Tag Archives: Colin Campbell

It Just Keeps Getting Better

Posted on by

Well wasn’t that nice of Mike Murphy, wasn’t it?

Now that Colin Campbell has stepped aside, Bettman’s cousin gets to take the reigns as far as discipline goes from now, until Brendan Shanahan takes over at the start of next season. I wonder how warm and fuzzy Shanny feels this morning that Murphy went ahead and doled out a four game punishment to Vancouver’s Aaron Rome for knocking Boston’s Nathan Horton out of the playoffs?

While it would be nice if this 4 game ban was actually the start of some new standard, there’s no indication that Shanahan sees things the same way as Murphy does, or that he plans to pick up where Murphy leaves off. The general assumption (or hope?) is that Shanahan will rip up the book and start anew; beginning a slow and painstaking journey in restoring confidence in the NHL’s disciplinary process by bringing a fresh perspective and approach to how supplementary discipline is handed out. If that’s indeed the case, then Murphy just put Shanahan in a really unenviable spot; fans are perplexed with the Rome suspension – unless of course it’s a new benchmark for blows to the head, in which case I believe most fans will embrace this new standard. But in essence, he has forced Shanahan to follow suit next year by punishing players with at least four game suspensions (though many would argue that four games in the Cup Finals is worth at least twice as many in the regular season) for similar offenses. Anything less, and the usual “same old, same old” refrain will erupt once again. Whatever path Shanahan takes, he would be well served to behave in the opposite of the current guard. That is to say that he must be transparent and open with how he plans to deal with supplemental justice. And for goodness sake, he has to avoid consulting everyone under the sun before reaching a decision.

And what of the hit that has cost Rome the rest of the Cup finals? Opinion on the hit ranges from blaming the victim to villifying the offender. Personally I believe the hit was a tad late, but it was not blindside. The only way it could ever be defined as blindside is because Horton was admiring his pass and wasn’t looking at what was coming in front of him. It’s his responsibility to keep his head up. If Rome doesn’t hit Horton in that situation, he’s out of a job, plain and simple.

As I remarked a couple weeks back, the NHL’s department of hockey ops set the table for themselves as far as criteria goes a couple years ago when they suspended Alex Ovechkin for hitting Brian Campbell from behind. In his statement, Colin Campbell ended his statement with the following:

“If you cause a player to be injured, then you have to be responsible for the play that you’re involved in, if there’s any carelessness or recklessness in it.”

Still, I do agree with the league’s “stance” that if you hurt somebody by being reckless, you should be suspended. We can argue whether or not Rome was reckless in wiping out an opponent who had no idea what was about to happen. The fact is the league saw it that way, and so it’s a closed case. The trouble is that many, many other hits have adhered to these same criteria yet the offending player was not punished. Yeah, the Pacioretty hit is the poster child for the league’s hypocrisy in this instance, and that’s what has many fans, Habs fans in particular so angry and confused. Again.

Using Campbell’s statement above, Chara should have been suspended. He was certainly being reckless, and he obviously caused injury. Yet he skated away scot-free and even received a standing ovation upon his return home to Boston. The issue becomes even more confounding when you take Murphy’s comments on the Rome suspension. Murphy said that the result of the hit, and the lateness of the hit are what compelled Murphy to give Rome four games. How then, did that logic not apply to when Chara hit Pacioretty? Hypocrisy? Stupidity? Favoritism? Double standards? Different rules for stars? Whatever the reason was for not suspending Chara, it was wrong then, and that wrong has been amplified now.

By the same token, again, I have no problem with a suspension for a hit causing injury. It apparently is too much, however, to ask the league to be honest and consistent with their punishments. With vagaries like “we have our own formula at NHL hockey operations for determining late hits”, it’s no wonder that we fans have totally lost faith in the supplemental discipline process. Like any good chef, everyone knows that a formula can be tweaked on a whim, and the league has clearly been a mad scientist in the kitchen. They jerk around with the formula on a case to case basis so that the end result suits their taste. How else can we rationalize the haphazard, inconsistent and bizarre decisions the league has made over the years. Players are confused, and a decline in the quality of officiating indicates that the officials are also unsure of themselves.

The day after the hit that sidelined the Canadiens winger, the organization announced that Pacioretty had suffered a severe concussion and a fractured C4 vertebra in his neck. Bruins fans and media alike thought it was a conspiracy to get Chara suspended through embellishment of the extent of the injury. Yet in the same fashion, the Bruins organization was quick to divulge the severity of Horton’s concussion and that his season was over. They didn’t even wait until the next day; they let Horton’s status be known in the minutes following game 3. I wonder if Bruins fans figured it was another conspiracy to get Rome suspended? Naw, their team wouldn’t be that classless and devious…or whiny and weasly…would it? Of course not…just don’t listen to the trifecta of liars in Ference, Lucic and Coach Julien who want you to believe their words, but ignore their repeated actions.

A short time after being stanchioned, Pacioretty was released from hospital and resumed his recovery; opening a twitter account, and having the audacity of going to a movie theater were just two of the the things he did to fill his suddenly open schedule. Similarly, Horton was released from hospital the very next day after being crushed by Rome. Teammate Milan Lucic soon after admitted that Horton had been texting him. Tweeting. Texting. Tomayto, tomahto. I wonder if Bruins fans have embraced their own ”embellished injury” theory yet? Let’s see what happens if Horton is feeling well enough to be in attendance for game 4 in Boston. If he is, I’m guessing he’ll get on the jumbotron, and I’m guessing he’ll get an ovation. Movie theaters. Arenas filled with light and noise. Potayto, potahto. In short, these incidents are so strikingly similar, yet the hypocrisy spouting from Boston now that their guy has been felled is so thick you need a chainsaw to cut through it. If you’re a Bruins fan reading this, and your retort is “well at least we didn’t call 911″, then you have no leg to stand on.

I’m not here to say that the Bruins have embellished. Clearly Horton is hurt. The sight of his crumpled body on the ice is as sickening as seeing Pacioretty laying motionless. What I am drawing attention to is the manner in which the people in Boston reacted in the aftermath of the Pacioretty/Chara incident. Now that they find themselves in a similar situation, hopefully they now see things differently.

As Murphy addressed the media yesterday, he credited his buddy Colin Campbell on numerous occasions for teaching him everything he learned. The same Colin Campbell who was embroiled in an email scandal that revealed extreme bias and in which should have resulted in his immediate termination. The same Colin Campbell who went on TSN Radio earlier this year and confessed to not knowing the rules anymore. The same Colin Campbell with a conflict of interest. The same Colin Campbell that made a mockery of the league for over a decade. If that doesn’t say enough about Mike Murphy’s education, then I don’t know what does. Remember Mel Brooks’ role from Spaceballs? The supreme schmuck President Skroob? Towards the end of the movie as all hell is breaking loose, Skroob turns to one of his minions and says “Sandurz! Help me! I don’t know what to do! I can’t make decisions! I’m a President!” Somehow Spaceballs and the NHL seem to fit hand-in-hand these days. Surrounded by assholes. Major assholes.

Don't be shy! If you liked it, share it!

It All Makes Sense Now

Posted on by

If you detected sarcasm by the time you finished reading the blog title, you’re on the right track and your sarcasm radar is working just fine.

When our civilization ends (May 22 October 21, 2011, if you need to know), the next great society of beings will sort through our vast history and learn all kinds of things about us; what we ate, who we worshipped, what we listened and danced to, what we watched on tv, who our leaders were, and countless other cultural, political and societal customs. But the one thing they will never, ever figure out no matter how advanced they are is the mystery wrapped in an enigma, wrapped in a flour tortilla and deep fried in stupid that is Colin Campbell.

I’m not going to run down the entire list of head scratching, inconsistent, and downright ridiculous rulings he has meted out over the past several years as the NHL’s brainless head of discipline. I’ve done that, and so have many other journalists and bloggers. And to be honest, this would turn in to a 10,000 word blog post that nobody would read. But I want to take this time to point out two cases of blatant, overt hypocrisy and contradiction Colin Campbell has committed over the past two years alone. Yet he not only keeps his job - despite the obvious conflict of interest that comes with having his son play for the Bruins - but we are told by Campbell’s superiors that he is doing an outstanding job.

The first case of blatant contradiction (of many) stems from the now infamous Chara/Pacioretty incident. Consider this quote from Campbell when he suspended Capitals superstar Alex Ovechkin in May, 2010:

“And so I think he has to be responsible in how he takes a [Brian] Campbell in, and what kind of position the other player’s in. And he had moved the puck already, Campbell. Look, if there’s no injury on the play, we probably, we don’t do anything, but that’s part of the supplemental discipline process. If you cause a player to be injured, then you have to be responsible for the play that you’re involved in, if there’s any carelessness or recklessness in it.”

Now replace Brian Campbell’s name for Max Pacioretty’s in the above statement, and you’re left wondering why Campbell’s office didn’t suspend Zdeno Chara. You can argue that it was a hockey play, and that it happens all the time. You can show me the clip of Hal Gill introducing Jon Sim in to the stanchion (though the two plays are totally different). But when you look at the above bolded text, Colin Campbell makes it crystal clear that regardless of your intentions, hockey play or not, if you hurt somebody badly enough (and we’re not talking about a run-of-the-mill bump or bruise here), you will be suspended. I wonder if anybody asked Colin Campbell why or how his statements from March 2010 no longer applied in March of 2011? Especially given the seriousness of the injury (please, no Dr. Recchi comments!)

The second incident is an even more perplexing example. Two years ago, New York Rangers Head Coach John Tortorella was suspended for one playoff game for hosing down a fan with the contents of a water bottle. For his part, here’s what Campbell had to say about Coach Torts’ suspension:

“While it is a difficult decision to suspend a coach at this point in a playoff series, it has been made clear to all of our players, coaches and other bench personnel that the National Hockey League cannot — and will not — tolerate any physical contact with fans. We do not take this action lightly.”

Continued Campbell:

“That investigation revealed that Mr. Tortorella squirted a fan with water before Mr. Tortorella was doused with a beverage. While, in these circumstances, it always is easy to allege mitigating circumstances, the fact is we do not tolerate contact with our fans in this manner”

Fast forward to May 25, 2011 and Boston Bruins neanderthal forward Nathan Horton was caught doing the exact same thing – spraying a fan with water from a bottle. Given Campbell’s strongly worded and straight forward statement, you’d think that an automatic suspension would follow suit for Horton, right? After all, he did mention – twice in the same statement – that the league will not tolerate these types of interactions with fans.

Unbelievably, the NHL didn’t address the issue whatsoever.

What. The. Hell.

What changed in the course of two years?

No rational person can sit down and explain to me how Chara and Horton escape supplemental discipline while Ovechkin and Tortorella missed time. Given Campbell’s statement, the arguments just can’t be made. You can tell me that the Chara/Pacioretty incident was a hockey play (please remove the needle from your arm), and you can tell me that Horton was antagonized by the fan he hosed. You can tell me that it’s just water, and nobody got hurt. You can tell me that suspending a player for spraying a fan is unnecessary and an abuse of power (and perhaps I’d agree with that). But the fact is what it is, and the league “cannot” and “will not” tolerate physical interactions with fans.

Except for when it does. Without explanation.

The league will suspend those who cause injury.

Except when it doesn’t. With explanations that contracdict.

It would be really easy to say the Bruins are the unfair benefactors of having the son of the NHL’s head of discipline watching out for them. I’m not a conspiracy theory guy, but when then Islanders defenseman James Wisniewski is suspended for a lewd gesture – to another player, yet Andrew Ference has an equipment malfunction flips the bird to 21,000 people after scoring a goal without a corresponding penalty (hey – there’s a third incident where a Bruin avoid real punishment! Maybe I should get my tin foil hat out!), you can’t help but think that the situation is getting a little out of control.

When the aliens sift through our remains and try to paint a picture of how we lived, Colin Campbell will be a prominent figure. He will be portrayed as an eclectic man, who’s life work is colorful, diverse, and of varying consistencies…just like the brand of soup which bears his name.

Don't be shy! If you liked it, share it!

Violence & Headshot Blog Compilation

Posted on by

There’s been an unprecedented amount of chatter, much of it of the loud, profane and passionate variety surrounding the Chara/Pacioretty incident.

While the hit was a shock to everyone, it’s important to use this incident as a spearhead for league-wide change, and not just an opportunity for Habs fans to get “justice for their guy”. While some justice would have been nice (considering Campbell’s quote after suspending Ovechkin last season), that no supplemental discipline was given to Chara may be a blessing in disguise. If he had received a game or three, there would still be a large amount of fans dissatisfied with the decision. Upon serving the meagre suspension, the refrain would have reverted to “he served his suspension, move along”.

Instead, the league has flung the door wide open to criticism on their insane views of what is tolerated as “part of the game” and what isn’t.

I’ve been very, very vocal about the whole situation on twitter, and it’s led to many “accusations” that I’m only this upset because it’s happened to a Canadiens player. While my anger is certainly intensified this time around (and to be fair, a broken neck and severe concussion is as horrific an injury as we’ve seen in the NHL since the Bertuzzi/Moore incident of several years ago. Marc Savard’s accumulated head traumas are certainly the most profound for any player since Moore) there’s no doubt that I’ve made my stance and opinion on the state of the NHL very clear. I may not have listed every incident, but you’ll get the point.

Below is a compilation of blog posts that I’ve written over the past couple years that prove (I hope) just how disgusted I am with the league and their ineptitude to properly deal with headshots.

I’m not sure how I’d qualify it, but the oldest blog entry on this list most closely mirrors the way I feel today about Pacioretty. This tells me that despite the introduction of rule 48 to NHL play, that the sport of hockey is still nowhere near getting to the root of this frightening problem.

As Canadiens fans prepare to protest at the Bell Center prior to the game on March 15th, I can only speak for myself when I say that I hope the focus of  the protest centers around the fact that the NHL now expects their players to take far too many risks and that they need to get serious about suspensions and safety. Hockey has always been a fast, dangerous sport. The lack of respect among players, and the flaccid, impotent rules (as well as the disciplinary office) only make it a more hazardous environment.

Don't be shy! If you liked it, share it!

Pathetic

Posted on by

There’s no other word for any of what’s transpired in the past 36 hours. Some may use “unfortunate” and “coincidental contact” as ways to describe it. They have their right to be idiots.

This whole debacle has been pathetic.

Pathetic is Chara’s insistence to keep hacking away at Pacioretty after the latter gave him a light bump in the back after scoring in overtime.

Pathetic was the sight of Max Pacioretty unconscious on the ice. With his parents in the stands.

Pathetic is Chara attempting to hide away on the team bus and not take responsibility for what he did.

Pathetic is Chara, after being dragged off the team bus then placing the blame on Pacioretty for leaning and jumping in to the glass.

Pathetic is the Bruins continued philosophy of goonery and excessive aggression.

Pathetic is the NHLPA for not realizing what’s at stake.

Pathetic is the NHL’s flaccid non-response to this flagrant dirty hit (and countless others), especially when the head disciplinarian contradicts himself.

Pathetic is the National media’s collective shrug and willingness to leave it as a “good hockey play gone bad” (save for Pierre McGuire and Cam Cole).

Pathetic is the National media’s stance that it’s “the building’s fault”.

Pathetic is the National media conveniently dismissing the history between the two players.

Pathetic are the Canadiens brass for not speaking up publicly for their players, and their fans. DONE!

Pathetic that the only way the NHL may listen is if million-dollar sponsors threaten to disassociate themselves from the league.

Pathetic that this has gone on for so long without a solution, that the law and/or government may now decide to intervene, and pathetic that fans around the league will act surprised and claim that there’s no place in hockey for “the law”.

In how many other ways is this incident pathetic?

Don't be shy! If you liked it, share it!

Day Zero for Colin Campbell

Posted on by

Better late than never, as the saying goes.

NHL “disciplinarian” Colin Campbell today handed down an 8 game suspension to Anaheim Ducks defenseman James Wisniewski for this horrendous head shot:

YouTube Preview Image

I’m sure there are many hockey fans out there that are both puzzled and outraged with the decision. Why did he get 8 games while Matt Cooke got none? Why did he get 8 games while Downie got none? Why did he get 8 games while Ovechkin only got 2?

The fact is it doesn’t matter. Not anymore.

While Campbell sat by and blithely found reasons to dismiss dirty hits, or hand out limp 2-game bans, fans got angrier and angrier while the NHL made itself in to more and more of a laughing stock.

If there’s a silver lining to a hit like Wisniewski’s, it’s that Seabrook walked away from the hit, and it’s that Campbell acted swiftly and harshly. He didn’t dawdle over whether or not Cooke would or could be suspended, he didn’t hand out pathetic $1,000 fines, and he didn’t sit around spinning the wheel of justice until it landed on a small enough number of games fit for a star to miss. Clearly, when he wants to, he is able to act quickly instead of checking schedules for potential conflicts, and checking to see which way the wind is blowing.

On the night that an angry Bruins team was going to get their shot at retribution on Matt Cooke, Campbell levied what I hope to be the new standard for dirty hits, especially ones to the head. Now I’m sure that Bruins fans (and the Bruins themselves) are extra angry. If any one of their players gets excessive with Cooke, or one of the Penguins stars, you can bet that the suspension will be severe. It’s unfair, and on some level it’s wrong. Sometimes you’re the bug, and sometimes you’re the windshield. In a season where nothing has gone right, the Bruins are the bug.

I think fans have to understand that Campbell has probably figured out that he’s made a fairly ugly mess of things and that he has to put a stop to it at some point. With guys having their heads smashed on a nightly basis, the time to act is now. In fact, the time to act was long ago. The players are as disjointed a group as there is, there’s no sense in looking to them for logical behavior or coherent action. To a man, they keep blowing the same hot air: “I didn’t intend to hurt him / I don’t go out there to injure”. Sure guys. Then why does it keep happening? And why do you guys keep acting as a roadblock to getting new rules in place? If the players can’t or won’t control themselves, then the league has to do it for them. Marc Savard, Brian Campbell, Brent Seabrook, and Sidney Crosby have all been subject to a range of questionable hits over the past week. You can even lump Seabrook’s questionable hit on Perry in there if you want. That’s 5 guys of Olympic and all-star calibre in a week. Two will miss a long period of time, 1 is yet to be determined, and 2 were lucky to walk away unscathed. At that rate there won’t be any stars left to sell the game!

Colin Campbell needed to swallow his pride, and start acting like someone who has the teeniest clue about what he’s doing. I believe he did that today, and if it’s at all possible, he deserves some credit. If 8 games becomes the new baseline for taking a run at someone’s head (heck, even if 5 games is the new baseline; Wisniewski is a repeat offender after all), then Campbell can restore some measure of faith and credibility by sticking to it, regardless of the name on the back of the jersey. He will never fully erase the years of futility and impotency that he will forever be known for, but he can do the game some good if he finally does the right thing and get serious with cheap shot artists. Players don’t care about 1 or 2 game suspensions. That’s a short break from a long year. The lost salary is just a few nights out where they take it easy instead of going all out. Start suspending guys for 10% of the season and the picture becomes clearer. Get these guys off the ice, and hit them in the wallet. That’s where it hurts most. Suddenly, they’re not thinking about just cutting back to make up for lost pay; they’re actually reeling from the financial hit. It may take a while, but I’m certain that a player with violence on his mind will think twice about recklessly hitting an unsuspecting opponent if he reprograms himself to understand that he won’t just miss a game or two, but 5 or 10.

Where do you stand? Do you think Colin Campbell finally got one right?

Don't be shy! If you liked it, share it!

Campbell Gets Another Chance

Posted on by

When it rains, it pours.

NHL disciplinarian Colin Campbell has been handed another opportunity. Will he use this opportunity to further embarrass himself and the league, or will he stick to his new found standard of consistency?

Alexander Ovechkin, a reckless runaway train on NHL ice surfaces, and now hopefully labeled as repeat offender was at it again today vs the Blackhawks. In case you have not seen it, here’s the hit:

YouTube Preview Image

If that isn’t a suspendable hit given the climate in the NHL today, then I don’t know what is. Except for the fact that Ovechkin is the league’s biggest star. Or in the top 2. Take your pick, it doesn’t really matter.

Last week Canadiens motor mouth Maxim Lapierre was suspended for four games for a nasty, boneheaded hit from behind on Sharks forward Scott Nichol. To refresh your memory, here is the video on that hit:

YouTube Preview Image

On the surface they may look slightly different, but in the end, they are both in fact the same thing. Both were from behind, and both shoved defenseless opponents headlong in to the boards at high speed. Lapierre was suspended four games for his hit, and deservedly so. While he is a mouthy player who refuses to back up his words by dropping his gloves, he had not yet been suspended by the NHL. Contrast this with Ovechkin who has been suspended once already this year (no doubt begrudgingly), and has many questionable hits on his resume, including others from behind, and knee-on-knee. It’s clear that while some would dismiss the wreckage in Ovechkin’s wake as a byproduct of his aggressive, reckless abandon style of play, there’s no doubt that the focus should be on reckless.

So again the ball is in Campbell’s court. In just about everyone’s eyes, he dropped the ball by not suspending Penguins forward Matt Cooke under the “intent to injure” leeway that he has. He cited consistency as his reason for his inaction. To him it was more important to remain consistently wrong, because he did not suspend Flyers forward Mike Richards early in the season. If being consistent is his new mantra, then we should look forward to seeing a suspension of at least four games, should we not?

I am not going to hold my breath, because Campbell has given hockey fans no reason to have faith in him, but with the entire hockey world watching for dirty hits and Campbell’s reactions, he can’t afford to drop the ball again. But haven’t we heard this before?

Also embarassing was NBC’s reaction to the hit. While Ray Ferraro nearly had a stroke decrying Lapierre’s hit, barely anything at all was said of Ovechkin’s dirty hit. Pierre McGuire was notably silent on the issue, and when was the last time that happened? I’m not a conspiracy theory guy, but it’s not hard to imagine that they were being told to not get too critical of the game’s main attraction.

What’s your opinion on this latest questionable hit from Ovechkin? Will his status as a star save him again, or will the league do the right thing for once?

Don't be shy! If you liked it, share it!

NHL General Managers Finally Act on Headshots. Sort Of.

Posted on by

I suppose we should be glad that the NHL’s General Managers meeting in Florida has finally produced some concrete action against headshots. It seems not a week goes by where somebody in the world of hockey gets their head smashed by an opponent’s shoulder or elbow, or is shoved head-first in to the boards at high speed. These types of hits are tough to watch, and they often have devastating effects. Some of the after effects of these hits are still unknown to doctors, which, to me makes them even more dangerous.

Frankly, I’m appalled that the NHL took this long to investigate the matter. For years the old guard stood there and claimed that by wiping out headshots, you would be taking the physicality out of hockey. I know I’m not alone in finding that statement to be absurd. Since when does ensuring the safety of player mean that you are promoting the “pansification” of hockey, as Mike Milbury puts it?

How utterly embarassing were things within the NHL before today?

On the way to work yesterday, I read a story by Jeff Z. Klein and Stu Hackel regarding Matt Cooke’s hit on Bruins center Marc Savard, and it had a couple of quotes that worry me greatly.

“the question really is, when a shoulder makes contact with the head, is that going to be termed illegal – because right now, it’s legal” – Colin Campbell

In reference to blatant head shots, like the Ted Green/Wayne Maki incident of 1969 and Dave Brown’s cross-check to the head of Tomas Sandstrom in 1987 Campbell has this to say:

“We don’t have these things anymore….we’re talking about cross-checks to the head, sucker punches to the head.”

Campbell claims that league crack downs have eliminated this sort of thing.

So what is the problem with these quotes exactly?

On the first, it sounds like he has no intention of punishing a hit that is currently deemed as legal. I guess he really can’t and shouldn’t try to invent punishments at random. But is there not a penalty for intent to injure? Cooke is a repeat offender, after all. You can make the strong case that he did precisely what he intended to do. At best, Campbell may give another slap on the wrist for hitting an opponent while defenseless. In the end, although Cooke is a repeat offender, he probably won’t be penalized very harshly, if at all. That’s pathetic, because there is no justification for letting those sorts of hits go unpunished.

On the second quote, it appears as though Campbell’s memory is fading. He says that we no longer see cross checks to the head, or sucker punches. But wait a minute…didn’t he suspend Daniel Briere for cross checking Scott Hannan in the head in November 2009? Yes he did. He also suspended Danny Carcillo for sucker punching Matt Bradley in December of 2009. Yes Colin, indeed we don’t see those things anymore.

Did we not just witness an Olympic tournament that displayed the best of what hockey has to offer? And we saw it without headshots, without fighting and without making hockey and less tough than we all like seeing it. So what is so difficult about instituting a ban on head shots? If the best players in the world can avoid knocking each other’s heads off, why can’t other players follow suit?

It is utterly shocking to me that the General Managers, and the player’s union did not take this more seriously before now. The players are what sell the game, and they’ve been dropping like flies in recent years. Colin Campbell, for his part, has not helped matters at all. His wildly inconsistent disciplining has only served to exacerbate the problem, and frustrate fans who have come to label his process of determining appropriate punishment as “the Wheel of Justice”. Want an example of what I mean by wildly inconsistent? In November 2009, former Canadiens forward Georges Laraque was suspended for 5 games for his knee-on-knee hit with Red Wings defenseman Niklas Kronwall. Then, just a few days ago, Campbell saw it fit to give Minnesota Wild goon Derek Boogaard just 2 games for a similar knee-on-knee hit. You’d expect this sort of discrepancy if Boogaard was a star in the league, but he’s far from it. He’s the type of player that Commissioner Gary Bettman has been trying to squeeze out of the league with instigator penalties and rule changes that focus on speed and skill. It’s that sort of inconsistency and randomness that has dogged Campbell for years now.

Today the league has finally put something in writing with regards to blindside hits to the head. A panel of General Managers came up with the following language to define the new rule against headshots:

“A lateral, back pressure or blindside hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and or the principal point of contact is not permitted.

A violation of the above will result in a minor or major penalty and shall be reviewed for possible supplemental discipline.”

Is it just me, or is that not nearly enough? Like I mentioned, I suppose I should be happy that something has been done, but what is with these half measures? Like Major League Baseball when it first instituted anti-performance enhancing drug rules, this penalty is obviously nothing but lip service. It feels like this rule was put in place just to quiet people down. Does it make sense that a marginal hooking call, or an accidental delay of game call is given the same penalty as a headshot that could sideline a guy for months, as it did with David Booth? Why could they not have taken a serious stand? In my view, a more appropriate penalty – one that shows that the GMs care and are serious – would be a 5 minute major, a game misconduct, and an automatic review with the Wheel of Justice, who would presumably have less reason to be so random.

What I don’t think will work is lifting the instigator rule. While I don’t like the rule at all, I don’t think it changes anything. Instead of guys having their heads scrambled by an elbow, or shoulder, they would instead get it scrambled by fists, as fighting would likely increase with the fear of being penalized and tossed from the game for instigating removed.

Personally, I don’t think today’s implementation will change anything. The NHL does not seem to have taken any steps to educate the players about respect, and it does not seem to want to look at the issue of body armor as weapons. These are 2 more items that the league and player’s union should look at. The Rock ‘em Sock ‘em culture still exists, and guys are not only looking to separate the man from the puck, they are looking to intimidate and take opponents out. The idea of “sending a message” continues to escalate itself, and until the players learn that their speed, and power has exceeded the skull’s ability to protect the brain, I don’t see much changing. I still think someone will be crippled or killed before the NHL gets serious.

Because the nature of concussions and brain trauma is not yet fully understood, I think the league needs to swallow its pride and be safe rather than sorry. It won’t ruin or change the game. Perhaps I’m a softy, but 30 years from now, I want to be able to see and hear today’s players take part in ceremonies and interviews, without the need of using a walker, and with their full, vibrant memories intact.

How do you feel about the league’s first step to stem the tide of headshots? Are you satisfied that the league has finally done something, or is this just nothing more than public relations?

Don't be shy! If you liked it, share it!