Yeah, and sometimes you miss a player like MItchell. I agree with what you're saying though, despite the players that recover and play well for years.
Dickinson hit from behind on Chytil
- Thread starter M2Beezy
- Start date
The mindset that overlooks dirty plays is fundamentally flawed and detrimental to the league. Players are the league's most valuable assets—their talents and abilities, whether on offense, defense, or in goaltending, are what draw fans to games and drive ticket sales. When a player, as an asset, is sidelined due to an injury from an illegal play, their value is diminished, and the league suffers as a result.
For example, if a star like McDavid is injured and the league fails to take action, it risks losing significant marketing value. Fans may hesitate to buy tickets to Oilers games if he’s absent, leaving seats unsold. Opposing fans also purchase tickets specifically to see elite players like McDavid, Hughes, Crosby, or even a game-changing goaltender like Hasek once was. These players elevate the product on the ice.
By imposing hefty suspensions, the league can hold players accountable. A substantial suspension means a loss of pay, which serves as a strong deterrent. This sends a clear message to every player in the league: illegal plays that injure others will have serious consequences. Protecting the league’s assets ensures the game remains compelling for fans and preserves its overall integrity.
Referees also play a critical role by enforcing rules during the game. I’d suggest allowing coaches to request reviews of undetected dirty plays. This could prevent escalating tensions that lead to scrums after every whistle, where offended players still on the ice get dragged into senseless fights for the rest of the game. Giving coaches this tool would help keep the game clean and focused on skill rather than chaos.
While I don't entirely disagree with you, so much of the play in the NHL is along the boards and with the speed today and lots of players having their backs to the center of the ice, ie facing the boards somewhat, you idea would probably transform the game and I'm not sure how many people would ant that, ie less hitting and more safety.
I say all this acknowledging that was a really bad hit but those types of hits are going to happen without actual intent to harm and those types of hits (even if we can never prove the intent) are easier to spot and need to be punished in the way you are saying.
You don’t seem to understand that perhaps the biggest impediment to holding players accountable for actions like this is the players themselves - via the NHLPA. A recent example was the NHLPA successfully appealing Hartman’s suspension, which was reduced from 10 to 8 games.
Many like to think simplistically that this is a league via players issue, when it is as much a players vs players issue as anything.
Focusing just on the success stories of the ones that recover from grade 1 concussions is unwise. Players like Chytil and Byram will live with their grade 2+ concussion history possibly forever, fans don't understand, its additive in nature. I truly sympathize with the player, but from a business point of view, you don't stake the return of your most competitive player to someone that carries with them that high of a risk. Knowing the Canucks medical staff, they better not rush him back, and give fans the "no one plays 100%" BS that Tocchet likes to say, this is a QoL thing now.
This highlights why a hit from behind is an unnecessary and outdated tactic. The puck is often long gone by the time the hit occurs, and pinning a player to the boards is a far better defensive strategy. When a player with the puck is pinned, their movement is restricted, allowing the defense to set up effectively. You don’t see hits from behind as much anymore, and for good reason—pinning is safer and more efficient. Once the player is pinned, they’re stuck with the puck, reducing the risk of injury compared to a reckless hit.
If you compare today’s game to past eras, the evolution is clear. Back then, dumping the puck into the offensive zone often led to physical hits along the boards. Now, the approach has shifted: players dump the puck and focus on pinning rather than hitting. This allows the team’s defense to get into position and hold the line without risking a boarding penalty. The game has improved as a result—players thrive, and defensive play is stronger and safer overall.
He was gooning it up against the Sharks too. Not sure if this is how he always plays or if he’s given up on trying to make a difference on the scoresheet.
Dickinson didn't have have position, wasn't trying to get position, and hits Chytil in the back. If that isn't boarding, nothing is boarding.
So it caused a concussion. That is now fact. But it was not deemed illegal during or after the game. And that is the problem. I get the arguments given when these arguments happen:
Feet were planted
Elbows tucked
Player had his back turned
I've seen harder hits
Rule 48 says it is fine
DOPS says it is fine
But when a hit results In a concussed player.. and it is deemed okay then the rule needs to change.
Feet were planted
Elbows tucked
Player had his back turned
I've seen harder hits
Rule 48 says it is fine
DOPS says it is fine
But when a hit results In a concussed player.. and it is deemed okay then the rule needs to change.
