The Players' Tribune: "It's Time for Action" - Ken Dryden

Absurdity

light switch connoisseur
Jul 6, 2012
10,797
6,817
Dryden calls for the penalizing of all hits to the head: It's Time for Action | By Ken Dryden
The book is called, Game Change: The Life and Death of Steve Montador and the Future of Hockey, and it is the story of an everyman player, not a superstar or a goon. It’s about science as it relates to brain injuries, and about a game — how it has changed throughout its history, and how, as it’s become better and more exciting, it has left its players more vulnerable to head hits. But the book is not foremost about what’s wrong. It’s about what steps — specific, concrete, do-able steps — can be taken to make it right.

I wrote the book for NHL commissioner Gary Bettman.

On every matter of significance, he is hockey’s central decision-maker. So I wrote the book to try to create for him the conditions he needs to make the changes necessary when it comes to concussions and head hits. Now, a few months since the book came out — and after hearing from countless hockey and non-hockey people — I’m more convinced than ever that commissioner Bettman and the NHL cannot wait, and need not wait, any longer before initiating these changes.

The time for action is not 10 years from now.

The time is now.

Because hockey, as we currently play it, has a problem.
In my opinion, I agree with Dryden. Penalizing and suspending hits to the head will not only keep the players safer, but my hope is that supplemental discipline would also be more consistent. With that said, I will still enjoy the physical aspect of the game along with fighting. What do you guys think?
 
  • Like
Reactions: maxbme and Dr Hook

Dr Hook

It’s Called Ruins
Sponsor
Mar 9, 2005
14,097
20,878
Tyler, TX
I agree with Dryden also. Although he was a hated Hab, I loved THE GAME, and he was on that track even in the early 80s. I know some don't care for him because of his anti-fighting stance, but a lot of what he argues makes sense. Hits to the head, with the size, strength, and speed of todays players and the equipment, just have no place. We talk about the game we love getting "wussified" but it's even sadder to me to Bergeron miss an entire season, or the careers of Eric Lindros and Marc Savard ended. It will always be a rough and risky sport, but there should be a zero tolerance policy for head hits. Yeah the NHL needs to be more consistent, but if they can nail that part, then I don't think its out of line to have a three strikes policy for head hits or something like that. Douchebags like Matt Cooke should have been given the gate. Marchy, for all I love the guy, should be on really thin ice after he Johansson headshot. Ovie ought to be afraid of a lifetime ban after that cheap shot to Carlo.

Sorry, rant over, but as someone who has been involved with war veterans with TBI and all the assorted issues, this one really hits close to the heart for me.
 

BNHL

Registered User
Dec 22, 2006
20,020
1,464
Boston
A lot of hits to the head are not targeted or are inadvertent,so penalizing all hits to the head discounts intent. Don't like it.
 

Ratty

Registered User
Feb 2, 2003
11,970
3,488
Rive Gauche
Visit site
Dryden calls for the penalizing of all hits to the head: It's Time for Action | By Ken Dryden

In my opinion, I agree with Dryden. Penalizing and suspending hits to the head will not only keep the players safer, but my hope is that supplemental discipline would also be more consistent. With that said, I will still enjoy the physical aspect of the game along with fighting. What do you guys think?
Wait a minute!
You agree that hits to the head should be penalized but you would still enjoy fighting. Where are those fighting punches directed? To the hips?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Estlin

Fenway

HF Bookie and Bruins Historian
Sponsor
Sep 26, 2007
69,117
100,318
Cambridge, MA
In 1964 the Bruins drafted Dryden and then traded his rights to Montreal minutes later. :cry:

upload_2018-4-6_23-44-43.png


99% of the time Gary Bettman is the smartest person in the room but Dryden can match wits with his fellow Cornell alumnus.

The day will come when insurance companies will walk away from football and hockey unless something changes - or make the premiums so high that colleges and youth hockey can't afford coverage.

Something has to change.
 

Absurdity

light switch connoisseur
Jul 6, 2012
10,797
6,817
Wait a minute!
You agree that hits to the head should be penalized but you would still enjoy fighting. Where are those fighting punches directed? To the hips?
Fighting is between two willing combatants. A surprise elbow, forearm, upper shoulder etc. to someone's head isn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GloryDaze4877

Fenway

HF Bookie and Bruins Historian
Sponsor
Sep 26, 2007
69,117
100,318
Cambridge, MA
One of the biggest what if's in Bruins history.

Suppose the B's kept Dryden.....He has written often that he loved Boston Garden even more than the Forum.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chief Nine

Colt.45Orr

Registered User
Mar 23, 2003
14,728
5,044
Canada
Montador was "not a goon" sure --but he fought a lot and wasn't very smart about it as he suffered many, many losses. McQuaid (for example) will not suffer as many losses (shots to the head) in his career as Montador would in a single season. Just throwing in some context:
Steve Montador Fights

Also, the NHL has already made lots of changes to hits/fights but Dryden wants to ignore that so he can act like a revolutionary force. His anecdotal stories of his Slapshot hockey era don't hold water in 2018.
 

ODAAT

Registered User
Oct 17, 2006
52,295
20,532
Victoria BC
Dryden calls for the penalizing of all hits to the head: It's Time for Action | By Ken Dryden

In my opinion, I agree with Dryden. Penalizing and suspending hits to the head will not only keep the players safer, but my hope is that supplemental discipline would also be more consistent. With that said, I will still enjoy the physical aspect of the game along with fighting. What do you guys think?
I like fighting too however, can`t have it both ways, it`s not like players are throwing punches at each other`s shoulders. I wouldn`t be one bit shocked if we see so few fights 5 years from now that we are all shocked when one occurs. We watched Olympic hockey with NHL players for a few decades, no scraps, anyone NOT entertained with that brand of hockey?

I despite head shots, what disturbs me even more than those are hits from behind. With head shots I often see a player shift at the last second and it sometimes leaves them exposed and the player who`s doing the hitting wasn`t targeting the head but with that shift, the head became/becomes the point of contact. With hits from behind, I still see far too many players completely ignorant that they are literally staring at a guy`s name and number as they are about to lay a hit.

This one will never happen but in recent years, I see far too many players turn their backs before they get hit to draw a penalty. They too should get a penalty, IMO, it could be perceived as unsportsmanlike to do this knowing there is a good chance the opponent will get dinged with a penalty
 

whitetape

Registered User
Jun 3, 2006
773
458
A lot of hits to the head are not targeted or are inadvertent,so penalizing all hits to the head discounts intent. Don't like it.

A lot of sticks to the face are not targeted or are inadvertent, and usually cause far less damage than hits, yet they are penalized automatically except for a few specific cases.
 

missingchicklet

Registered User
Jan 24, 2010
36,589
34,464
The NHL could make a start by enforcing the rules it already has in place. We have seen multiple hits to the head on Bruins' players go completely unpunished this season. Those were hits that, according to the rules, should have resulted in suspension. DoPS does not do its job in a competent or consistent fashion.
 

BMC

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Sep 26, 2003
70,075
60,547
The Quiet Corner
A lot of hits to the head are not targeted or are inadvertent,so penalizing all hits to the head discounts intent. Don't like it.

That's the trickiest part IMO. As you say not all hits to the head are deliberate attempts to injure, I would say most are inadvertent with one or both players moving their bodies in such a way that one of them ends up getting hit in the head.

I still say more needs to be done with making the boards/glass safer, a better helmet and more energy absorbing body padding. I would emphasize doing that before ruling that all hits to the head are to be penalized.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chief Nine

Absurdity

light switch connoisseur
Jul 6, 2012
10,797
6,817
A lot of hits to the head are not targeted or are inadvertent,so penalizing all hits to the head discounts intent. Don't like it.
Players have been suspended before with or without intending to hurt said player:



A big reason why I shared the article is because of the inconsistencies in suspensions and rulings on and off the ice.

So the question then becomes, are the rules currently in place fine, and it's the DoPS that isn't doing its job enforcing said rules or should there be a change in the rules to simplify things that may bring more consistency or will it micromanage the game?

I thought Hornqvist's hit on McAvoy and Schenn's hit on Krejci were suspendable, but the league determined there was no ill-intent and both players put themselves in a vulnerable position so no suspension. Backes' hit on Nielsen was late, and Nielsen's head got clipped by Backes' shoulder even though contact was made to Nielsen's chest. I don't think Backes had intent to injure Nielsen, but he still got suspended.

If the league looked at principal point of contact more prominently than intent, do Schenn and Hornqvist get suspended while Backes doesn't, or is the onus, in McAvoy's and Krejci's instance, on the player to not put themselves in a vulnerable position even if contact to the head was made with intent or not? I do think some sort of changes need to be made whether it is an overhaul of DoPS or in the rules, and in my opinion, the incidents the Bruins have been a part of this season are good examples as to why there needs to be some changes.
Result is still the same. Object......concussion.
I don't see it as black and white.

Because I agree with some of Dryden's points, do I automatically have to agree with everything he says?

Do I have to either be pro physical hockey vs. non-contact hockey? Pro contact sports vs. only watching tennis and golf while I protest against the NHL, NFL, MMA, UFC, and WWE etc.?

Players who fight know the risk and fighting does have a place in the NHL. Having a player end another player's career on a hit does not.

As I mentioned in my response to BNHL, I think with Dryden's article coming out, now is a great time to talk about ways to fix the DoPS and discuss ways how they can be more consistent in their rulings to keep players safe. It could be as easy as deciding that any principal point of contact to the head will result in a tiered punishment, stiffer punishment for each act committed, until players learn to not hit someone in the head. Or it can be argued that Dryden's ideas would micromanage the game to the point that it will take most if not all physicality out of the sport. For me, it's finding the happy medium between keeping the physicality in the game as well as the players (they know the risk of playing a physical sport) as safe as possible. If Dryden's ideas aren't going to work, feel free to argue his points, then I am more than welcome to discuss how the DoPS can do better and further enforce/change the rules.
I like fighting too however, can`t have it both ways, it`s not like players are throwing punches at each other`s shoulders. I wouldn`t be one bit shocked if we see so few fights 5 years from now that we are all shocked when one occurs. We watched Olympic hockey with NHL players for a few decades, no scraps, anyone NOT entertained with that brand of hockey?

I despite head shots, what disturbs me even more than those are hits from behind. With head shots I often see a player shift at the last second and it sometimes leaves them exposed and the player who`s doing the hitting wasn`t targeting the head but with that shift, the head became/becomes the point of contact. With hits from behind, I still see far too many players completely ignorant that they are literally staring at a guy`s name and number as they are about to lay a hit.

This one will never happen but in recent years, I see far too many players turn their backs before they get hit to draw a penalty. They too should get a penalty, IMO, it could be perceived as unsportsmanlike to do this knowing there is a good chance the opponent will get dinged with a penalty
If you were to grade the DoPS, what would you give them?
 
Last edited:

NDiesel

Registered User
Mar 22, 2008
9,350
9,935
NWO
100% agree with this premise. Inadvertent high sticks are still called penalties. They are still called 4 minutes if the player is injured - accident or not. Why should a hit to the head be any different?
 

ODAAT

Registered User
Oct 17, 2006
52,295
20,532
Victoria BC
Players have been suspended before with or without intending to hurt said player:



A big reason why I shared the article is because of the inconsistencies in suspensions and rulings on and off the ice.

So the question then becomes, are the rules currently in place fine, and it's the DoPS that isn't doing its job enforcing said rules or should there be a change in the rules to simplify things that may bring more consistency or will it micromanage the game?

I thought Hornqvist's hit on McAvoy and Schenn's hit on Krejci were suspendable, but the league determined there was no ill-intent and both players put themselves in a vulnerable position so no suspension. Backes' hit on Nielsen was late, and Nielsen's head got clipped by Backes' shoulder even though contact was made to Nielsen's chest. I don't think Backes had intent to injure Nielsen, but he still got suspended.

If the league looked at principal point of contact more prominently than intent, do Schenn and Hornqvist get suspended while Backes doesn't, or is the onus, in McAvoy's and Krejci's instance, on the player to not put themselves in a vulnerable position even if contact to the head was made with intent or not? I do think some sort of changes need to be made whether it is an overhaul of DoPS or in the rules, and in my opinion, the incidents the Bruins have been a part of this season are good examples as to why there needs to be some changes.

I don't see it as black and white.

Because I agree with some of Dryden's points, do I automatically have to agree with everything he says?

Do I have to either be pro physical hockey vs. non-contact hockey? Pro contact sports vs. only watching tennis and golf while I protest against the NHL, NFL, MMA, UFC, and WWE etc.?

Players who fight know the risk and fighting does have a place in the NHL. Having a player end another player's career on a hit does not.

As I mentioned in my response to BNHL, I think with Dryden's article coming out, now is a great time to talk about ways to fix the DoPS and discuss ways how they can be more consistent in their rulings to keep players safe. It could be as easy as deciding that any principal point of contact to the head will result in a tiered punishment, stiffer punishment for each act committed, until players learn to not hit someone in the head. Or it can be argued that Dryden's ideas would micromanage the game to the point that it will take most if not all physicality out of the sport. For me, it's finding the happy medium between keeping the physicality in the game as well as the players (they know the risk of playing a physical sport) as safe as possible. If Dryden's ideas aren't going to work, feel free to argue his points, then I am more than welcome to discuss how the DoPS can do better and further enforce/change the rules.

If you were to grade the DoPS, what would you give them?

For hits from behind on plays where the player does NOT turn his back but has his name/numbers clearly in view at all times, 5 minimum. Not gonna lie, heard it talked about before, and this one woulda killed the B`s on the Marchand play vs the Devils, but on a play where it`s pretty obvious there was little to no doubt what the offender was doing, he`s gone for not just the suspension but until the player returns to action up to a set number of games (15/20), only way to send a message is to truly send a message.
 

GloryDaze4877

Barely Irrelevant
Jun 27, 2006
44,395
13,873
The Sticks (West MA)
Any reason why?

Any reason why what?

If you mean why am I not 100% behind it...because there are hits that make contact with the head as the secondary point of contact (say after initially hitting chest or shoulder).

I don’t think those should be suspended, but it you want to take the “subjective” out of it, they may need to go that route.
 

NDiesel

Registered User
Mar 22, 2008
9,350
9,935
NWO
Any reason why what?

If you mean why am I not 100% behind it...because there are hits that make contact with the head as the secondary point of contact (say after initially hitting chest or shoulder).

I don’t think those should be suspended, but it you want to take the “subjective” out of it, they may need to go that route.
Yeah I was curious to your reasoning.
That's completely fair, but I don't really think the issue is whether it should be suspendable or not, it's that a hit that hits the head - primary or secondary point of contact- could still be career ending. I don't think in the grand scheme our biggest worry should be whether the punishment for each is fair - it's whether the players being hit can continue on without his brain being turned to mush.

Based on that alone, should we not protect the player by just outlawing it? Maybe to make it fair any hit to the head is worth 5 and a game misconduct at minimal, while more egregious ones start to garner more punishment.
 

BNHL

Registered User
Dec 22, 2006
20,020
1,464
Boston
100% agree with this premise. Inadvertent high sticks are still called penalties. They are still called 4 minutes if the player is injured - accident or not. Why should a hit to the head be any different?
Because they are both stupid
 

BNHL

Registered User
Dec 22, 2006
20,020
1,464
Boston
Players have been suspended before with or without intending to hurt said player:



A big reason why I shared the article is because of the inconsistencies in suspensions and rulings on and off the ice.

So the question then becomes, are the rules currently in place fine, and it's the DoPS that isn't doing its job enforcing said rules or should there be a change in the rules to simplify things that may bring more consistency or will it micromanage the game?

I thought Hornqvist's hit on McAvoy and Schenn's hit on Krejci were suspendable, but the league determined there was no ill-intent and both players put themselves in a vulnerable position so no suspension. Backes' hit on Nielsen was late, and Nielsen's head got clipped by Backes' shoulder even though contact was made to Nielsen's chest. I don't think Backes had intent to injure Nielsen, but he still got suspended.

If the league looked at principal point of contact more prominently than intent, do Schenn and Hornqvist get suspended while Backes doesn't, or is the onus, in McAvoy's and Krejci's instance, on the player to not put themselves in a vulnerable position even if contact to the head was made with intent or not? I do think some sort of changes need to be made whether it is an overhaul of DoPS or in the rules, and in my opinion, the incidents the Bruins have been a part of this season are good examples as to why there needs to be some changes.

I don't see it as black and white.

Because I agree with some of Dryden's points, do I automatically have to agree with everything he says?

Do I have to either be pro physical hockey vs. non-contact hockey? Pro contact sports vs. only watching tennis and golf while I protest against the NHL, NFL, MMA, UFC, and WWE etc.?

Players who fight know the risk and fighting does have a place in the NHL. Having a player end another player's career on a hit does not.

As I mentioned in my response to BNHL, I think with Dryden's article coming out, now is a great time to talk about ways to fix the DoPS and discuss ways how they can be more consistent in their rulings to keep players safe. It could be as easy as deciding that any principal point of contact to the head will result in a tiered punishment, stiffer punishment for each act committed, until players learn to not hit someone in the head. Or it can be argued that Dryden's ideas would micromanage the game to the point that it will take most if not all physicality out of the sport. For me, it's finding the happy medium between keeping the physicality in the game as well as the players (they know the risk of playing a physical sport) as safe as possible. If Dryden's ideas aren't going to work, feel free to argue his points, then I am more than welcome to discuss how the DoPS can do better and further enforce/change the rules.

If you were to grade the DoPS, what would you give them?

The big problem is intent,which is very difficult to prove. Was the hit malicious? Was the head targeted? Was there any evidence of attempted avoidance? What is the player's history? I would give the DoPS an F. Too inconsistent,too much indicated bias.
 

ballofhate13

Registered User
Jan 6, 2018
237
131
Dryden calls for the penalizing of all hits to the head: It's Time for Action | By Ken Dryden

In my opinion, I agree with Dryden. Penalizing and suspending hits to the head will not only keep the players safer, but my hope is that supplemental discipline would also be more consistent. With that said, I will still enjoy the physical aspect of the game along with fighting. What do you guys think?



I am totally fine with Dryden on this. what I do have a problem with is legal hits by players now are responded by the other teams trying to punch said player in his head for the legal hit.
 

Alan Ryan

Registered User
Jun 1, 2006
9,071
1,506
A lot of sticks to the face are not targeted or are inadvertent, and usually cause far less damage than hits, yet they are penalized automatically except for a few specific cases.

A punch to the head in a fight is an intent to injure. No other way to interpret it.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad