GM's recommendation on hitting

[Guest micah]

Fin, you've been asked several times how much pre-instiogator rule NHL hockey you watched, and I'm not sure you answered. I suspect you're basing your oppinion on the rule of what you fear would happen rather than what you observed before it was in place.

Allowing players to pick fights without taking an additional penalty did not result in goons picking on star players before and I don't see why it would now. Enforcers might not be gifted scorers, but they are not always idiots either. They know that the Datsyuks of the league bring in the money, and they know that there is no way that the league is going to tollerate a $500k/yr hack pummeling a superstar for no reason. IF that ever became a problem, I would support efforts to stop it post haste - that is not hockey, that's a sideshow.

If you wanna see fighting just for the sake of fighting go watch boxing or something.

Come on, man. Nobody here is talking about "fighting just for the sake of fighting", the topic is fighting as a part of a package that will discourage headshots. I don't think that fighting is magic and I don't think that it will prevent every instance of thuggery - just like rules and penalties and suspensions and fines wouldn't - but there is room for all of them, and all of them together could form a nice package that's safer for the players and better for the fans.

If player A just took an elbow to the head, there is no ******* reason I can immagine for his teammate to recive an extra penalty for going after the bad guy. That's what good teammates are supposed to do, why discourage it with penalties, fines and suspensions? That is what the instigator rule does.

[HOCKEY MATTERS 167]

micah. dammit. i'm agreeing with you lately. wtf.

[Guest micah]

micah. dammit. i'm agreeing with you lately. wtf.

Don't worry, I'll say something ridiculous soon enough.

[Pucks 66]

So they way it's stated is open to way too much interpretation. You can go head hunting and get a two minute minor? Big deal that won't stop s***. We will see no consistency with this at all. That's not to mention what a circus act it will be when Collin "incompetent" Campbell decides to get involved after the incidents.

I'm all for a rules to be in place, but this seems way to broad. I guess we shall see.

Edited March 23, 2010 by Pucks

[Finnish Wing 110]

Fin, you've been asked several times how much pre-instiogator rule NHL hockey you watched, and I'm not sure you answered. I suspect you're basing your oppinion on the rule of what you fear would happen rather than what you observed before it was in place.

Allowing players to pick fights without taking an additional penalty did not result in goons picking on star players before and I don't see why it would now. Enforcers might not be gifted scorers, but they are not always idiots either. They know that the Datsyuks of the league bring in the money, and they know that there is no way that the league is going to tollerate a $500k/yr hack pummeling a superstar for no reason. IF that ever became a problem, I would support efforts to stop it post haste - that is not hockey, that's a sideshow.

Of course I'm basing my opinion of what the rule would cause to happen. I think you can relate it to real life. Let people police themselves and see what will happen. There's obviously a reason why there are referees in this game.

Yes, they do know it. Players obviously respect the league as you said. League makes the rules and hands the punishments. No need to remove the instigator.

Edited March 23, 2010 by Finnish Wing

[Guest micah]

Of course I'm basing my opinion of what the rule would cause to happen. I think you can relate it to real life. Let people police themselves and see what will happen. There's obviously a reason why there are referees in this game.

You're basing your oppinion on fear instead of history and direct observation. I don't think that's sound practice.

People are responsible for policing themselves to an extent. One may use force to defend themselves or another person from likely bodily injury. Police cannot be expected to stop all crime, and you and I have a responsibility to deter and or actively fight back against illegal attacks to the extent possible.

Yes, they do know it. Players obviously respect the league as you said. League makes the rules and hands the punishments. No need to remove the instigator.

If the league would give the boot to the Cookes of the league with the quickness they would give it to Donnald Brashear if he took to randomly jumping and kicking the s*** out of superstars, there would be no problem, that's true. Until that day comes, I'd like to see players able to defend themselves and their teammates without the threat of 17 minutes of penalty along with possible fines and suspensions.

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

You're basing your oppinion on fear instead of history and direct observation. I don't think that's sound practice.

People are responsible for policing themselves to an extent. One may use force to defend themselves or another person from likely bodily injury. Police cannot be expected to stop all crime, and you and I have a responsibility to deter and or actively fight back against illegal attacks to the extent possible.

If the league would give the boot to the Cookes of the league with the quickness they would give it to Donnald Brashear if he took to randomly jumping and kicking the s*** out of superstars, there would be no problem, that's true. Until that day comes, I'd like to see players able to defend themselves and their teammates without the threat of 17 minutes of penalty along with possible fines and suspensions.

How do we as a people deter illegal attacks?

[jollymania 162]

Get rid of blindside headshots and that's it, in the mean time remove the instigator, although it isn't the perfect fix, it would help a little

[Guest micah]

How do we as a people deter illegal attacks?

With the threat of fines, jail, and legal counterattack.

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

With the threat of fines, jail, and legal counterattack.

I'm talking about we as people. Not we as a legal entity.

Those threats are the same as those provided by the NHL rulebook.

[Guest micah]

I'm talking about we as people. Not we as a legal entity.

Those threats are the same as those provided by the NHL rulebook.

It is not legal per the NHL rulebook to fight back and defend yourself or another person.

As far as how normal folk defend themselves, it varies. Some learn to fight, some hire bodyguards, some carry guns, some exersize caution in where thy go and when, some lock their doors at night, etc. Most of us don't think about it very often, I don't. Some people live in places where they must worry every day about stopping some thug that wants to do them harm. Where are you going with this, and why are you asking questions that you know the answers to?

If Crosby were hitting my sister in the back with a stick and I feared that she was at risk of bodily harm, I could proceed to feed him punches until the threat was removed, and the only legal punnishment would be against him.

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

It is not legal per the NHL rulebook to fight back and defend yourself or another person.

As far as how normal folk defend themselves, it varies. Some learn to fight, some hire bodyguards, some carry guns, some exersize caution in where thy go and when, some lock their doors at night, etc. Most of us don't think about it very often, I don't. Some people live in places where they must worry every day about stopping some thug that wants to do them harm. Where are you going with this, and why are you asking questions that you know the answers to?

If Crosby were hitting my sister in the back with a stick and I feared that she was at risk of bodily harm, I could proceed to feed him punches until the threat was removed, and the only legal punnishment would be against him.

Because your discussion of self defense in society does not relate to self defense in the sport. Attacking someone for putting someone else out of a game from a cheap-shot is not part of "self defense" when the system knows it happened and can punish it accordingly (and when that player already received the entire brunt of the "crime" itself). That is vigilante justice.

They are not the same.

If we have a situation where Cooke repeatedly punches players in the back of the head without a single player attempting to stop him because it leads to a suspension or severe penalty, then there may be a parallel. That isn't the case here.

[Guest micah]

Attacking someone for putting someone else out of a game from a cheap-shot is not part of "self defense" when the system knows it happened and can punish it accordingly

Can punish it accordingly? I don't think it has anything to do with what the league can do, but what the league does. If the league ever gets so serious in their punnishments against cheap-shotters that they cease to exist, then players will not need to fight. Until the day that the league cleans up the game, the players should be able to police themselves as they have for the majority of the league's history.

That is vigilante justice.

..and I'm okay with that, at least in hockey. It isn't just about punishing bad guys, it is also about sending a message to others - "If you mess with this team you will be punished, even if the league won't get you, we will. Don't do anything stupid."

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

Can punish it accordingly? I don't think it has anything to do with what the league can do, but what the league does. If the league ever gets so serious in their punnishments against cheap-shotters that they cease to exist, then players will not need to fight. Until the day that the league cleans up the game, the players should be able to police themselves as they have for the majority of the league's history.

And that is my point. If hockey requires players to perform vigilante justice on others for cheapshots, then the league is not doing their job.

[ManLuv4Clears 7]

And that is my point. If hockey requires players to perform vigilante justice on others for cheapshots, then the league is not doing their job.

The league isn't doing their job, I think that's obvious. There is no consistency on who get punished and how, and there never has been since the instigator rule was put in place. I don't know if removing the rule will fix the problem at hand, but I don't think it would hurt. I wouldn't hold my breath on the NHL in changing their practices anytime in the near future, so something has to be done.

[Hockeytown0001 7,652]

It's the NHL. When was the last time they came out on the right end of a significant issue?

[HOCKEY MATTERS 167]

I miss old time hockey.

[Hockeytown0001 7,652]

I miss old time hockey.

"What was that, now?"

[Guest micah]

And that is my point. If hockey requires players to perform vigilante justice on others for cheapshots, then the league is not doing their job.

No s***?

I'm all for punnishing fight instigating, right after the league eliminates dangerous play.

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

No s***?

If it is no s*** then your gripe should be less on the instigator penalty and more on the NHL getting their s*** in order.

[Guest micah]

If it is no s*** then your gripe should be less on the instigator penalty and more on the NHL getting their s*** in order.

Whatevs, dawg. I live in the real world. I've seen the NHL without the instigator rule, and I know that it can exist and work reasonably well. "The NHL getting their s*** in order" with regards to preventing cheapshots through dicipline is something that I have never seen and am not sure I believe to be possible. I mean, that would be nice, much as sexy space aliems giving me money and handjobs would be nice, but I don't clamour for things that I'm not certain are even possible in this mortal coil.

[Doc Holliday 1,888]

Whatevs, dawg. I live in the real world. I've seen the NHL without the instigator rule, and I know that it can exist and work reasonably well. "The NHL getting their s*** in order" with regards to preventing cheapshots through dicipline is something that I have never seen and am not sure I believe to be possible. I mean, that would be nice, much as sexy space aliems giving me money and handjobs would be nice, but I don't clamour for things that I'm not certain are even possible in this mortal coil.

I'm sorry, I forgot that I live in fairy tale land.

I'll just leave and go ride my unicorn off into the sunset. Later, homeskillet.

[cusimano_brothers 1,655]

From TSN :

The National Hockey League is growing tired of waiting for the NHLPA to respond to the league's plan to introduce supplemental discipline for a blindside hit where the head is targeted.

The NHL has indicated that it expects to hear from the Player's Association at some point today, and the hope is the union will work together with the league to implement the change in time for tonight's games.

However, if the PA does not approve, the NHL has indicated it will consider moving forward without the players' approval.

...

Seems like the League wants to take advantage of the lack of leadership of the NHLPA.

[Guest micah]

Seems like the League wants to take advantage of the lack of leadership of the NHLPA.

Good. The league has to take action post haste in order to maintain any sense of credibility (or rather, as a first step towards gaining credibility). "But we were waiting for the NHLPA" will not be a good enough excuse if someone important gets hurt by one of these hits.

[toby91_ca 620]

I heard that the players would like to expand it beyond just lateral or coming from behind type plays, they want to avoid even the head shots that come head on (no pun intended). I may have heard wrong as I just got the end of a radio discussion yesterday.