Should head shots be banned?

[nfreeman]

There's an increasing debate in hockey circles about whether head shots should be banned, without regard to whether the checker intentionally hit the opponent in the head. In other words -- it would be up to the checker to make GD sure he avoided hitting the opponent in the head. The ban would be backed up by penalties for all lesser hits and heavy suspensions (presumably without pay) for hits like

or this one or at least half of

.

 

Those in favor of a ban point to star careers that have been cut short due to concussions (Lindros, LaFontaine, Bure and the Skill), not to mention the downright scary long-term effects of concussions. Players such as LeCavelier and former players such as Roby point out that checkers could absolutely avoid head shots if they knew they had to do so. Those opposing a ban say that skaters need to know to skate with their heads up and not to cut into the middle, and that a ban would take the hitting out of hockey.

 

Personally, I favor the ban. I think there would still be plenty of hitting, and plenty of big hits. The OHL has the ban, and it works just fine. There would be an adjustment period, and some players would get suspensions that would infuriate their fans, but then everyone would get used to it -- and we'd see much less unnecessary loss of dazzling skill due to injury.

 

Whaddya think?

[deluca67]

Ban them, personal responsibility and respect for your opponent needs to brought back to the game.

[carpandean]

I tend to agree with the ban. I'm just not entirely sure what Weight was supposed to do in that situation. Sutter brought his head down to Weight's shoulder level. I guess Weight would have to just play the puck, but if Sutter looks up, he might blow right past him. Will skill players start feigning a head duck to avoid a check?

 

I guess if it's worked in the OHL, it can't be that big of a problem.

[shrader]

Suspension is too harsh. They absolutely need to create a 2 minute contact to the head penalty. But then again, I'm sure you've all read this rant from me in the past.

[SwampD]

Suspension is too harsh. They absolutely need to create a 2 minute contact to the head penalty. But then again, I'm sure you've all read this rant from me in the past.

I think it has got to be more. A vicious blow to the head is not the same as shooting the puck over the glass in your zone.

[Stoner]

I wonder if a different standard for charging would help. Most of these hits are preceded by pretty good run-ups. The rule would have to be completely rewritten. "Distance traveled" does no one any good.

 

But, yeah, ban them. Only in the NHL would the defense to a head shot be, "Well, he had his head down."

[shrader]

I think it has got to be more. A vicious blow to the head is not the same as shooting the puck over the glass in your zone.

 

You're allowed to scale up for more vicious hits just like you are for any other call, but there needs to be a standard 2 minutes for any contact to the head. You have to start somewhere.

 

 

But, yeah, ban them. Only in the NHL would the defense to a head shot be, "Well, he had his head down."

 

I know we all love to rip on the NHL for the way it's run, but they do deserve credit for the way they handle concussions. No other league has the 7 days symptom free restriction. Yes, they're not doing what they can to prevent them like the NFL has, but they've done far more post-concussion than any other league has. Just look at former NFL players like Ted Johnson who might as well be a vegetable at this point.

[BetweenThePipes00]

I would have no problem with a 2-minute penalty, even if it is accidental, and the ref can increase it if he sees fit and then the league can suspend if they see fit ... they call accidental tripping penalties all the time, they call accidental high sticking all the time, why not for this too? And it's up to the ref to decide if a hit from behind is 2 minutes for boarding or a major ... there are a lot of subjective decisons in the refs' hands already, I don't see why this should be any different.

Now, if you want to argue it's part of the game and all that, that is different. I am sure there are many who want the big hits and don't really care if guys get hurt. But to hide behind "Well sometimes it is accidental" is weak, guys get penalties for accidents all the time.

They are pretty strict in the NFL and the hits still happen, but I gotta believe it makes guys think twice before going high. Thing is, no one gets mad if you tackle low ... in the NHL if you go low with a hipcheck they get all pissed you might be going for their knees ...

I don't know what the answer is, no matter what they do, the game has gotten so much faster and the players so much bigger, it's a matter of time before we have someone paralyzed or worse.

[darksabre]

Unequivocally yes. There is no reason to allow hits to the head of any kind. With players being conditioned in college to follow rules of no head contact, there is no reason it should change when they enter the minors and eventually the NHL.

[shrader]

I would have no problem with a 2-minute penalty, even if it is accidental, and the ref can increase it if he sees fit and then the league can suspend if they see fit ... they call accidental tripping penalties all the time, they call accidental high sticking all the time, why not for this too? And it's up to the ref to decide if a hit from behind is 2 minutes for boarding or a major ... there are a lot of subjective decisons in the refs' hands already, I don't see why this should be any different.

Now, if you want to argue it's part of the game and all that, that is different. I am sure there are many who want the big hits and don't really care if guys get hurt. But to hide behind "Well sometimes it is accidental" is weak, guys get penalties for accidents all the time.

 

Those accidental trips and high sticks are a part of the game too. They're still penalties.

 

They are pretty strict in the NFL and the hits still happen, but I gotta believe it makes guys think twice before going high.

 

They're strict about it in the NFL only when the QB is the one being hit. Feel free to gun for the heads of the other 10 players out there.

[BetweenThePipes00]

They're strict about it in the NFL only when the QB is the one being hit. Feel free to gun for the heads of the other 10 players out there.

Not entirely true, thet hit on Boldin brought a suspension and he dipped his head at the last split second. The QB is more protected for sure but ...

Whatever, they have to do something, but I am not holding my breath.

[shrader]

Not entirely true, thet hit on Boldin brought a suspension and he dipped his head at the last split second. The QB is more protected for sure but ...

Whatever, they have to do something, but I am not holding my breath.

 

Do they ever throw a flag for contact to the head of any player other than the QB? I can't remember ever seeing one.

[ROC Sabres]

This could really go either way. In the case of hockey, there are always going to be players looking for the cheap head shot and stuff like that doesn't fly with me and they should be banned. On the other hand, hits like what Campbell had on Umberger could be considered a suspension for a clean hit because he didn't have his head up and leaned into the hit trying to reach for the puck. It is a part of the game but when it becomes the only game a player knows how to play, that's when it has to become a suspension.

 

As for football, the QB is the only one that gets the safety net. Boldin was a rare case. If Boldin took that hit, stayed down for a minute and got up and kept playing, no fine would have been made. The fact that he was injured and could continue playing made the league think 'hmmm maybe would should do something to keep the best players in the league from getting hurt and make defenseman stop hitting them helmet to helmet cuz we won't make money off of a superstar that outs for 3-4 weeks'.

 

There were a few times when players were hit in the head that a penalty was called on the team but most of the time it wasn't a football hit, it was poking the guy in the eye or actually punching them. Hits to the head happen on every play, whether it be helmet to helmet, shoulder to helmet, leg to helmet. These guys take a beating and as much as they should be protected, that comes with the territory of being a pro football player.

 

So to sum it up, I voted no.

[That Aud Smell]

i voted "no," but only because i'm not quite on board with there being automatic suspensions for making contact with an opponent's head when delivering a check.

 

the league has to do something about this, to be sure, but i don't think it can be a black/white/up/down sort of thing.

 

others who've already posted have more ably identified the gray areas of this issue than i can.

 

EDIT p.s. i've watched the wideman hit 5 times and still can't determine from the reply whether he actually made contact with stajan's head. like i said, there's a lot of gray areas in this issue affecting a lot of gray matter.

[BetweenThePipes00]

Automatic suspensions is too far ... but a 2 minute penalty, even if it is accidental, is no different that giving someone an automatic 4 minutes for an accidental high-stick that draws blood.

[That Aud Smell]

i guess that's where i see the middle ground -- an automatic 2-minutes for any contact at all, then there's referee's in-game discretion ( :sick: :death: ) for upward departures to double-minor all the way up to major/game misconduct, and also league reviews of every incident, with the option of suspensions and a policy of dealing firmly with repeat/egregious offenders.

[mrjsbu96]

i think they have to bring some regulation to the equipment. i hear the point about it working in the OHL, but to me it is about the equipment. i just can't see what dougie weight is supposed to do differently. take away the center ice hits and you take away a big part of the game. i personally don't believe suter is hurt if weight is not wearing the 'body armor' that is shoulder and elbow pads these days...

[shoveldog]

Too many rules! Let them play the game as it was intended to be played. The NFL treats QB's like namby pambies and to me it takes a lot away from the game. If a player knows he has a chance of getting creamed, he plays differently (more careful) or he risks injury.

 

I blame a lot of it on modern equipment... yes, guys are bigger today, but you never saw guys skating through the middle of the ice with their head down back when they didn't wear helmets. Guys take bigger risks today than they did years ago because the equipment is more protective. Does it improve the game? I dunno.

[2ForTripping]

Do they ever throw a flag for contact to the head of any player other than the QB? I can't remember ever seeing one.

Yes they do. In fact during this past wekkends GA vs FLA game one of the Georgia o lineman was flagged for illegal contact to the head while blocking. He got his hands under the chin of the d lineman and tore his helmet off. I've seen the same call several other times season , college and pro. FWIW

[ForbiddenDonut]

Keep your head up!

 

Elbows, jumping, or otherwise targeting the head should bring suspensions.

But sometimes a skater just needs to look both ways before crossing the ice.

[shrader]

I blame a lot of it on modern equipment... yes, guys are bigger today, but you never saw guys skating through the middle of the ice with their head down back when they didn't wear helmets. Guys take bigger risks today than they did years ago because the equipment is more protective. Does it improve the game? I dunno.

 

Blaming the equipment is fine, but you completely missed what is probably the biggest issue with it. The Armor these guys are wearing is usually the cause of most head injuries. Those huge, hard plastic shoulder pads might as well have spikes on them when they're driven into a guy's head.

[That Aud Smell]

this sort of sh*t disgusts me

 

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNJ3X9tHqf0&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNJ3X9tHqf0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

that's borderline criminal ... or maybe just criminal.

 

and poor van ryn

 

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

the guy's had a hard year.

[spndnchz]

That first one is a bad hit, but com'on, he turns his body a half second before he gets smashed into the boards, no way the Montreal player holds up.

 

The incident left Kostopoulos visibly shaken. He planned to give Van Ryn a call to apologize.

 

"I was trying to get in there, get a hit and get the puck," Kostopoulos said. "Like I said, I didn't anticipate him turning and I couldn't stop myself. And I hope he's all right."

[shrader]

They've at least tried to do something about hits like that, unlike the shots to the head that we've been talking about.

[That Aud Smell]

That first one is a bad hit, but com'on, he turns his body a half second before he gets smashed into the boards, no way the Montreal player holds up.

saw that quote as well. maybe recent events and mounting frustration have me pre-disposed to crying wolf at this point. :unsure:

 

 

EDIT: re-watched it, and i can't get on board with saying the hit was a good one, or even one that i want to see in hockey.