In the meantime I've been digesting it all and chatting back and forth with the original curmudgeon (the OGC). The OGC suggested a post that sums it up quite nicely. I've been hoping for this for a while and now, here's the OGC:
NHL leadership stinks and the league is becoming a joke. Every time they have a chance to make a statement, they take a pass. This is the same league that hands out suspensions for vulgar gestures and flipping someone the bird. But when a guy is brutally injured, they turn a blind eye like it's nothing.Well put OGC. But he wasn't done. In response to this article on the Boston Herald website, in particular this line:
A caller to The Team 990 said it perfectly. How can players be held responsible for their sticks when they're falling on their butts and the stick flails, but not be held accountable for their elbows, shoulders and fists when in full control of their body? Only one word sums this up: bullshit.
The true villain, though, is the architectural genius who placed that small, exposed stretch of boards, stanchions and glass right in the area between the benches and created a tremendously dangerous hazard.The OGC had this reply:
Is that a little like blaming a rape victim because of the low cut dress she was wearing? In your world, Mr. Harris, I guess the aggressor is never at fault.
14 comments:
Oh please. Play actual hockey and you will understand that this was just part of the game and it wasn't intentional. If the proper boards were in place, this conversation wouldn't be happening. Watch any hockey game and look at every check. They're all the generally the same and in many cases worse, but in because the player got close lined and hurt badly(which is unfortunate) it has become a huge debate.
The rape comment is not even a close comparison.
"clotheslined"
You're missing the point. Intent can't, and shouldn't, be a factor. You have to be responsible for your actions.
Take an example of a cross-check from behind near the boards where the victim goes face face first into the lip of the boards resulting in an injury. That's a suspendible play while a cross-check from behind in front of the net with no resulting injury is not suspendible. To me that's the same as the Chara-Pacioretty incident. Where he was makes a difference and what happened makes a difference regardless of intent.
If the boards were designed properly, this check would have just been a check. How many players go into a check with their arms up? Almost all of them. It was just a badly placed check. I've seen worse checks at a pee wee game.
It was just a badly placed check.
I agree, horribly placed, and that needs to be considered and taken into account. Let's not forget it was interferrence, with the puck 14 feet away from they play. Chara skated in from centre ice. Chara's hand is clearly on Pacioretty's head as his head hits the stanchion.
This is no place to debate this. You disagree. That's fine, you're allowed to.
Again, it looks just like the majority of NHL hits. Nothing out of the ordinary.
What if every penalty(and there are a lot of penalties in hockey done by almost all players) created a bad injury? Thank goodness they don't. Which to me, means that this was just bad timing and bad luck.
Chara should have received a 2 min penalty(maybe he did, I don't know) for interference, that it. And maybe a heavy heart.
BTW - why is this not a place to debate this - its an opinionated blog. Its the perfect place.
You're arguing and you don't even know if he got a penalty?
Plus, hiding behing a veil of anonymity.
Irrelevant whether he got a penalty or not - I am discussing peoples thoughts on this.
I do understand that its painful to watch and I know the guy was injured badly, but I think people are overreacting with regards to Chara. People are so angry at him and I am intrigued as to why.
You missed another point. Chara may or may not be a bad guy, the point of this post was disappointment with the NHL, who have said they are trying to help avoid head injuries to players. I'm paraphrasing Pierre McGuire here, but he said something like "The NHL missed a great opportunity to send a message to players, regardless of intent or malice, that shots to the head resulting in injury are not acceptable."
you're right, I got sidetracked.
The NHL probably felt that this was not a strong enough case to send a message to the players. Its hard to make a point based on something that is so grey. That aside, maybe all the debating and discussions surrounding this incident, will make the players and spectators stop and think about the rules and the direction hockey needs to go.
Hope the Canadian makes a full recovery, that was ugly.
I agree, I hope it at least leads to changes.
Pierre McGuire also mentioned on Montreal radio that one of the league's younger GMs told him that the league really missed an opportunity to make a statement on this.
And with all due respect, "Anonymous", when you say: If the boards were designed properly, this check would have just been a check. How many players go into a check with their arms up? Almost all of them. It was just a badly placed check. I've seen worse checks at a pee wee game.
Isn't Chara responsible for knowing where he is on the ice. That was vicious. I'm not say that he want to break MaxPac's neck – there's little debate about that – but ultimately this is a case of being held responsible for your actions on the ice.
The league is deteriorating to shit. Crosby is out. The report on Propert is a huge eye opener. And there's been pretty much non-stop public outcry about shots to the head in the league.
When the league had a chance to make a statement, to stand up and say, "This has got to end", they totally crapped the bed.
And you can ask anyone who knows me and they'll tell you that this isn't my opinion as a Habs' fan, but as a hockey fan.
It's time Campbell and Murphy and Bettman to go.
Actual current NHL players are now speaking out against it. Real players, not some kid in Dartmouth who played on a line with a future Sloan member.
Joe Thornton says:
"It's just something with Boston. It just seems like they have a horseshoe," Thornton said. "We've seen the Milan Lucic cross-check to the head of [Maxim Lapierre] earlier and there's no disciplinary thing.
"It's just something about Boston and the disciplinary [decisions] are on their side. I'm not sure why that is. I'm not assuming that Colin [Campbell's] kid is on the team
and that's why, but it's really bizarre."
Henrik Sedin said this:
"What are you doing to do the next time Trevor Gillies comes down and runs a guy into the thing? You can't give him anything. And you tell the guys [Chara] has no history, so the next time he does it he still has no history because he didn't get suspended. I don't see the reasoning behind it. Give him at least something to show that's not acceptable."
"I'll tell you this: If you say that you don't know where things are around the ice, I think you're not telling the truth. You play the game for 20 years, you know it's there. It's got to the point, you have to suspend guys if you hit the head. You have to do it even if guys say they didn't mean to do it or it's an accident. You have to start somewhere.
"I don't think players know where the limit is. That's the bottom line."
NHL needs to play like International Hockey. Fast, furious, generally very clean and lets remove fighting from the sport - its sooooo boring.
I'm not from Dartmouth, I'm from Clayton Park.
In my 13 years of playing hockey, I can say, in my opinion that yes, I knew where I was on the ice, but when things like speed, pucks, players, the desire to score or to defend came into play, the last thing on my mind was to be concerned about whether or not I should check someone at a certain part in the rink or not. Thats called hesitation and we were taught to never hesitate.
Anyway, all the discussions relating to this particular hit is good for the sport. Everyone is questioning it, analyzing it, and trying to figure out how to deal with it. Its not being brushed under the table, and maybe one day I will start to become an NHL fan again.
-Chris M
Post a Comment