Zdeno Chara hit on Pacioretty

[Prez]

http://www.torontosun.com/sports/hockey/2011/03/09/17550286.html

I have watched it over and over and I agree with the leagues decision that it was a clean hit. Montreal fans are belly aching but I believe the problem lies more with the arena having stanchions than Chara intentionally attempting to injure a much smaller player. It's a very poor and dangerous design.

I hope the league doesn't cave into some of the bleeding hearts and try to eliminate the hard hitting. The game is so much more faster now that they have eliminated the clutch and grabbing making the hits and collisions more violent. Maybe they can bring back a little clutching without the grabbing to slow things down a bit.

 

[HOE is a sick Kitty]

You like the hard hitting eh?

How about the 78 concussions they have had in the NHL so far this season?

Is it worth it?

 

[Steven J]

I agree it was a clean hit, just finishing off his check. The problem lies with the "turnbuckle" structure atop the boards.

There was a similar hit by Tom Laidlaw on Al Iafrate quite a few years ago:

See video at 1:20

[video=youtube;8_LgKnYVj4w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_LgKnYVj4w&feature=related[/video]

 

[Tee Tee]

Hockey is a mans sport. The problem is the players are bigger and faster with what seems like armoured plated equipment. I play twice a week in a league and some boys love to rough it up. The difference is we can't skate at 80 miles an hour.

I agree with Chunky and Regular Joe about the arena boards design being the cause of this particular incident.

 

[crickeys]

So here's a novel idea, why not keep the lower body protection as is but limit the body armour they are allowed to wear from the waist up.

My guess is that with less protection these tough guys like Cooke won't be running everybody that they can line up.

Bringing back the centre line might slow them down a bit too. Of course they could also take out a row of seats around each rink and make for bigger ice surfaces. Not necessarily Olympic size mind you but say half way in between.

 

[Agent: Yip]

Interesting idea. As a former Rugby player (who also played some football) I always felt that all that armor that is worn on the shoulders and the helmet only gave players a false sense of security.

 

[Alicia M.]

Well, limiting the protection on the upper body would lead to all sorts of injuries simply from falling, losing an edge, getting hit with the puck, etc.

On the same note then, why not limit the upper body protection on linebackers in the NFL?

They removed the centre ice line to speed UP the game. Now you're talking about slowing it down?

Making the ice surface bigger is just going to allow the players to get more speed up for even harder hits.....What really needs to be done is to do away with the dasher board. The walls should be smooth and seamless to the glass and have all arena glass the same. There is zero reason not to. To me this is just about as bad as having different sized rinks in different cities. No reason for that either.....

Same as the squared off edge at the ends of the benches, there's no reason for that either. The corner could be rounded and the perpendicular wall could be angled to reduce the risk of impact. In fact, the part that Pacioretti hit doesn't even have to be there.....it could be set back a foot from the boards.....To make matters worse he didn't even have the puck. CHaro deserves a couple of game suspensions for that. Now if it was a clean hit, in the middle of the ice on a puck carrier? No problem, he can use his size but to run a guy into a stancion like that.......

When you compile all the hits into one video, they look like a lot. I've watched more game than not where there wasn't any hitting at all let alone big hits like the ones in the video. I don't mind the open ice hits where the puck carrier has his head down. It's the blindside and the clothesline hits that are a problem. Clipping a guy is much worse than hitting him from the side or front.

One more thing on the don cherry video: a LOT of those hits would be penalties now.

 

[David C]

Bosco I have to admit it man, I love a good hard hitting emotional game. I remember watching Wendal Clark (pit bull) coming across and delivering a bone crunching hit. It brings fans and spectators to their feet all the time.

At the same time the players should have a certain amount of respect of one another and not intentionally attempt to injure but we all know that in any sport, especially fast paced contact sports there will be injuries, they are unavoidable in the real world.

On the other hand poorly designed arenas can easily be avoided and all that is needed are some $$$ and common sense. The same goes with the player’s equipment, softening them up without reducing reliability should be easily accomplished.

As much as some dislike Don Cherry and dismiss him as a goon loving loud mouth, he actually does make a lot of sense. Some of his suggestions are;

1) soften the shoulder pads,
2) Removing icing, how many get injured racing for the puck?
3) Remove the instigator penalty, then the good players will have protection,
4) he was the first one to start screaming about the poorly designed boards.

I apologize if I'm rambling; I'm still recovering from a hang over

I apologize if I'm rambling, I'm still recovering from a hang over!arty:

 

[Sylvia]

It's interesting that you bring up Wendel.

I was listening to an interview with him on the radio the other regarding concussions.

He said that when he played the Oilers in his day the only 2 players he had to worry about ''hit wise'' were Semenko and Messier. So 2 players on an entire team.

Today in the NHL he went on to say that there are about 8 or 9 players on each team that can and will try to take you out on a given night.

The reason for the change he went on to state was there was no fear of repercussion as well as the advances in equipment making today's players ''Robo'' (my word) players with absolutely no worry for their own safety as they use their bodies as projectiles against each other.

Putting the red line back in would slow the game down yes. The idea being that a player would not be able to accumulate as much velocity to drive his body through an opponent.

Conversely a bigger ice surface with a centre line would make more room for players to maneuver to hopefully avoid being lined up for tha big concussive blow.

As for tboy assertion that limiting protection would lead to all sorts of injuries simply from falling, losing an edge, getting hit with the puck, etc. Well there were very few of those injuries in the days before they became gladiators so why would that change.

While I'm at it I would do away with those composite sticks as well. Players wouldn't be able to shoot as hard but at the same time the players getting hit with those shots would not sustain the injuries that are happening.

Last of all the goalie equipment needs to standardized and made smaller. they look like Lacrosse goalies out there right now. With the composite sticks gone the goalies would stand a better chance of stopping some of these shots that they can barely see.

 

[gregory_dittman]

Interesting points noted by Wendel and it does make a lot of sense.

I don't believe they can ever go back to wooden sticks. You can't stop technology but I would like to see the red line back, removing the stanchions and making the boards more flexible, removing the touch icing and abolishing the instigator rule.

 

[Cammie]

Baseball never went to the aluminum bats did they.

Sometimes technology is a bad thing and tradition should be maintained.

 

[dlc8675]

So, why do you think they made helmets mandatory?

If there wouldn't be more injuries due to misadventure don't you think the players would prefer not to wear as much equipment? Think of how fast and maneuverable they'd be?

I'd go back over the years to the 60's and 70's and read up on the stats for injuries, you might find that more players were injured, and played injured, than they do now.....This chart does show there are more injuries today, but I can't determine if the numbers are adjusted to pre or post expansion stats per capita.

http://www.google.ca/search?q=nhl+i...vns&ei=GE99TZbBJ8jbrAHM2IHNBQ&ved=0CCgQyQEoBQ

 

[Brigitte H]

When did the use of helmets become an issue? Helmets came in during the 30's I believe after the Bailey-shore incident. No dispute from me on their use.

A friend of mine's son is 8 and he was telling me that with his shoulder pads on his shoulders are wider than his. Sorry but that is ridiculous.

Another that I knew played 10 years in the NHL and at 6'4 235lbs he's a pretty big guy but with his upper body pads he is massive. He told me that he would rather go back to the pads of 20 and 30 tears ago across the board.

The reason why is because players who would never think of taking a run at other players now feel invincible with the extra armour they have.

The equipment manufacturers have come out with a ''better'' product but the reality is that the players have exploited this and with bigger bodies on the same size ice surface the game is resembling a pin ball game. Give em an inch and they take a mile.

Remember on coaches corner when Cherry showed an elbow pad to Maclean and then pounded it off the desk. Did you here the thud and Maclean's reaction when Cherry hit him in the head with it.

The harder equipment and the disregard for fellow players has led to many more career ending concussions. Lindros, LaFountaine just to mention a few and it looks like Savard and Crosby are finished as well.