thing. It baffles me when you see a defenceman is allowed to completely destroy someone with cross checks in the back with no call and then a minute later a guy will get called for doing a one handed stick lift on a guy.

Like Tanner said. You need to implement rules and stick to them. All year, regular season and playoffs. I love the physical part of the game but you don't have to destroy a guys face when you can take the body.

Being from another culture and only starting following hockey in 2010 I really never understood why some of you guys cheer those types of hits.

Then I started learning about Hockey History and watch old games and I understood how the game was played 20, 30 years ago. I think some people are stuck in the past, specially when its about head trauma and what it can do to someone's life.

To me a big hit can look cool, but if it's at the cost of breaking someone's jaw or giving a concussion it should be toned down for the good of the players and preservation of the sport. If you lose a Kuznetsov, a Crosby, a Kucherov to a "clean" hit like this, its us fans of the sport who are also losing. You are taking a star player out of the game for a long period of time and threatening his health for a 2 seconds flashy hit. Is it really worth it? You dont need to eliminate all hitting from the game, just the predatory ones.

I don't know, just my opinion as someone who grew somewhere where there's 0 hockey being played and started to love the game for other reasons than big hits.
- Conse

No better team to start rooting for than last year's Stanley Cup champs, huh?

Claude, the adults are talking, please go back to your hole. Also, consult the following link.


https://aretheflyersoutyet.com/
- outpost316

He’s got half a point. The NHL needs to understand that a contact sport results in injuries. It can stem the tide but unless it becomes the non hit league, it’s going to have gray area hits like this that could go unpunished or 5 games.

No better team to start rooting for than last year's Stanley Cup champs, huh?
- Ftown19125

Why not? If you've never followed a sport before and need to pick a team to follow, the obvious choice is the one that is the best and will get talked about the most.

Lightly reprimanded?!?

I'd say it was more than he deserved.

No better team to start rooting for than last year's Stanley Cup champs, huh?
- Ftown19125

Hells yeah! Who else would he root for, Hakstol, G & the Flyers?

Hells yeah! Who else would he root for, Hakstol, G & the Flyers?
- chimpira

Hakstol wasn't the coach back in 2010.