College Hockey...getting way too soft!

[Puck Swami]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

I happened to have seen all of those, the thing that bothers me about the Malone hit, the refs didn't call a penalty during 10 mins Martin was receiving medical care laying in the corner, not til after the meds called for the neck brace and stretcher did they give Malone the major penalty. It was a clean hit but may have been a change depending on the exact place he started on the ice, all the tv angles looked like he was simply pinching in from the Blue line. Coach G for Denver later said the hit was clean and there was no intent to hurt Martin. Also Martin was skating forward but looking down and to his left for a place to pass the puck, nowhere near the direction Malone was coming from.

To clarify:

1) The penalty wasn't called immediately because the 2 refs didn't see it happen with their own eyes. The linesman DID see it and conferred with the ref after the whistle and the penalty was assessed - not because of the injury or location, but because the refs didn't see it initially.

2) Gwozdecky never said it was a 'clean hit'. He said he 'didn't think the hit was dirty' but the the hit "was illegal". Martin did say he thought it was clean. I see the word 'illegal' as a penalilzable area between a clean hit and the intent to injure/dirty hit, and I'm pretty sure that's what Gwoz meant. The point here is that Malone is not blameless, and he hit Martin in the head, which is a penalty. The hitter does bear some responisbility for where they hit someone. Martin is lucky he wasn't killed, and Malone is also lucky that didn't happen. Simply saying "Keep your head up" is not good enough in today's game. In college hockey, Just because someone's head is down does not give another player the right to pop him in the head.

 

[MAVFANJEFF]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

If anything it seems like the ncaa needs to look at officiating to see how inconsistent refs are from game to game. I've seen players from several teams (including UNO) get away with some serious infractions right in front of refs. Let the boys play rough as long as the calls are consistent.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

Gleason's hit was the absolute worst BS call I've seen in a long time , esp. with such a big penalty that could have drastically affected the outcome of the game if the Badgers executed on the PP. The Gleason hit was shoulder to shoulder and Gleason takes a few extra steps to get fully parallel to Simonelli before hitting him.

There has to be some responsibility to players that are getting hit just as there are currently with the players hitting.

The person being hit has no responsibility whatsoever when another player does something cheap to them. Are you serious with that last sentence?

As for the Gleason hit, read the rule and then tell me how that's NOT a penalty. As Chuck said in our series thread, just because the refs called it the wrong thing doesn't make it not a penalty.

Rule 604 Board-Checking

"A minor or a major penalty, at the discretion of the referee based upon the degree of violence of the impact with the boards, shall be imposed on any player who body-checks, cross-checks, elbows, charges or trips in such a manner that causes the opponent to be thrown violently into the boards."

Now genius, explain to me how Gleason's hit was not a penalty.


Quick, what is the common denominator for most who don't think these hits are a problem.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

I also question the old argument that full faceshields should be taken away to solve the problem. The game is faster, players bigger, sticks make shots much harder than when players didn't wear them. Pucks and sticks will deflect up no matter how much one lets off on the hitting. In my adult league, with only a handful of players without masks, I've seen a broken nose and a few cases of stitches (including one right next to the eye) in recent years where NO checking is allowed or occurs. You'll never see the day when kids younger than HS don't wear masks, because parents don't want their kids to loose their teeth and get broken noses and scars. If they play for 10 years with masks, then take them away, you think players will suddenly keep their sticks down and 90 mph slap shots off a graphite stick won't get deflected into a kids face? Facemasks prevent many injuries caused by accidents from occurring. Penalties can be used to prevent injuries cause by overaggressive play.

I agree with this. An unpaid college kid doesn't need to lose his teeth just because certain players can't stop themselves from questionable hits and the NCAA won't impose rules that will stop them.

Make charging, boarding, cfb and contact to the head majors and DQs along with suspensions and I think these fast agile players will find a way to adjust. Like many of you, I've been playing all my life and you don't need to hit someone at 70 mph to separate them from the puck. It's only bloodsport at that point.

 

[uaafanblog]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

I want every NCAA hockey player to be indoctrinated with the cause and effect of the decisions they make (especially the reckless decisions such as the one Malone perpetrated)

Again, using my drunk driving analogy, there are many times people choose to get behind the wheel (when they shouldn't) and they arrive home safely without hurting themsleves or anyone else. Does that make that decision to get behind the wheel the right decision?

I believe this is the only way such problematic incidents become less frequent. It's a culture issue. Not so much one of enforcement. I suppose proper enforcement is some sort of deterrent but unless and until coaches, parents and players start at early levels deciding that hitting is a tactical aspect of the game versus some bogus NFL-glorified MMA-wannabe kill shot to mollify the mob in the coliseum, then you'll see it continuing.

It is the player who initiates the hit who has the responsibility here. Yes, it's a good idea to keep your head up but such a thing isn't always possible when locating the little black biscuit that loves to bounce around on the slippery ice eh? There were some milliseconds where Malone made an almost unconscious (reactionary) decision about what sort of hit he was going to deliver. A personal history of learning the difference between tactical hitting and kill shots would probably have swayed his choice toward letting up.

So yes ... I'm whining that it's "society's fault".

 

[HoosierBBall_GopherHockey]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

I happened to have seen all of those, the thing that bothers me about the Malone hit, the refs didn't call a penalty during 10 mins Martin was receiving medical care laying in the corner, not til after the meds called for the neck brace and stretcher did they give Malone the major penalty. It was a clean hit but may have been a change depending on the exact place he started on the ice, all the tv angles looked like he was simply pinching in from the Blue line. Coach G for Denver later said the hit was clean and there was no intent to hurt Martin. Also Martin was skating forward but looking down and to his left for a place to pass the puck, nowhere near the direction Malone was coming from.

Gleason's hit was the absolute worst BS call I've seen in a long time , esp. with such a big penalty that could have drastically affected the outcome of the game if the Badgers executed on the PP. The Gleason hit was shoulder to shoulder and Gleason takes a few extra steps to get fully parallel to Simonelli before hitting him.

The second major in that WIS-UND game was head contact so I could see why it was called under the current rules. but Marray had his head down, leaning forward to reach the puck, not looking for Fighting Sioux players) (a known hard-hitting team).

There has to be some responsibility to players that are getting hit just as there are currently with the players hitting.

So then Genoway should have had some responsibility for putting himself in a vulnerable position up against the boards when Marvin hit him? Wait, what? That doesn't make any sense? Well neither does your argument when you say someone like Jordy Murray or Jesse Martin have to take responsibility for getting destroyed in an illegal manner. If you take bothman's example of drunken driving, are you going to blame the person who is sober and driving responsibly that gets hit by the drunk driver for what happened?

 

[PCM]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

Quick, what is the common denominator for most who don't think these hits are a problem.

I can answer that question, although it's probably not the answer you want. The common denominator in all these incidents involving dangerous hits is that fans of team to which the hitter belongs make excuses for the player. It doesn't matter which team or what player is involved, most fans will come to the defense of their favorite team, no matter how bad the outcome of the hit or how dangerous and unnecessary it was. Anyone who's been on this board long enough knows that it's what fans do.

But fans don't make or enforce the rules. Fans don't train the players to play the way they do. So if you are truly disturbed by dangerous hits in college hockey, place the blame at the top, on the organization responsible for protecting the safety of student athletes. If there's to be meaningful change, it will be because the NCAA finally starts doing the job it's supposed to do.

 

[lord k]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

In the case of the Martin hit. If the linesman sees a penalty he can't blow the whistle to stop the play but isn't he supposed to put his arm up to signal that there is a penalty? In the UND Denver game the linesman that supposedly saw the penalty did not raise his arm.(this simple fact does or does not make the hit a penalty) I am just wondering what the proper way for a linesman to make a penalty call is.

 

[lord k]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

The player receiving the hit is somewhat to blame if he has his head down. Coaches preach to players from the very time there is checking allowed to keep your head up. Especially in certain areas, behind the net or if you are a winger trying to pick a breakout pass off the wall. These two areas are where most of the huge hits happen in any game.

 

[Koho]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

I guess I misunderstand the charging rule as written. I always thought that if a player took strides as he was coming toward the checkee, that was the definition of charging. Now I find out from this thread that coaches teach a player to take strides. hmmm...I wonder which coaches that might be.

I know. After I read that one I was going to look up the definition of charging in the rules, but decided, "why bother...".

 

[Koho]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

There has to be some responsibility to players that are getting hit just as there are currently with the players hitting.

WOW! I never thought of this. If players were just faster and thought about doing everything to avoid getting hit, rather than ever looking to see the puck, they wouldn't get hit, so it is all their fault.

I am guessing you are supporting the guy who is in jail for 10 years for manslaughter for going twice the speed limit and killing a kids on a bike, who is now suing the family of that kid because he wasn't wearing a helmet?????

 

[Koho]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

If there's to be meaningful change, it will be because the NCAA finally starts doing the job it's supposed to do.

Isn't that the point of this whole discussion? The NCAA is trying to use penalties to change the "culture" of hockey so that coaches teach their players that injuring an opponent and ending up with a major penalty and sitting out a game or more doesn't really help the team. But a fan of one specific team (in answer to the question of the common denominator) is questioning whether the NCAA should be doing this. (After all, there are a lot more kids waiting to play hockey, so who cares if a few get knocked out of hockey for life because they are too stupid to keep their heads up for 50 minutes. As long as it doesn't become a Sissy sport!

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

The player receiving the hit is somewhat to blame if he has his head down. Coaches preach to players from the very time there is checking allowed to keep your head up. Especially in certain areas, behind the net or if you are a winger trying to pick a breakout pass off the wall. These two areas are where most of the huge hits happen in any game.

They are taught that not only for self preservation, but more importantly, so they can see the game around them. You can't see a teammate who's wide open if your head is down. They are NOT taught that so that they can be blamed for being on the wrong end of an illegal hit.

Why is this too heady of a concept for some of you? The only thing I can think of is that some are just too stupid to comprehend it.

Always blaming the victim and refusing to hold someone accountable for their own actions.

 

[PCM]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

Isn't that the point of this whole discussion?

It should be, but as usual, the discussions turn into finger-pointing marathons of "your team's fan's are worse than all others" and "your team plays dirtier than all others." In 10 seasons of covering Fighting Sioux hockey, I've seen enough UND players go off the ice on stretchers or have their seasons ended by dirty hits (some of which have gone unpenalized) to know that the problem of dangerous hits doesn't exist on one team or with one coach.

The NCAA is trying to use penalties to change the "culture" of hockey so that coaches teach their players that injuring an opponent and ending up with a major penalty and sitting out a game or more doesn't really help the team.

I'm questioning whether the NCAA's "points of emphasis" approach is really effective at accomplishng that goal. From my perspective, it's not because it comes off as more of a suggestion rather than a "this must end -- NOW!" policy that's written in stone and stringently enforced.

The other aspect that's not being addressed is that these types of dangerous hits are a problem throughout hockey, from the NHL on down. As long as they remain "part of the game" in other leagues and venues, dealing with them at the college level will be difficult. That was the point of this blog I wrote the day after Jesse Martin was injured.

 

[huskyfan]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

so, what can be done? I can't imagine doing away with facial protections. as noted earlier no one wants to see a bunch of college kids with missing teeth and scarred up faces. would allowing fighting or at least lessening penalties for it, help teams to "enforce", a self policing kind of thing? hard hitting is such a part of the game. how do you draw a line, you can hit this hard, but not that hard?

 

[PCM]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

The player receiving the hit is somewhat to blame if he has his head down. Coaches preach to players from the very time there is checking allowed to keep your head up. Especially in certain areas, behind the net or if you are a winger trying to pick a breakout pass off the wall. These two areas are where most of the huge hits happen in any game.

I think it should be obvious to all by now that this approach to the game has to end. For God's sake, don't you realize how close we came to seeing a player paralyzed for life (or worse) on the ice at Ralph Engelstad Arena? We are extemely lucky it didn't happen. As it is, Jesse Martin's life will never be the same. Is seeing one player "destroy" another worth that much to hockey fans?

As much as I love hockey, it is just a game played for the entertainment of sports fans. We can make it a safer game by outlawing the types of hits that we know jeopardize the lives of the players. We can also take players out of the game who develop a history of delivering dangerous hits. Maybe that means that hockey becomes a "softer" game. If so, I think it's a trade worth making.

 

[lord k]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

They are taught that not only for self preservation, but more importantly, so they can see the game around them. You can't see a teammate who's wide open if your head is down. They are NOT taught that so that they can be blamed for being on the wrong end of an illegal hit.

Why is this too heady of a concept for some of you? The only thing I can think of is that some are just too stupid to comprehend it.

Always blaming the victim and refusing to hold someone accountable for their own actions.

You know some of you anti hitting guys are just as bad as the blood and violence guys.

I was not blaming the victim. If you have your head down you can and will be most likely hit by a perfectly LEGAL hit. If you don't see it coming you will be knocked down or at least off the puck. The point is if a guy has his head down you can and should hit him, now you may have to let off the gas a bit and not blow him up or you will get penalized(which I am fine with.)

The main point I was trying to make is there are places on the ice where time and space are more limited, behind the net being one of them. Every player knows if they are going for a loose puck behind the net they will be in a collision no matter if their head is up or down.

 

[Gurtholfin]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

You know some of you anti hitting guys are just as bad as the blood and violence guys.

I was not blaming the victim. If you have your head down you can and will be most likely hit by a perfectly LEGAL hit. If you don't see it coming you will be knocked down or at least off the puck. The point is if a guy has his head down you can and should hit him, now you may have to let off the gas a bit and not blow him up or you will get penalized(which I am fine with.)

The main point I was trying to make is there are places on the ice where time and space are more limited, behind the net being one of them. Every player knows if they are going for a loose puck behind the net they will be in a collision no matter if their head is up or down.

We're talking about illegal hits here. Your post seemed to be assigning blame to the recipient of an ILLEGAL hit. Did I misunderstand what you were saying?

If someone has their head down and gets checked because they don't see it coming, I don't have a problem with it. An ILLEGAL hit is always the responsibility of the hitter.

 

[manurespreader]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

To clarify:

1) The penalty wasn't called immediately because the 2 refs didn't see it happen with their own eyes. The linesman DID see it and conferred with the ref after the whistle and the penalty was assessed - not because of the injury or location, but because the refs didn't see it initially.

2) Gwozdecky never said it was a 'clean hit'. He said he 'didn't think the hit was dirty' but the the hit "was illegal". Martin did say he thought it was clean. I see the word 'illegal' as a penalilzable area between a clean hit and the intent to injure/dirty hit, and I'm pretty sure that's what Gwoz meant. The point here is that Malone is not blameless, and he hit Martin in the head, which is a penalty. The hitter does bear some responisbility for where they hit someone. Martin is lucky he wasn't killed, and Malone is also lucky that didn't happen. Simply saying "Keep your head up" is not good enough in today's game. In college hockey, Just because someone's head is down does not give another player the right to pop him in the head.

Well hard for me to understand how the ref's didn't see the hit. I mean Martin did have the puck. If they missed it they were negligent imho.I think they had decided to ignore the penalty, ( charging, and hitting to the head) But they will never admit it.

 

[lord k]

Re: College Hockey...getting way too soft!

We're talking about illegal hits here. Your post seemed to be assigning blame to the recipient of an ILLEGAL hit. Did I misunderstand what you were saying?

If someone has their head down and gets checked because they don't see it coming, I don't have a problem with it. An ILLEGAL hit is always the responsibility of the hitter.

I understand what you are saying but some of the hits that have been discussed(the Martin hit and the Gleason hit ) have been pretty boarderline if they were or were not penalties. The refs didn't even make a signal on the martin hit. There is no way they didn't see it coming. When the puck comes to a player standing by the hash mark on the wall everyone knows there could be a collision. Nobody really knows what's a penalty or not. For the coaches, players and refs it is just a gigantic grey area.

I don't want to see a player get seriously hurt but I hate seeing a kid get ejected for something that most people don't even know if the infraction was a penalty or not.