Toggle sidebar

The new and improved concussion thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

straka91*

Guest
Not against banning youth of checking, love the idea actually.

The only way the NHL is going to rid of concusions is ban checking, make the puck plastic and hollow, and turn the ice into gum. There will always be concussions in a contact sport especially when players can get up to 20+ mph.

I think the only way to help the rate of concussions is doing the reverse of they are doing now. Less saftey equipment. Players put on all that gear and literally become invincible making them overconfident and less respectful of the opposing team.
 
Kritter471

Kritter471

Registered User
Feb 17, 2005
7,714
0
Dallas
That Mercury News article is ridiculous and wrong in so many ways, I don't even know where to start.

Nichol was not suspended for violating rule 48. He was suspended for elbowing that involved the head. Thornton absolutely and clearly violated the blindside rule, and if he hasn't figured out how yet, he needs to look up the definition of "blindside."

Then the author tries to compare it to the Crosby stuff, which is equally ridiculous. Neither the Hedman hit (boarding but the head was neither the primary point of contact nor targeted - the head was involved in a hit that took the whole body) nor the Steckel collision (incidental contact initiated by Crosby) violate rule 48 and are completely other worlds from the Thornton hit.

The Nichol hit is closest to the Kostopoulos hit on Stuart, though much more illegal than Kostopoulos because of the contact from the extended forearms. Targeting the head in an otherwise allowable check is fine. But Nichol's extended forearms bring the elbowing rules into play, and elbowing violations to the head are always taken fairly seriously.

If the author really wanted to make a point about the rule being confusing, he needed to cite the suspension to Kostopoulos. Bringing in a pair of valid suspensions and whining the Sharks just don't understand, though, is really a commentary on the team's victim mindset.
 

Dado

Guest
billycanuck said:
Savard has another concussion. IMO, retirement is his best bet for a happy life after hockey.
Click to expand...

Savard made it back for the playoffs, but now he's really messed up, and will miss a playoffs anyway. Really have to wonder if the best thing in Crosby's case is to pack it in for the rest of the season, including playoffs, and really really err on the side of caution.

But nobody in management, and no player, is willing going to accept that. Maybe the rule should be something like "if you aren't symptom-free in 2 weeks, you're automatically out for six months".
 

Robert604strom

Registered User
May 31, 2010
686
0
Victoria
I bet you the concussion rate is at the same as it was before,the knowledge is just much more greater. Comparing my first concussion to the last one i had a year ago the docters know alot more about it now.
 
LadyStanley

LadyStanley

Registered User
Sep 22, 2004
106,495
19,520
Sin City
http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/more_sports/headhunting_ok_by_pa_3LxPicYDOv4bpl2VvdaGFM

Slap Shots has been told the NHLPA, at least as the union has been represented on the competition committee, has consistently argued against punishments that fit the crime of head-targeting.

Indeed, we were told by a well-placed source the PA only signed off on Rule 48 last summer on the condition that VP Colin Campbell not impose what the players referred to as "super suspensions," for those guilty of coming laterally to apply blindside hits to the head.

Which is why suspensions, even for repeat offenders, are generally fewer than five games.
Click to expand...


:shakehead


If you're serious about concussions, shouldn't you have a "punishment fit the crime" consequence?


Seems like it might be better to ban hits to the head all together.
 
Drake1588

Drake1588

UNATCO
Sponsor
Jul 2, 2002
30,103
2,499
Northern Virginia
"If you're serious about concussions, shouldn't you have a "punishment fit the crime" consequence?"

You just made a statement that treated, as an assumption, the idea that everyone is serious about about concussions. Why?

Posit: Not everyone is serious about concussions. This is why initiatives to date have been slow, piecemeal, and half-hearted.

We are certainly not about to see the NHL ban all hits to the head. A certain amount of violence, and tolerance for the odd player's career flaming out as a result of head hits, may be considered acceptable by the self-appointed Stewards of the Game. It's a blood sport mindset.
 
Drake1588

Drake1588

UNATCO
Sponsor
Jul 2, 2002
30,103
2,499
Northern Virginia
Indeed it is a blood sport. I was not suggesting that any of the above is a bad thing. I'm on the side of the stewards on this one. Preserve the physical aspects to the game, even if a few players end up on the losing end. I'm OK with this.
 

Dado

Guest
I misinterpreted your earlier post, then. IMO your position is quite defensible.

Isn't punching another player in the head the walking talking definition of a head shot? If they were serious about head shots, seems the quickest way to send that message would be to ban fighting.
 
Confucius

Confucius

There is no try, Just do
Feb 8, 2009
22,152
7,120
Toronto
Dado said:
I misinterpreted your earlier post, then. IMO your position is quite defensible.

Isn't punching another player in the head the walking talking definition of a head shot? If they were serious about head shots, seems the quickest way to send that message would be to ban fighting.
Click to expand...

The fighting is just a joke. It's all staged not much more serious than WWE. I liked the fights when it was true emotion spur of the moment. Now with my thug will meet your thug next game. It's become a sideshow when it used to be part of the game.

Anyway the difference with fights is you enter into them fully prepared and consent to get smacked in the head, if that be the case.
 

Dado

Guest
Hockeyhopeful said:
Anyway the difference with fights is you enter into them fully prepared and consent to get smacked in the head, if that be the case.
Click to expand...

Sure.

But why allow it, if doing something about head shots and concussions really is a priority? Circus or not, those are real bare-knuckle punches being thrown...
 
Confucius

Confucius

There is no try, Just do
Feb 8, 2009
22,152
7,120
Toronto
Dado said:
Sure.

But why allow it, if doing something about head shots and concussions really is a priority? Circus or not, those are real bare-knuckle punches being thrown...
Click to expand...

They allow it because it is a sideshow. If the heavyweights on each team couldn't fight anymore they'd be out of work. They'd be replaced with a skill guy. The guys main job is to fight so he accepts the risk just like a boxer does. The league probably doesn't really care if a heavyweight is out of a job because of concussions. There are other fighters. The league cares when stars get put out of work because they're harder to replace.

Yes I believe the league concerns are different with the fighters on teams.
 
Kritter471

Kritter471

Registered User
Feb 17, 2005
7,714
0
Dallas
Dado said:
Sure.

But why allow it, if doing something about head shots and concussions really is a priority? Circus or not, those are real bare-knuckle punches being thrown...
Click to expand...
Rule 48 is not about completely eliminating concussions per se but it's about giving players the ability, should their eyes be up, to see head-high hits coming and brace themselves as much as possible. With the neck strength of a typical NHL player, being able to see the hit can seriously reduce the hit coming because he can tense those muscles and lessen the violent whiplash that causes the serious concussions.

Concussions from fights are relatively rare because of that.

Players are also not obligated to fight, so the risk isn't really the same as hits you can't see coming.
 
LadyStanley

LadyStanley

Registered User
Sep 22, 2004
106,495
19,520
Sin City
http://nhl-red-light.si.com/2011/02/07/players-action-needed-to-stop-headshots/

SI's Hackel on the state of affairs as Boston's Savard is "shut down" for the season due to concussion(s).

Recalls that in 2009 NHLPA's Kelly suggested to the GMs that more needed to be done to prevent head shots/injuries. Was not well received. However, in 2010, they reversed themselves and instituted Rule 48.

And on the inconsistency in calls...
Sports Illustrated’s Pierre McGuire, who gets as close to NHL action as anyone when announcing from rinkside for NBC and TSN, was asked about the Boyle hit this morning on Ottawa radio Team 1200 and he wondered if the Ranger defenseman would be suspended because he has no previous headshots on his record. McGuire decried the inconsistency in the headshot rulings and added, “There’s got to be something that happens that gets the attention of these players and I don’t know what that is. They had a chance to do something with Danny Paille, which was clearly…a malicious play and a predatory play and they gave him four games.â€
McGuire, who has long been an advocate for stronger measures against hits to the head admitted that he was frustrated by the league’s response to the issue. “You get to the point where you talk so much about it over the last 10 to 12 years; you knew it was an issue because you’re down there all the time, yet it seems to have not really caught the attention of the decision makers in the league.â
Click to expand...
 
Kritter471

Kritter471

Registered User
Feb 17, 2005
7,714
0
Dallas
LadyStanley said:
http://www.tsn.ca/nba/story/?id=352935

NBA player learns that all he has to do to return from concussion is give his word to doctor's he's OK. Wants league to come up with concussion policy.

You kinda think with all the publicity throughout sports there would be a bit more required to return.
Click to expand...
There's not a requirement because it's ridiculously difficult to tell when somebody is "recovered enough" from a concussion, and there's also a fair bit of controversy about impact testing's reliability. A study done on high school players showed many had significant decreases in their impact tests throughout the season even though they never received a concussion.

Generally, the medical standard is one week symptom free, including symptoms that only occur when your heart rate gets up (that's what sounds like's getting Crosby right now). But many symptoms are self-reported, so a player who wants to return could lie about experiencing dizziness or nausea. And until medical science finds some way to see the damage and healing from a concussion on an MRI, functional MRI or CT scan, that's going to be the best we've got.

So with the NBA, a doctor shouldn't clear a player until he's been symptom-free a week regardless. The only thing I might change about that is make it a designated list of doctors to prevent players "doctor shopping" for someone who wouldn't agree with the initial diagnosis and would clear them before a week.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom