It seems all that's to come out of the NHL general managers' meeting in Florida - they finish up March 16 - regarding protecting player's heads will be little more than head games. The GMs said the day before the meet wrapped up that there will be no new rules; instead they'll simply enforce rules already in place and level stiffer penalties. They talked about how hitting must be kept in the game and that the game is inherently dangerous. While they say they want to eliminate the danger of hits to the head, they spoke more about applying existing rules.
Brian Burke's Statement on Hits to Head: A Firm Grasp of the Obvious
In the story linked above from NHL.com, to defend their position, Toronto Maple Leafs GM Brian Burke talked of a hit Mattias Ohlund inflicted on Phil Kessel last season. Ohlund hit Kessel in open ice and hard, making contact with the head. Kessel was not concussed and Burke said that if he had been it wouldn't have made a difference.
"We want that hit in the game," Burke argued. "Phil has to be more alert and keep his head up. He didn't get a concussion on that play, but even if he did, I'd have the same view. We want that hit in our game. What's distinctive about our game from anywhere else in the world is the amount of body contact. So we have to try to take out the more dangerous hits and make it safer for the players, but keep hitting in the game."
Burke's point that hitting is wanted in the game is arguably an obvious one and a check of a number of stories, and fan comments below those stories, did not produce one media member, player, coach or fan, who suggested taking hitting out of the game to protect heads. Keeping hitting in hockey isn't in danger by taking head shots out. Yet whenever that possibility is brought up, the Burkes and Don Cherrys of the hockey world invoke the former.
Hitting High to the Head Doesn't Have to be in Hockey
This hit from Joe Thornton on David Perron last November is a good example. Thornton had the chance to hit Perron but did he need to hit him in the head with his shoulder? It also looks like his elbow may have been raised up and got Perron in the chin.
Had he been made aware of avoiding the head in order to avoid fines and possible suspension, he may have stayed away from hitting Perron high and yet still effectively bodychecked the St. Louis forward. It's the same with the Ohlund hit on Kessel, Ohlund clearly raises his arms up and pushes forward at the head while also raising his shoulders, resulting in Kessel's helmet being knocked back.
He didn't have to do that to hit him any more than Zdeno Chara needed to give the extra shove to Max Pacioretty, a shove that created extra force and arguably left Pacioretty with a more severe injury than he would otherwise have had. Another example is the Mike Richards hit that knocked David Booth out of hockey for months. He didn't need to hit him high. The Matt Cooke hit on Marc Savard is the worst of all, and such hits should result in heavy suspensions. Of all these hits only Thornton was suspended (two games).
Burke, Bettman, GMs: Hockey Dinosaurs
Falling and hitting your head is an unhappy consequence of hockey, but head shots need not be. And while Burke, Gary Bettman and GMs are not in the category of Cherry when it comes to outmoded thinking and an inability to put players before plays, they still fail to see that they could keep hard hits in the game while protecting players' heads.
Because of this lack of vision, is it possible a player could be grievously hurt, or worse, because of a hit to the head that need not have been? Let us hope that never happens despite the fact that once again GMs did essentially what they did about head shots the last time.
They talked.
Join the Conversation