Why isn't checking allowed in women's hockey?

[Icebreakers]

I haven't read most of the comments on here but for me the reason is obvious. Women don't get paid millions or even hundreds of thousands to play hockey. I know a girl who played in the woman's hockey league (pro) and her salary was 20k a year. If a woman gets a concussion and is out her quality of life is severely impacted. Whereas NHL players or even pros playing in Europe are making 6 figures at least. Would you risk concussion for 20k a year? Some of them work real jobs or are coaches in hockey schools to make extra money.

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

as its been said they play exhibition against teenaged boys and often lose. so objectively ( ignoring their sex) its not great hockey by any available metric.

And people have said that polls indicate that the women who are currently competing in no check hockey, prefer it that way. If, through consensus, they express a desire to keep checking banned, you would want to overrule them for the sake of your sense of consistency ?

I have no idea about the current reasons why they don't allow checking. I think ( and I may be wrong) that it was initially paternalistic. But if they decide they want the game to be check free, I say they are the ones who get to make that call.

right now outside of north america its a race for bronze, adding checking isnt going to change that much. Without checking its going to be ( usa-canada-X) or ( canada-usa-X) for probably a pretty long time. and its clear that for all of the " we don't wan't checking" there is some bad blood between the two countries.

If the women don't want to check, I guess it's fine. Disappointing in the whole equality discussion, but it's not that big of a deal I guess...

I still think the skill level was plenty high enough to have a very enjoyable game.

 

[sandysan]

If the women don't want to check, I guess it's fine. Disappointing in the whole equality discussion, but it's not that big of a deal I guess...

I still think the skill level was plenty high enough to have a very enjoyable game.

I might enjoy watching midget or atom players, it might even be competitive. That does notmake it objectively good hockey, at least how I see it.

Similarly, the men's tourneyy mighr be unpredictable, but good hockey it is not ( even if it's can be entertaining)

 

[Captain Bowie]

I might enjoy watching midget or atom players, it might even be competitive. That does notmake it objectively good hockey, at least how I see it.

Similarly, the men's tourneyy mighr be unpredictable, but good hockey it is not ( even if it's can be entertaining)

So you're saying that a sport can't be considered good hockey/football/baseball/whatever unless it is the highest possible skill level, or at least very close too it?

That may be your opinion, and that's fine. But it's not an objective truth.

I've seen Junior Hockey games, High School football games, and Single A Baseball games that have blown their professional counterparts out of the water in terms of quality, both entertainment value and execution value.

 

[sandysan]

You have seen junior hockey games that are BETTER than the pros in. Terms of quality?

If you substituted one of those teams what happens? The pro team is faster, stronger, shoots harder, passes crisper and has better goaltending.

If. Midget level boys can beat the best women, then in terms of relative skill, that's a mighty big gap. Enjoy whatever you like but let's be realistic about the delta.

 

[Captain Bowie]

You have seen junior hockey games that are BETTER than the pros in. Terms of quality?

If you substituted one of those teams what happens? The pro team is faster, stronger, shoots harder, passes crisper and has better goaltending.

If. Midget level boys can beat the best women, then in terms of relative skill, that's a mighty big gap. Enjoy whatever you like but let's be realistic about the delta.

I guess you are really arguing semantics as to what the term "Better hockey" means. I don't think it means that one team at one level can easily beat a team at a lower level automatically means it's better hockey. The term "better hockey" takes into account entertainment value, rules, talent equality between the teams, ect...

But it's semantics at this point.

 

[sandysan]

I guess you are really arguing semantics as to what the term "Better hockey" means. I don't think it means that one team at one level can easily beat a team at a lower level automatically means it's better hockey. The term "better hockey" takes into account entertainment value, rules, talent equality between the teams, ect...

But it's semantics at this point.

I don't think it's semantics at all. Quality is a. Continuum and the ladie's game is towards the left.

I think conflating entertainment with. Quality is worse. Again enjoy what you. Like.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Your oddly placed periods are confusing, but I think this is an agree to disagree situation.

 

[offkilter]

Your oddly placed periods are confusing, but I think this is an agree to disagree situation.

I think it's a autocorrect problem. If you type too fast on a phones touch screen keyboard and double tap space it adds a period and caps the next word.
So. Sentences. End. Up. Like. This.

 

[sandysan]

I think it's a autocorrect problem. If you type too fast on a phones touch screen keyboard and double tap space it adds a period and caps the next word.
So. Sentences. End. Up. Like. This.

ding ding ding. winner winner chicken dinner!

 

[sandysan]

Your oddly placed periods are confusing, but I think this is an agree to disagree situation.

if you want to disagree with the commonly accepted definition of quality, sure.

and it has nothing to do with parity, competitiveness or entertainment. Enjoy what you like. I suspect that they are better than a lot of male players but that doesnt sem to be the salient metric. perhaps you think it is unjust to extend male expectations on to the ladies but isnt this an admission that the quality of play is simply not as good ?

For the record I think that the world juniors is not great hockey either, even if it is entertaining as hell.

 

[Pez68]

Cuz....I really have no idea.

And let's be serious. These women are checking.

USA vs. Canada was as physical an Olympic game as I've seen. lol

 

[Tuoppi]

Finland coach said that hits on boards should be allowed but open ice hits should be banned even in mens game. Jalosuo said that with no tackles it makes for more skillful game.