Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Search
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
 All Forums
 Hockey Forums
Allow Anonymous Posting forum... User Polls
 Mitchell Hit on Toews

 NOTICE!! This forum allows Anonymous Posting.
 Registered members please login above or input your User Name/Password before submitting!
Screensize:
Authority:  UserName:  Password:  (Member Only !)
  * Anonymous Posting please leave it blank. your temporary AnonyID is
Format Mode:
Format: BoldItalicizedUnderlineStrikethrough Align LeftCenteredAlign Right Horizontal Rule Insert HyperlinkInsert Email Insert CodeInsert QuoteInsert List
   
Message:

* HTML is OFF
* Forum Code is ON
Smilies
Smile [:)] Big Smile [:D] Cool [8D] Blush [:I]
Tongue [:P] Evil [):] Wink [;)] Clown [:o)]
Black Eye [B)] Eight Ball [8] Frown [:(] Shy [8)]
Shocked [:0] Angry [:(!] Dead [xx(] Sleepy [|)]
Kisses [:X] Approve [^] Disapprove [V] Question [?]

  Check here to include your profile signature. (Member Only !)
    

T O P I C    R E V I E W
admin Posted - 10/22/2009 : 00:09:37
How many games will Toews miss because of the hit from Mitchell in the 3-2 Canucks victory over the Blackhawks?
40   L A T E S T    R E P L I E S    (Newest First)
Guest4948 Posted - 10/30/2009 : 07:34:50
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15

I don't think I have every watched a hit like this with a player coming out of the penalty box. Interesting to say the least.

And I know I am not the popular opinion on this, but did the hit really have to be that hard??? This could have been a more reasonable hit and still had the same impact. Instead, Toews is out with a concussion.

Coaches teach players to hunt for guys with the head down and cream them. To me, this is intent to injury.

Again, I know I am not the popular opinion on this matter.



Dude...this is hockey. Hockey involves violent hits. The players who play the game consent to this. The fans who watch it (the vast majority of them) consent to this. If you don't like hitting, watch curling! Or women's hockey! Some sports aren't made for petunias like you.
Alex116 Posted - 10/29/2009 : 23:26:11
2120....very good points, and i agree. I have no prob with their rules regarding advertising, etc. I have a prob though, when a fine for a dangerous play is less than a fine for an infraction of a dress code! At least make the horse-collar tackle $20k or something? Either way, does it really matter to these multi-millionaires?

My biggest beef with the NFL is not allowing a TD celebration!
Guest2120 Posted - 10/29/2009 : 18:28:41
Your're right, they've made some progress. And in the end, it's a contact game, just like hockey, hits & injuries will happen.

I actually missed the English hit. I also don't know too much about the NFL fining schemes.

But here's a thought on the OchoCinco incident. Fines always follow where the money is. There's no money to be made in big hits. In a sense there is, because it draws fans etc etc, but that could be said about all plays or antics, What I mean, is that the NFL gives up big money in advertising contracts to keep player's uniforms free of anything they don't want on there. Draw a comparision here to the European leagues, Moto anyone?

Think of it this way, if Chad Ochocinco decided he was going to start wearing Nike chin straps, Nike Advertising Managers start high fiving each other. Nike sales go up, and so does 85's bank account. Without league wide restrictions, and hefty fines, players would be encouraged to do stuff like this.

I'm not sure if thats true obviously, just a thought.
Alex116 Posted - 10/28/2009 : 07:57:47
2120, interesting article, thanks for the link.

As for the NFL, they've at least made "some" progress. However, they must have allowed the NHL to handle things this past week. They decided to fine the Bengals' Chad "Ocho Cinco" $10,000 for wearing a black chin strap on his helmut (supposed to be white) and then turned around and fined Larry English of the Chargers $7,500 for a horse-collar tackle on a Denver Bronco. A larger fine for the wrong chin strap compared to a very dangerous tackle? Go figure? The NHL had to have been invovled.....
Guest2120 Posted - 10/27/2009 : 22:48:16
Ok, since we're talking football here, lets try and get our facts straight. Its been said several times that "the NFL has reduced the number of concussions, especially to the QB."

Thats half true. It depends how you measure it.

NFL players rarely leave the game these days because of a concussion injury. NHL players in the last two weeks seem to leave every second game with a concussion injury. But recent studies have shown that post-retirement, NFL players have horrible, and I mean absolutely atrocious head problems. There is lots of recent data on this, much of it suggesting that small, non-game-leaving hits are the culprit.

Its a bit of a long read, but this is an absolutely excellent article on the NFL and pot-retirement head trauma. It can obviously apply to the NHL as well..

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/10/19/091019fa_fact_gladwell
Guest9554 Posted - 10/27/2009 : 19:04:06
In my opinion this hit was a perfectly fine clean hard hit. I love hard hits but not when their dirty or to injure another player. This hit was not. Toews just had his head down at the wrong time and Mitchell hit him. He wasn't trying to injure him
JOSHUACANADA Posted - 10/27/2009 : 18:26:29
Beans you are right on this point. Rules could be made to restrict hits to the head and equipment should be more safe and upto date. I am all for stupid looking helmets if it means guys like Lindros, and Lafontaine have a full and happy career. I am all for restricting hits to the head and/or head hunting. Any intentional head contact should result in a game misconduct, if a resulting injury match suspension. You would then have more responsible checking.

Some are using the NFL to compare injuries to the NHL. You cant compare the 2 games. Why do QB get more head injuries? Because a QB sack is a celebrated stat and rocking the QB is considered a higlight reel play. High accolades are given for a sack leader. No one says why is this defensive guy more responsible for head injuries or concussions unless he uses a illegal play. Why do concussions and head injuries happen at a higher % in the NHL than in the NFL or any other major sport. The helmet is smaller than the NFL helmet and are easier to remove or fall off. The players are moving faster so the collision speed is higher. The playing surface is harder.

Guest9571 Posted - 10/27/2009 : 10:53:12
huge hit
Guest4803 Posted - 10/26/2009 : 16:34:13
They are both very phsyical sports in which hitting is a involved and a very big part of the game. However like Beans has mentioned the NFL has taken steps towards lessening the amount of head injuries, they are always comming up with new ideas for making the helmet safer, and rules against hitting defenceless players. However one sport is played on ice where you have large men skating extremely fast at one another plus you add glass and boards around the rink itself. In football it usually the imidediate impact causing the concussions not hte grass or turf itself, not saying that all hockey concussions are caused by the ice either, but id rather land on a nice patch of grass then some hard as cement ice
Beans15 Posted - 10/26/2009 : 15:02:54
You are right in the QB's get more concussions that any other players, followed by wide outs, running backs, and tight ends. Offensive players.

So let's look at this for a second. Why QB's?? my opinion, they often don't see the hit coming. They are paid to pass the ball, and it's virtually impossible to pass the ball and watch the other 11 guys trying to rip your head off. That is why almost every time a QB is sacked, it is 'defenseless'. The only time a QB can see the rush is when it is right in front of him.

And the comparison is valid, in my opinion. Not only is football one of the few sports in the world that allows body contact, it is also the biggest other than hockey. Ultimately, there is significantly more body contact in football than in hockey. That solidifies the point even further.

Why is it that a sport with significantly more physical contact than hockey had so fewer head injuries???

Equipment is one and rules are the other.
Alex116 Posted - 10/26/2009 : 13:12:01
I've said it before and i'll say it again. I'm all for reducing the amount of injuries in the NHL, especially the concussions, but, i don't want to eliminate the hitting to do so. Be it new helmuts, fine, i'd be okay with that!

Beans, i still don't like the comparison to football. Yes, they've taken some steps to protect their players but it's really tough to compare numbers of concussions from one sport to another. I still say numbers, or the percentage, is lower in football due to more reasons than simply the rule changes. I still feel that there's so many injuries in football, especially the completely accidental ones, that the numbers are skewed. Think how often a guy gets an ankle rolled onto, or a bump on the side of the knee that sprains his MCL or any other of the many injuries that occur when you have that many HUGE men crashing together on EVERY play! Yeah, their steps may have helped, but i'd prefer to see stats as to numbers of concussions before and after the rule changes rather than comparing it to another sport altogether?
I'm sure the numbers are still down, but i'd bet it's mostly QB's as they're the ones that most of the concussions were inflicted on.
Beans15 Posted - 10/26/2009 : 11:52:42
Ok Slozo, I need to rebute.

My point is that the NFL has done things for the past 15+ years to protect players from head injuries. It never does work 100%, but the framework is there and there has been a reduction in head injuries in the NFL. That is the reason why only 2% of the total listed football injuries today are concussion or head. The NHL on the other hand, encourages plays which often result in head injuries. As such, nearly 20% of all NHL injuries today are head injuries.

The link??? The NFL protects their players with rules such as hits to defenseless player(Ray Lewis on Ochocinco), hits to the legs, hits to the helmet, and hits leading with the helmet. Above this, the equipment (specifically the helmet) has evolved in that time to provide better protection against head trama.

The NHL has done..........

Nothing. No rules changes, no equipment changes, nothing.


Again, I am getting completely rocked by my 'let up on the hit' comments from the past. I concede. When a player has an opportunity to 'lay the lumber' there are as many bad things that can happen if they choose to let up as if they hit hard. I concede. My opinion was wrong.(Not often does someone say that on here)

However, it does not take away from the fact that NHL players receive head injuries at an alarming rate comparatively to the other physical pro North American Sport.

If you have the time, you might want to read through this. I skimmed through it a bit, but I was shocked when I read some of the numbers. It a study by a couple of doctors in Toronto regarding head trama in youth hockey players.

http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/169/2/124



(As a side note, I will do my best to find the clip of the Toews his from behind the Blackhawk net. Toews. Unfortunately, I can hit PUH at work but not Youtube. When I find it, you will be able to clearly see Toews look up the left side of the ice, where there is literally no players, before he looked right to receive the pass. In the matter of a second and a half, Toews was on dream street. Toews played this dead right. If anything, where was the Blackhawk goalie tapping his stick on the ice to indicate the penalty was over. I would blame that over Toews for the concussion).
slozo Posted - 10/26/2009 : 10:58:31
Good clean hit. Again. So why the controversy?

Who said that Toews was not to blame . . . was that you Beans? You mean to tell me that an NHL claibre player (a star player, in fact) shouldn't know approximately when the penalty is expiring, and where the penalty box is?!?

Toews is 100% to blame for being concussed right now. He lost awareness on the ice by forgetting where he was, that he had the puck, and that the penalty would be expired at this point, meaning a guy would be coming from the box to intercept him.

And, your football analogy is way off.

Guest 5985 - Penalty box doors open inwards to avoid such things happening. Watch some more hockey.

In summary, I can tell that some of you never played sports at a high level, because anyone that has knows this: you never let up, or you get eaten up.

Pull up a chair beside the fire, and slozo will tell you a story . . .

I played volleyball, myself - pretty far removed from hockey, I know, but what can I say - it was what I was always good at. Played at division A level, which means the level the best players are at, from which you get picked to go to provincial, national teams, etc - it's all college, university and club teams for older players. I played for a club team, and was an average player at this level, which means I was still very very good.

Now sometimes, as a decent hitter (I usually played middle) you'd get that one beautiful chance to really crush the ball with no block - against good teams, it almost never happened, but once in a while, on a broken play, it would occur. And, often, when in that superior position just about to crush the ball, there'd be a guy on the other side of the net about to potentially get his face mashed. Trust me, I've seen lots of bloody and broken noses from volleyball, almost all from situations like this (and more rarely when a player who was so good, he could absolutely murder the ball from anywhere so that guys would get "six-packed" if unlucky). I wasn't one of the best hitters, but at that level, everyone except the setter can hit very well.

You always had to hit the ball hard and put away the point. The times that you tried to "soften it up" even a little bit, increased the chance that someone would dig it up, and then win the point. I learned quickly that you could not ever hold up, otherwise you'd be taken advantage of.

It's the same in any sport at a high level of competition. You just have no room to let up, because it might not bite you in the a$$ every time, but it will eventually. Or, in the case of hitting, just be relegated to 'not very effective'.

Alright, storytime's over! Now get to bed!



"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
Beans15 Posted - 10/26/2009 : 08:32:31
No disrespect Alex, it is hard to separate the smart a$$ comments from the others sometimes. My apologies.


Ok, case in point is that MOST of us are arguing the same point. I don't think anyone has said anything positive when people get hurt. It was brought up last night during the Oilers telecast where things have changed. There are HUGE and fast players today compared to year ago.

Now, possibly the biggest impact to head injuries in hockey is this.

Every known piece of hockey equipment designed to protect players has gone through a huge evolution in the past 20 years. From skates, to goalie pads, to skater pads, to sticks. Everything. Oh, wait. There is one that has not.

The HELMET!!!

The helmets today are virtually identical to the ones being used 20-30 years ago. Messier has been endorsing a new helmet(that does look a little goofy) which is far superior to the helmets today. The studies show that these helmets would reduce the risk of a concussion by like 30 %or 40% compared to the ones used today.

I do agree, the NFL does do things largely to protect the QB. Reasoning being is that not only is he smaller than most, but his head is not focused on the players hitting him.

Does that kind of sound a bit like a player skating through the neutral zone with their head down????

Alex116 Posted - 10/26/2009 : 00:22:34
Beans, calm down! Smart a$$ comment? WTF? I simply asked if you watch football. Many don't, this is a hockey site you know! As for your stats, that's great. I'm happy the NFL is protecting it's assets and i think the NHL would be wise to follow suit. However, the major penalties for hits to the head you speak of are generally on the QB's to protect them. If you're talking about "leading with the helmut", that's a different story. Also, the helmuts they use in football are quite a lot more protective than hockey lids and it's played on ice with boards (don't forget, a lot of concussion are a result of the head hitting either of these, not just the hit itself). Add in the fact that football gas MANY more injuries if you wanna compare #'s of injuries to games played. There's guys leaving football games all the time with a tweak here or there. Maybe they should ban tackling cuz a lot of guys get injuries from a guy simply rolling onto their ankle or leg?

Guest4067 Posted - 10/25/2009 : 22:17:16
quote:
Originally posted by Guest5985

Jumping out of the penalty box and blind siding a streaking forward is Rollerball, not hockey. How about, if a guy skates past the door just as your penalty expires, you ram the door open and cut him in half. You were coming out of the box. Rollerball.


Wow. You really don't watch hockey. You're very stupid. I'd say use your eyes but apparently you can't even see.
just1n Posted - 10/25/2009 : 22:16:08
OK, so now we have Mike Richards hitting David Booth in the head. This is a completely different hit in my opinion, from the Mitchell on Toews hit.

Richards cut across and hit only (I can't totally tell from the youtube reply I found but...) Booth's head with what I believe is his shoulder. And he leaned into it too, presumably he was trying for the body as well but head contact is all I can see.

The big difference here is head hunting, as I believe this was the case with Booth, or a straight on hit where someone just doesn't have their head up, a la Toews.

I don't see why Richards isn't being suspended. That's intent to injure to me, whereas Mitchell was taking a hit that was there for the taking, that he had no choice but to take in my opinion.
Guest5985 Posted - 10/25/2009 : 22:02:57
Jumping out of the penalty box and blind siding a streaking forward is Rollerball, not hockey. How about, if a guy skates past the door just as your penalty expires, you ram the door open and cut him in half. You were coming out of the box. Rollerball.
Beans15 Posted - 10/25/2009 : 18:17:39
What kind of smart a$$ comment is that?? Do I watch any football. I do. I watch tons. I enjoy football as much as hockey if not more.

And let's talk about that for a second.

Do you have any idea how many head or concussion injuries are listed in the NFL today???

5. 5, our of 228 listed injuries. Meaning about 2% of all injuries are head/concussions.

Any guess how many players in the NHL are injured due to head injuries???


18 out of 95 listed. Nearly 20% of all injuries are concussions.

Any idea as to why?? I'll give you a few clues. Firstly, the NFL has had specific rules against hit to the head for the past 13 seasons. Since 1996, it was illegal to make a hit to a players head. Secondly, the NFL is continuously installing rules to protect their assets(the players) such as the one regarding hitting a defenseless player. For all the 'smart guys" who talked about the Ray Lewis hit being late, they should do their homework. He was penalized (and fined) for hitting a defenseless player

The NFL protects their players with rules designed to reduce/deter hits to injury.

The NHL, on the other hand, encourages player to hit to injury.

I don't have the answers, never claimed to. But I don't think so many NHL players need to get injured as what is actually happening.

That's my only point.
Alex116 Posted - 10/25/2009 : 15:45:16
quote:
Originally posted by Guest2120

Beans, I agree with you. No one likes to see injuries, and in an ideal world we wouldn't, but its just not practical to pull up on a check like that. No one here has alleged that Mitchell's hit was dirty, but your here arguing that..it could have been cleaner?

I agree, injuries suck. Anyone who's played knows that. But the reality is that pulling up on a check isn't possible either (your own safety, no time to think, ensuring the check actually happens, intimidation).

Does this hit strike anyone else as the passer's fault? I watched the game, and I've watched the clip numerous times, and all I can think of is a video game suicide pass.



I don't think Beans meant that it could have been "cleaner", although if that's the quote he used, i stand corrected. His outlook on it is that he would prefer the hit to be softer and he feels there's no need to hammer a guy as hard as many do. Personally, i don't agree, i think you hit a guy as hard as you want, as long as it's clean. Yeah, we're gonna get injuries where guys are gonna be out for long lengths of time, but that's part of the game.

Beans, do you watch football at all? How often do we see a receiver go up for a ball and get absolutely destroyed by the safety coming full throttle? Sure, he could just tackle him around the legs, but they don't! They not only wanna knock the ball out of his hands or try to stop him from catching it, they wanna punish him so he's a little uneasy the next time a pass is thrown his way! Same thing in hockey, Toews will not be as comfortable recieving passes in the nuetral zone for a long time!

The hit itself, imo, was clean, not malicous in any way and simply a part of the game. Unfortunately for Toews, it was one of those flukey things that happens where Mitchell's penalty had just ended. I don't put any blame on the passer as he prob didn't notice Mitchell at that point either? When you make a pass, it's hard to be paying a lot of attention to the defense and making your pass accurate as well. IMO, it was simply one of those things that happens, no blame on Toews, no blame on the passer and certainly no blame on Willie Mitchell for taking the opportunity to make a game changing play.
Guest4067 Posted - 10/25/2009 : 14:19:42
Toews was clearly skating faster than Mitchell. Silly Blackhawks fans claiming Mitchell intent to injure. You're just upset he got rocked with a good clean hit. Some of you Blackhawk fans should be watching figure skating. Seriously. You're a disgrace to hockey if you think Mitchell did anything wrong.
Guest2120 Posted - 10/25/2009 : 10:55:37
Beans, I agree with you. No one likes to see injuries, and in an ideal world we wouldn't, but its just not practical to pull up on a check like that. No one here has alleged that Mitchell's hit was dirty, but your here arguing that..it could have been cleaner?

I agree, injuries suck. Anyone who's played knows that. But the reality is that pulling up on a check isn't possible either (your own safety, no time to think, ensuring the check actually happens, intimidation).

Does this hit strike anyone else as the passer's fault? I watched the game, and I've watched the clip numerous times, and all I can think of is a video game suicide pass.
Guest0920 Posted - 10/25/2009 : 00:33:28
Mitchell rocked life. I only wish it was Kane who got hit and that he was literally killed on impact. "Do you know who the f*** I am!?!? I'm Patrick Kane bitch!"...thump, dead. Bury the body under GM.
Guest4050 Posted - 10/24/2009 : 09:38:01
Have any of you ever played hockey before? You all make valid arguements but forget one thing hockey as a whole is a dangerouse sport you can break your neck or permanently injure yourself by simply falling ice is not a forgiving thing. As far as the hit is concerned one thing your taught as a kid is never look back for the puck because you leave yourself in an extremely vulnerable position no different then having your head down. The defenseman should have never made the suicide pass so blame him not mitchell. Also had Toews turned sideways to recieve the pass as he should of ; not only would he not of been laid out cold but it would of been a light hit that would of knocked him off the puck maybe off his feet but it definetly wouldn't have left his brain in the 5th row of the united center. To often we blame the guys who make the hit instead of the guy who puts himself in such a vulnerable and helpless position. There should be no suspension an if you wanna make a statement then Quenville should bench the defenseman who put toews in that position. If you wanna be a championship team then you must teach your players that stupid plays result in tough consequences.To often people who think they know the game put the malicious tag on hits. Tell me something what about hockey is not dangerous? A goalie stands in front of a puck travelling at 100mph not something the normal person signs up to do considering you could be killed instantly if hit in your trachia. Defensman an forwards alike are travelling at incredible speeds with blades on the bottom of there skates similar to a knife if accidentally struck with someones flesh as we have seen in the past along with a stick that can also be a deadly weapon. So there is nothing about the game that is not dangerous but that's a risk these guys are willing to take to do something they love an lets not mention they are more then fairly compensated with their ridiculious income that 99% of the public would not see over 5 lifetimes. An as far as the Ray Lewis hit on Ochocinco he was fined because it was a late hit not because he hit him to hard there are guys get that laid out cold every ween on bang bang plays and as long as you dont lead with your helmet there will never be a fine and most times not even a call on the play, i didn't know you thought NFL stood for the National Fairy League. Unfortunately a great player got laid out because he lost focus for 10 seconds and in a game that moves so fast ten seconds is a matter of victory or defeat and this time Toews lost an as a result this probably means he wont have the oppurtunity to rep canada in the olympics. Take care everyone and keep your head up you cant avoid what you cant see.
Drafter15 Posted - 10/24/2009 : 06:40:16
The Hawks were leading 2-1, then the hit.
Canucks won 3-2.
Willie Mitchell did his job.
Beans15 Posted - 10/23/2009 : 23:00:28
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4803

Great clean hit by big Wille, beans why would you possibly let up on a hit like that? if he slows down or lets up toews has a greater chance of bouncing off and staying on his feet avoiding it and possibly making a play down the ice, mitchell did exactly what he should of. You cant compare this to Ray lewis' late helmet on helmet hit on Mr ochocinco, Chad didnt even have the ball it had completley flown over his head, toews was actually carrying the puck up ice, if he didnt have the puck in his posession then i could see your point but he had his head down and can only blame himself for that one.




As I said before, Toews can't be blamed on this either. He looked up ice and there was not one there. Literally a second to a second and a half later he was seeing stars.Players NEVER look into the penalty box to see if a player is standing and ready to come back onto the ice.

Toews can't blame himself because he did everything dead right and still got hit with his head down.

As I have said before, I know that I am idealistic in my thinking and not popular with my opinion, I just think that players get hurt enough through the regular course of the game and I don't like to see players get hurt.
Guest5077 Posted - 10/23/2009 : 15:22:00
Great hit, momentum swinger. As a player you have to protect yourself, and that means having your head up. In this case, player stepping out of the box, just bad luck for Toews. Hope he ins't out too long, he's in my pool.
Guest4803 Posted - 10/23/2009 : 13:54:19
Great clean hit by big Wille, beans why would you possibly let up on a hit like that? if he slows down or lets up toews has a greater chance of bouncing off and staying on his feet avoiding it and possibly making a play down the ice, mitchell did exactly what he should of. You cant compare this to Ray lewis' late helmet on helmet hit on Mr ochocinco, Chad didnt even have the ball it had completley flown over his head, toews was actually carrying the puck up ice, if he didnt have the puck in his posession then i could see your point but he had his head down and can only blame himself for that one.
brentrock2 Posted - 10/23/2009 : 10:12:54
i said 5-9 games.This hit wasnt a like really big big hit though.

HABS RULE!!
brentrock2
JOSHUACANADA Posted - 10/23/2009 : 08:52:34
Going for the knockout punch might be great in Boxing, but there is an unwritten rule to never endanger an opposition player. Excessive force or intent to injure, IE roughing is a penalty and is being discouraged league wide by both players and management. Hits like this just make it more public. I still dont think this hit was intent to injure, just a worse case scenerio for Toews.
tbar Posted - 10/23/2009 : 08:30:29
Their is no such thing as hitting someone too hard. The harder you can hit somebody the better. As a player if I see a guys head down im gona try my best to lay him out. Im not thining to my self as I hit him I sure hope I hurt him. Im thinking I sure hope I rock him and my team can build off of it. And a big hit clean or dirty can have huge impacts on a game. If its clean it ussually fires up the team that threw the hit and if it's dirty well you can bet the opposing team is going to step it up for theyre fellow player.
Guest6156 Posted - 10/23/2009 : 01:47:33
what does a hit so impactful that a player gets injured bring to the game????

A hit like that completely changes the game, every blackhawks player for the rest of the game is gonna be extra careful when receiving a pass. It gives a huge advantage to the canucks and that is the whole point of big hits like that, it's an important part of the game and as long as the hit is clean there is no problem with it. Ya it sucks when guys get injured but it happens, stop complaining about hits being too hard
Guest8954 Posted - 10/23/2009 : 01:07:51
hockey is a competitive sport. You don't consider how the other end feels when you go for the hit. Toews head was down and mitchell made him pay. If it were dirty I would be pretty upset, but a clean hit is a great part of the game.
leigh Posted - 10/23/2009 : 00:51:36
Good, clean, solid hit. Loved every second of it! Mitchell had a clean shot and he took it as per the rules of the game. Mitchell actually didn't skate all that aggressively into Toews (not that I would care even if he did) It just happened that Toews was looking the wrong way for the pass and was at about 4/5's speed so he ran into Mitchell as Mitchell laid out a textbook open ice shoulder check.

BTW I voted for 5 games. But his bell has been rung. one or two more like that and you can call it a career.
Beans15 Posted - 10/22/2009 : 21:48:19
quote:
Originally posted by JOSHUACANADA

How do you make that check and not injure the guy, Toew's didn't even see it coming and he had a head of steam with the puck in play and his head down. It is the same old arguement, pulling up on a check is just as likely to injure the checker as the player being checked.

Are you suggesting Mitchell shouldn't check him at all? Are you saying lessor checking or are you suggesting no checking period? I think your ok with checking but are against injuries. I agree but there isn't a perfect formula to eliminate injuries by checking unless you remove checking from the game. I for one do not want the NHL to turn into light checking Allstar like games.




Absolutely dead on right. I am totally for checking but totally against players getting hurt. This was easily the most unique situation I have watching in a hockey game for years. If you watch the replay, Toews actually looks up the ice and has his head up looking to the left side(penalty box side of the ice) and no players were there. He was totally safe in looking the other direction for a pass. Then, the penalty box door opens and there is player there who totally creams Toews.

This was a situation where a player had their head up and still got hit with their head down.

Checking is checking and I know I am being idealistic with my thoughts about players hitting to a lower level. In this specific case, nothing would have stopped Toews from getting hurt. And Toews also played it dead right.
JOSHUACANADA Posted - 10/22/2009 : 20:26:23
How do you make that check and not injure the guy, Toew's didn't even see it coming and he had a head of steam with the puck in play and his head down. It is the same old arguement, pulling up on a check is just as likely to injure the checker as the player being checked.

Are you suggesting Mitchell shouldn't check him at all? Are you saying lessor checking or are you suggesting no checking period? I think your ok with checking but are against injuries. I agree but there isn't a perfect formula to eliminate injuries by checking unless you remove checking from the game. I for one do not want the NHL to turn into light checking Allstar like games.
Beans15 Posted - 10/22/2009 : 18:14:41
I guess I will pose a question.

Much like fighting, what does a hit so impactful that a player gets injured bring to the game????

In my opinion, nothing. I would rather see a million lighter hits which separate the man from the puck than a single hit "with malice" and see a single player get hurt.

The NFL, where hitting is a more vital part of the game than in hockey, has put in rules against hits that are harder than they have to be. Such as the hit that Ray Lewis layed on Ochocinco 2 weeks ago. They did it to protect their players. The NHL, on the other hand, markets heavier hits(not hits to the head but heavier hits) virtually encourage players to hurt each other. Coaches do it too. A soon as players are old enough to hit, they are taught not only to hit, but to hit 'with malice' (I like that on Fat Elvis) when a player has his head down.

The entire culture of hockey is to intimidate, yes. But what is the actual result??? Injuries that don't have to happen.
fat_elvis_rocked Posted - 10/22/2009 : 16:08:26
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15

I don't think I have every watched a hit like this with a player coming out of the penalty box. Interesting to say the least.

And I know I am not the popular opinion on this, but did the hit really have to be that hard??? This could have been a more reasonable hit and still had the same impact. Instead, Toews is out with a concussion.

Coaches teach players to hunt for guys with the head down and cream them. To me, this is intent to injury.

Again, I know I am not the popular opinion on this matter.




Beans, I have to yank your chain a little on this one.....

If the hit is there, and you can make the hit cleanly, you take it.
If the hit is there, and you can deliver it cleanly, but with malice, again, you take it.

The reason for allowing body contact, especially at that level, has as much to do with clean intimidation, as it does with physically removing the player from the play. It can be a complete swing in momentum to deliver a crushing bodycheck, it makes every player on the opposition lose that little bit of focus on their game and think about yours.

In this particular instance, it was unfortunate for Toews, as with Mitchell leaving the penalty box at the perfect time to deliver the hit, Toews got blindsided and crushed. Like you said, interesting timing to say the least..

I hear what you're saying about players considering the consequences of how hard they deliver the hit, but the whole point of running into each other at 20km/hr on ice is to make it .. uncomfortable.. on the opponent. 90+ percent of the hits in most games are of the garden variety rubouts and bump offs. These big hits are fewer and farther between than the highlights lead us to believe, but yet, are an integral part of what makes the game exciting.

I'm guessing the next time the teams meet, not only will there be some Hawks looking for retribution(see point above regarding losing focus), but Toews will a lot more careful when approaching any patch of ice Mitchell is on, maybe causing him to dump the puck too soon, or hurry a pass too soon, whatever, the big hit has then served it's purpose.

Had Mitchell pulled up and 'bumped' him off the puck. Toews, or any other Hawk has no worry playing to his side of the rink, not much danger over there...

And regarding the coaches teaching players to hunt for players? I'm not sure about that, a good will teach players to finish checks and make a big hit if it's there and doesn't leave you out of position. No decent coach will be happy with a big hit that leaves the opposition with a scoring chance, and I think at the NHL level, they must be pretty good coaches.

So do they have to that hard? Yes they do. I' don't think the intent is to injure so much as to intimidate.
Guest2180 Posted - 10/22/2009 : 15:08:32
The first rule of hockey is keep your head up. As long as it was a clean hit.....oh well.
JOSHUACANADA Posted - 10/22/2009 : 12:57:06
Good clean hit It wasn`t excessive and it was Toews momentum that caused the hit to be that brutal. Mitchell certainly wasn`t running him. It wasn`t a pick play. Just a well read check by Mitchell. Any time you check a player you see a good check you can argue it is intend to injure, but I dont see anything but a well placed hit against another player who was on the rush and didn`t see it coming.

Snitz Forums 2000 Go To Top Of Page