Powered by Max Banner Ads 

The Monthly Hockey Headshot Debate Heats Up Again


Does anyone else find it ironic that just as we receive an update to the health of Kitchener Rangers forward Ben Fanelli, that yet another devastating hockey hit has taken place, with yet another player landing in the hospital for observation?

For those who don’t remember, Michael Liambas attempted to send Ben Fanelli head-first through the boards and in to the front row. OHL Commissioner David Branch suspended Liambas from the OHL. Forever. I was elated at that decision, as nobody that plays so recklessly deserves to play hockey at any level, much less earn a paycheck doing it. I had thought that Branch’s suspension would be message to other players in junior hockey that reckless hits would no longer be tolerated. I guess I was wrong.

On January 17th, Patrice Cormier decided to take batting practice on Mikael Tam’s head with his elbow. It represents the continuing trend of disgusting, disturbing hits that continues to make hockey look like a joke, and that continue to be excused. If you haven’t seen it, here it is (around the :24 second mark):

If that’s not malice in action, I don’t know what is.

The problem is, these types of hits to the head are happening more and more often at both the junior and NHL level.

Here’s a very short list of headshots from THIS SEASON ALONE:

Mike Richards on David Booth

Andrew Ladd on Matt D’Agostini

Michael Liambas on Ben Fanelli

Johnny Boychuk on Matt Stajan

There are certainly others out there that have taken place this season, these are simply the ones that I can recall from the top of my head.

The point of this article is not to discuss how dirty some of these hits are. It’s to point out that these are taking place much more often, and with much more violence than ever before. Some fall within the “rules” of the game, but I’ve long maintained that hockey needs to evolve. Tyler, of nhldigest also believes that a change needs to happen, but his main contention is that if the rules are called as they are written, and if equipment is made to protect instead of to injure, we’d be on the right track.

What doesn’t help is when a legend like Lou Lamoriello comes out and states that the Patrice Cormier hit is not suspension-worthy. Whether or not the headline is misleading (i.e. was the question to Lou about a season-ending suspension, or any suspension), the point is moot. This was a heinous offense by a repeat offender.

“”I’m not the judge or jury, but in my opinion no,” Lamoriello said when asked if he felt that was possible.

He also said he did not foresee legal action.

“Not in my opinion,” Lamoriello said.

What is he thinking? I don’t need to tell you how much power Lamoriello wields within NHL head offices, but it goes without saying that any change or evolution of the game would greatly benefit from his support.

Looked at from another angle, certainly the cost and time involved to play organized hockey these days has become prohibitive for many parents, but you also won’t have to go very far to find a parent who just won’t subject their child to the potential of having their brains scrambled. True, a kid could have his head smashed in football too. But in the NFL, you can’t breathe on a guy’s helmet without repercussions. Perhaps a little heavy-handed for a sport based on violence, but the last time I looked, the NFL was the model professional sport in North America. It’s far and away the biggest money maker and by far gets the most eyeballs.

There are a lot of dinosaurs out there that simply shrug and say that hockey is a fast-paced contact sport and if you don’t want to get hurt, don’t play. Mike Milbury comes to mind in this instance. Such flippant ignorance is half the problem. Hockey has changed so many times since it was first created late in the 19th century. It’s silly to think that it cannot or should change. Hockey is still dominated by Don Cherry’s Rock ‘em Sock ‘em culture, and while I don’t think Don Cherry is to blame, the evolution of the types of hits he has become rich while endorsing is what we are seeing today. Players are coached to “finish their checks”, and to “separate the man from the puck”. These are cornerstones of physical hockey, and are not likely to ever vanish. I don’t want to see the demise of physical, hardnosed hockey either but I also am fed up of seeing people being wheeled off on a stretcher and sent to the hospital.

If you want to make the argument that pros exchange their safety and their health for their obscene paychecks, go ahead. I disagree with that completely, but I’m also probably not going to dissuade you from your stance.

What do you think? Is there a way to get the message through to the players heads? Is there a ban or suspension long enough that will serve as a reminder to all players that they need to be responsible for their actions? Or have they been coached a certain way for so long, that it will be virtually impossible to eliminate without taking the hitting out of hockey?

  • http://www.cowhideandrubber.com Kyle

    @Tyler – that’s an interesting point…if a player ruins another’s career, should a portion of the still active player’s salary be routed to the permanently disabled? Now THAT would be a deterrent, but would the NHLPA go for it?

    @Justin – another good suggestion…instead of manufacturing armor, could they go back to making and marketing pads like Chelios used to wear? In a perfect world, that probably is the way to go. Guys fly around out there thinking that they’re invincible because of these durable, lightweight materials. Raise their caution level a bit, see if that helps. It certainly can’t hurt.

    I think they should do both of the above. Be really aggressive, as the NFL is. Tell the players “this is the way it will be”. Learn it, or go play in Russia.

    Thanks to all for reading & leaving your thoughts!

  • http://thehockeycardshow.com Justin Kendrick

    Good read Kyle, something needs to be done or said that will finally get through to players that horse shit plays like Cormiers have no place in hockey.

    The argument of the player making $5 million a year and deciding to put himself in the line of fire is absurd, I think it was Milbury that mentioned something similar to it earlier in the year.

    What if they (NHL etc) took away protective gear? Would players play more reserved?

    Cheers man,
    Justin
    @hockeycardshow

  • http://nhldigest.com Tyler @ NHL Digest

    Kyle,
    On point as usual. Lou Lam should have stayed out of this one. Of course he is going to say it isn’t suspension worthy, he has a vested interest in the kid’s future.
    This is a close to killing someone as you’re going to see from a hockey hit. Now, maybe someone will have the nuts to take a stand and take some meaningful action against a “budding young star”. Or, let Cormier develop and move on the the NHL unpunished if a percentage of hsi future earnings garnished a la a Civil suit to Tam. Wouldn’t that be interesting?
    Thank you for linking up to our previous articles on the subject… and glad to see you’ve taken up shop here!

  • http://www.cowhideandrubber.com Kyle

    Elie, Thanks so much for your lengthy and thoughtful post! You’ve set the bar pretty high considering you’re the first comment ever on this site!

    I don’t know if anyone is entirely against hitting. I think most people will tell you that they want hard-nosed hockey, but without the headshots. Maybe it’s a pipe-dream.

    I think the fact that a giant like Chara hasn’t already squished a small player like Gionta speaks volumes. Chara could probably wipe him off the planet any time he wants, but he doesn’t. Chara can be as brutal as anyone but I believe (perhaps naively) that Chara is thinking out on the ice, and shows respect & restraint. There have been big variations in player sizes for decades. Why only now are we seeing incident after incident, with worse and worse results? If players and equipment continue to evolve in the direction that they have over the past 20 years, it’s likely that someone will die within the next few seasons as a result of a hit.

    To me, every hit to the head needs to be met with a suspension, legal or not. Players have to learn that they will be held accountable. The other thing that has to happen is a re-education of coaches and players, starting in the youngest levels of hockey. The idea of blasting a guy in to kingdom come has to be tempered. This will also be met with resistance from the camp that believes in the intimidation factor; that a player should have to think twice before crossing the middle of the ice.

    It’s absurd to me that the hockey establishment shrugs and yells at players to keep their head up, and to stop admiring their passes lest they be decapitated. Are they so stubborn and averse to change that they can’t wrap their heads around the fact that someone will die? What then? Hockey fans clamor for more coverage in the US from ESPN, etc.; well if a player dies on the ice, you can be sure that hockey will get more attention than it ever wanted, for an issue it has the power and duty to fix.

  • http://www.stayclassy.net Burgundy

    Kyle, as you know, I fully agree with your take.

    For as many good PR articles as hockey gets, it has its fair share of negative ones like this. It’s too easy for players to miss half a year in their last season in junior. That’s not a punishment as much as it is time off. Totally with you on this – other leagues should uphold suspensions/decisions.

  • Elie

    Kyle, I cannot begin to agree with you enough. What I’m afraid of is the extent to which those who control change will take this to. Will someone who is against hitting in it’s entirety begin to phase out checking completely? Who makes the distinction of a clean check where a player gets hurt (a la most recently Elias, who’s own teammates said he was being ‘reckless’)?

    My biggest fear is that players who throw bigger hits will be afraid to throw a check, just because of the what-if factor that the receiving player gets hurt (accidentally, of course) and then he receives his reputation as a head hunter?

    Point is, the worst thing is happening. Headshots are being examined on a case-by-case basis. To make matters worse, injury is heavily factored in. But my question to you is, is there any other alternative?

    If a clean check by Zdeno Chara is layed down apon a smaller player, for instance Brian Gionta, would you believe for a second that it warrants a second look? Is it even possible for Chara to not hit Gionta in the head with a check? What happens if Gionta get’s his lights clocked out and has a sever concussion or worse?

    Every hit to the head has to be looked at, because you can’t have a general rule with something like headshots. The reason is simple, there are other factors which can cause an injury to the head; what the receiving player does before the hit, putting himself in a vulnerable position, putting his head down at the last second, turning his back to the boards while the hitter is committed with no opportunity to abort and yes, size difference in players.

    How do you deal with all that? I understand incidents like this can be totally avoided, and this shouldn’t have happened because Cormier decided to step outside the ethical boundries of professional hockey. What’s my solution? Simple, and I think it would be effective too; have all leagues that are professional or educational respect one anothers suspensions or implement a governing board which can implement suspensions across all levels of hockey.

    That way, Cormier can never play again. Or in Russia, if they want him.


 Powered by Max Banner Ads