Why does "intent" seem to matter so much for disciplining hits to the head

[Crazy Monkey]

The League has an obligation to protect its players from head injuries and their chronic effects. This means trying to reduce (impossible to eliminate) hits to the head from elbows, body checks, boarding, etc

One way to do this is penalties and disciplining players that cause an opposing player to sustain a head injury. But it seems the decision to suspend a player, which would be one of the biggest deterrents, is often based on the "intent" of the hit.

I think this introduces too much subjectivity during disciplinary reviews and misses the bar. Yes, intentional hits should be more severely punished. But unintentional ones should still be subject to discipline if we are serious about changing behaviour and reducing head shots

Almost no other penalty on the ice depends on whether it was an accident or not. A trip is a trip, a cross check is a cross check, and a high stick is a high stick (unless it's a follow through, but otherwise intent does not matter)

What are peoples thoughts on the topic? And why does the league approach disciplining head shots in the way that it does?

 

[Juicy Pop]

The thing is, a lot of hits that are labeled as "unintentional" probably still meet the bar as far as "intent to injure" per the rulebook. There isn't a need for will on the part of the offending player, just that the act in a void is likely to cause injury.

For instance, if a player flailed their stick around on the ice and knocked someone behind them on the head, that probably meets that bar, even if the other player isn't injured.

I guess it just depends on what context they're using when they make rulings.

edit: My angle is that I'm not sure if they're making suspensions on the "emotional" aspect of intent, or if they believe that the action simply meets that lower bar in the rulebook.

 

[FriendlyGhost92]

You're asking the wrong question.

Why does quality of the players involved matter so much for disciplining hits to the head?

 

[Kryten]

Knock a players teeth out with a highstick, penalty. Knock a players teeth out on a follow through even intentionally, nothing.

Flip a puck over the glass on purpose, penalty. Flip a puck over the glass on accident, penalty.

The NHL doesnt care about their players, youre right that the end result is more important than intent

 

[BlueDream]

Because if you play a sport like hockey, you’re signing up for the risk of injuries, including to the head. Period. They’re all adults who are making that decision, and there’s no way to fully eliminate this risk. You could get hit in the head by a slap shot. Should we ban slap shots because of that, or punish the player that shot the puck? No, because that would be idiotic.

There’s no point in supplemental discipline for accidents that weren’t intentional. I don’t see how that benefits anyone. If the league did that, you’d have more players missing games due to suspensions (as well as paychecks, which the players would not be happy about), and thus would make everyone play more timid and therefore the quality of the game would decrease quickly. It’s just a stupid idea. If you want the sport to be in such a place that the there’s guaranteed to never be any head contact, then it will no longer be hockey. Find a different sport if you don’t like that.

 

[Eyeseeing]

The League has an obligation to protect its players from head injuries and their chronic effects. This means trying to reduce (impossible to eliminate) hits to the head from elbows, body checks, boarding, etc

Not just the league, the players themselves have an obligation to not intentionally injure each other.
The NHLPA , the league and the DOPS have this weird codependency where supposedly they are in this for the common good.
The players union protects goons.
The DOPS protects goons.
The league protects goons.
I zero sympathy for the players because they don’t respect each other’s long term health.
There are rules in place but all 3 of the aforementioned do everything they can to circumvent them for the good of the game.
Total clown show.

 

[Drew4u]

Because if you play a sport like hockey, you’re signing up for the risk of injuries, including to the head. Period. They’re all adults who are making that decision, and there’s no way to fully eliminate this risk. You could get hit in the head by a slap shot. Should we ban slap shots because of that, or punish the player that shot the puck? No, because that would be idiotic.

There’s no point in supplemental discipline for accidents that weren’t intentional. I don’t see how that benefits anyone. If the league did that, you’d have more players missing games due to suspensions (as well as paychecks, which the players would not be happy about), and thus would make everyone play more timid and therefore the quality of the game would decrease quickly. It’s just a stupid idea. If you want the sport to be in such a place that the there’s guaranteed to never be any head contact, then it will no longer be hockey. Find a different sport if you don’t like that.

This is the real truth. What is the the UFC without headshots. Hockey isn't purely fighting but how would the players play if there weren't any accidental headshots.

When you're battling for pucks constantly, blocking, diving, using your size as an advantage you can't avoid it. I see goalies today getting accidently elbowed or run over in a significant amount of games. These are powerful, strong men skating fast.

Nobody cares about CTE. If the NHL/any major sports league cares about the longevity and profitability of the sport they need to stop giving a fk about what the crybabies say. 99% of those guys with problems were massive goons who would've gone into drugs or other illegal shit. There lives would be nothing without the NHL. Same story with NFL players.

It seems to me like the original poster hasn't played a contact sport competitively.

 

[mr figgles]

It's a fast moving contact sport. Sometimes accidents are going to happen. There isn't always someone else to blame for an injury a player sustains.

 

[Crazy Monkey]

This is the real truth. What is the the UFC without headshots. Hockey isn't purely fighting but how would the players play if there weren't any accidental headshots.

When you're battling for pucks constantly, blocking, diving, using your size as an advantage you can't avoid it. I see goalies today getting accidently elbowed or run over in a significant amount of games. These are powerful, strong men skating fast.

Nobody cares about CTE. If the NHL/any major sports league cares about the longevity and profitability of the sport they need to stop giving a fk about what the crybabies say. 99% of those guys with problems were massive goons who would've gone into drugs or other illegal shit. There lives would be nothing without the NHL. Same story with NFL players.

It seems to me like the original poster hasn't played a contact sport competitively

UFC is not a great comparison. Headshots aren't penalized. In hockey they are

Human behaviour can be modified. Yes accidents will still happen, which is why the original post said it would be impossible to eliminate

Are you suggesting we should ignore head injuries? CTE is not the only form of head injury.

I've played competitive contact sports. Not NHL, but not sure how that is even relevant here. Do you study human behaviour, accident prevention, or head injuries?

 

[Crazy Monkey]

It's a fast moving contact sport. Sometimes accidents are going to happen. There isn't always someone else to blame for an injury a player sustains.

For sure it is. But there's ways of bringing the head shots down further.

 

[Crazy Monkey]

Not just the league, the players themselves have an obligation to not intentionally injure each other.
The NHLPA , the league and the DOPS have this weird codependency where supposedly they are in this for the common good.
The players union protects goons.
The DOPS protects goons.
The league protects goons.
I zero sympathy for the players because they don’t respect each other’s long term health.
There are rules in place but all 3 of the aforementioned do everything they can to circumvent them for the good of the game.
Total clown show.

Yeah it's super complex and political. Lots of say one thing and do the other

 

[Crazy Monkey]

Because if you play a sport like hockey, you’re signing up for the risk of injuries, including to the head. Period. They’re all adults who are making that decision, and there’s no way to fully eliminate this risk. You could get hit in the head by a slap shot. Should we ban slap shots because of that, or punish the player that shot the puck? No, because that would be idiotic.

There’s no point in supplemental discipline for accidents that weren’t intentional. I don’t see how that benefits anyone. If the league did that, you’d have more players missing games due to suspensions (as well as paychecks, which the players would not be happy about), and thus would make everyone play more timid and therefore the quality of the game would decrease quickly. It’s just a stupid idea. If you want the sport to be in such a place that the there’s guaranteed to never be any head contact, then it will no longer be hockey. Find a different sport if you don’t like that.

No one is talking about eliminating these hits. It's not possible. But they can be further reduced

Taking a puck to the head is obviously a different scenario. We are talking about one player initating contact with another player resulting in a hit to the head

We arent talking about eliminating hitting and making players timid. We are talking about making players get into the habit of aiming lower when going for a hit

 

[BlueDream]

No one is talking about eliminating these hits. It's not possible. But they can be further reduced

Taking a puck to the head is obviously a different scenario. We are talking about one player initating contact with another player resulting in a hit to the head

We arent talking about eliminating hitting and making players timid. We are talking about making players get into the habit of aiming lower when going for a hit

Ok but that’s already happening. There are less headshots now than there were in the past.

It’s already improving and trending in the right direction. So again, punishing innocent players for accidental acts doesn’t make sense.

 

[Crazy Monkey]

Ok but that’s already happening. There are less headshots now than there were in the past.

It’s already improving and trending in the right direction. So again, punishing innocent players for accidental acts doesn’t make sense.

That's the point. It's modifiable and can be further reduced

Again, it's not about intent. It's about being in control of your body as much as possible. Should someone who accidentally hit your car because they didn't check their mirrors before moving be excused from paying for damages because of intent?

 

[Crazy Monkey]

You're asking the wrong question.

Why does quality of the players involved matter so much for disciplining hits to the head?

I think they are both important questions

 

[OrangePMD]

So what is the solution ? Penalties from all head contact ? Bans for all penalized head contact ? For just some head contact ? Which are worth bans, and which aren't ? Just fix it moar banz ?

 

[Crazy Monkey]

So what is the solution ? Penalties from all head contact ? Bans for all penalized head contact ? For just some head contact ? Which are worth bans, and which aren't ? Just fix it moar banz ?

I think more penalties and suspensions for certain types of headshots, including elbows and boarding. Yes

 

[Mr Nogatco]

Knock a players teeth out with a highstick, penalty. Knock a players teeth out on a follow through even intentionally, nothing.

If a player acknowledged he intentionally hit someone on a follow thru and knocked their teeth out, of course he’d be fined and suspended. Nearly impossible to prove in the absence of such a confession tho

 

[hullsy47]

You're asking the wrong question.

Why does quality of the players involved matter so much for disciplining hits to the head?

Just a matter of time before someone gets totally dummied for life
The owners treat players as assets yet every board of govenor meeting never addresses the rules not being called in the playoffs
U might as well play an 80 game balanced schedule with the top two teams meeting for the NHL version of super bowl
Save the embarasment of looking like a rigged WWF card

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

They wanted to get rid of Matt Cooke/Raffi Torres style headhunters, but they didn't want to make players too afraid to hit each other.

Funnily enough, the meta shifting and teams prizing defensive neutral zone structure above all else probably did more to end that than anything, big open ice hits on the neutral zone puck carrier are rare now.

 

[FriendlyGhost92]

Just a matter of time before someone gets totally dummied for life
The owners treat players as assets yet every board of govenor meeting never addresses the rules not being called in the playoffs
U might as well play an 80 game balanced schedule with the top two teams meeting for the NHL version of super bowl
Save the embarasment of looking like a rigged WWF card

I look forward to the "We take player safety very seriously and there's no place for plays like this in hockey" speech when somebody splits their brains open on the ice after a slewfoot, which the NHL has notoriously not been suspending players for for years.

 

[Dickie Dunn]

You can’t always anticipate where a guy is going to be or how he might turn, fall down, etc. if we penalize the accidents then may as well ban hitting altogether. Punishing accidents will get to the same place over time. Slower, less interesting gameplay.

 

[Summer Rose]

Intent matters when it comes to consequences for actions in general. To use an extreme example, that's why there's a huge difference between involuntary manslaughter and premeditated murder. I don't feel like disciplining hits to the head should be any different, as long as the head was actually what was mainly hit as opposed to, say, a shoulder to chest hit where the hit rides up and eventually contacts the head. However, I think where the NHL fails is that some of them just end up going entirely unpunished. They all should be, and intent (I know it's hard to prove) can make the difference between, say, a minor penalty with no supplemental discipline, and a lengthy suspension.

 

[OrangePMD]

I think more penalties and suspensions for certain types of headshots, including elbows and boarding. Yes

And charging. That pretty much covers all the usual head contact fouls.

This would still leave all those head contacts that are currently ruled as unavoidable, as legal, and those tend to rub some fans the wrong way. Think anything by Trouba, or Whitcloud on Knies. That stuff.

But we are getting somewhere. I like this. Usually here people only want to "discuss" rule change on head contact, when they reactionally scream bloody murder and want retroactive changes and punisment when things don't go their way.

BTW, just to be clear, I'm fine with the current way. If he dies, he dies. But I'm open to discuss change, because the current way, probably isn't sustainable.

 

[KeyserSoze81]

The League has an obligation to protect its players from head injuries and their chronic effects. This means trying to reduce (impossible to eliminate) hits to the head from elbows, body checks, boarding, etc

One way to do this is penalties and disciplining players that cause an opposing player to sustain a head injury. But it seems the decision to suspend a player, which would be one of the biggest deterrents, is often based on the "intent" of the hit.

I think this introduces too much subjectivity during disciplinary reviews and misses the bar. Yes, intentional hits should be more severely punished. But unintentional ones should still be subject to discipline if we are serious about changing behaviour and reducing head shots

Almost no other penalty on the ice depends on whether it was an accident or not. A trip is a trip, a cross check is a cross check, and a high stick is a high stick (unless it's a follow through, but otherwise intent does not matter)

What are peoples thoughts on the topic? And why does the league approach disciplining head shots in the way that it does?

It gives them an out. The league absolutely does want subjectivity. This is obvious in everything that they do. The games are called differently depending on circumstances, depending on the player, their reputation, and if the player previously called the ref a mean name.

The NHL is a nepotistic, cancerous growth of an old boy's club. If they cared about objectivity, fairness, or competitiveness, none in the current league offices would have jobs. They do not care, and the owners are too busy collecting expansion fees to care. The sooner you realize that, the sooner you can disconnect from any sense of fair play. This is a less entertaining version of wrestling, with a bunch of uncharismatic players managed by incompetent buffoons.

You can want to fix the game you love, but the people in power won't. They don't see it as broken, as they are either managing the financial interests of the owners or have been brought up in the corrupt ecosystem from a child.