The debate over head hits continues

NBC Sports

Mar 26, 2010, 3:30 PM EDT

1 Comment

I don’t think the great David Simon could create drama quite like
this.

On Thursday night the NHL and the NHLPA agree to institute a
new ‘rule’ that gives the league the ability to actually punish for
blind-sided hits to the head. The consensus was that this is at least a
move in the right direction for the NHL, but there’s still concern over a
number of other dangerous hits plaguing the NHL.

Such as the one
that sent David Booth to the hospital for the second time in five
months, on the exact same night the NHL put the new rule into effect. If
you haven’t seen it (here’s the video) Booth gets rocked by Jaroslav
Spacek as he entered the zone, as Spacek catches Booth looking down and
slams him square in the chest. His shoulder also hit Booth squarely in
the chin, knocking him out and to the ice. Again.

The hit was
completely legal. There’s not even any debate about it.

Except now
we have cries of “It’s not enough!” In the wake of last night’s
devastating hit, now we get to talk about the merits of making any and
all hits to the head illegal.

From
Damien Cox of The Star:

But when bright young stars like Booth are being injured on these
types of hits, is it really worth keeping those hits in the game?

Moreover, given that blindside and so-called “lateral” hits are now
suspendable offences and by next season will earn a player an on-ice
penalty as well, isn’t the next logical step to say you just cannot
bodycheck an opponent in the head under any circumstances because the
danger is just too real given the size and strength of the modern player
and the fragility of the brain?

And we have this from Spacek after the game, per TSN:

“I tried to step up at the blue-line, he was kind of low and when he
turned, I was right there,” said Spacek after the game. “I’m not a dirty
player. It just happened. It was body on body. It’s too bad. You never
want to see that.”

The issue is now over the whole “he should have kept his head down”
mantra that’s pervasive with these sort of hits. The NHL, the players,
and most everyone involved in the game insists that they cannot take
these big open-ice hits out of the game since it’s such a vital part of
the physicality of the game.

It’s possible for a hit like Spacek’s to be perfectly fine; if Booth
was ducking, then Spacek’s shoulder most likely catches him square in
the chest. So who is at fault? The player that doesn’t adjust his hit
not to lay into the opposing player’s head, or the player who is skating
with his head down, or ducks into a hit?

The NHL will never be able to make a determination on ‘purposeful
hits to the head’ from the front, as there’s no way to say whether
someone intended to lay shoulder into someone’s chin.

What about players that turn away from a check while on the boards,
causing themselves to put in a vulnerable position and then be boarded?
It happened twice last night in the San Jose and Dallas game. If all
hits to the head are illegal, will we suddenly see players ducking down
into hits? I know it sounds incredibly stupid, but I never would have
thought NHL players would purposefully expose their back to a big hit
along the boards either.

I don’t buy the thought that making all hits to the head illegal will
suddenly make the NHL a league without big hits. The IIHF somehow
manages to create fun and physical hockey with all head hits being
illegal.

Now that the blindsided hits are illegal, we’re not going to see
anymore of those. Instead, we’ll get a slew of clean, open ice hits from
the front.

And we can just debate all season long all over again.

Skip to Comments (1)

Email

« Newer Iginla: "It's good that there's change."

Older » The debate over head hits continues

More ProHockeyTalk

Back to Homepage

No Comments (Feed for Comments)

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Older » David Booth's season likely over

More ProHockeyTalk

Back to Homepage

More ProHockeyTalk

Latest Posts

Top Posts

Subscribe