Quantcast
Channel: Brendan Shanahan – The Good Men Project
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 6

A Blueprint for Reducing Fighting in Hockey [OpEd]

0
0

AP101223136033

Paul Busch offers a plan for reducing fighting and improving player safety in the NHL.

Fighting is a symptom of player frustration over officiating and discipline. When a player is hit hard with a cheap shot, either they or a teammate feels compelled to take revenge. A two minute power play is not enough of a penalty to reduce this emotion. And if the player is hurt then the need for revenge is even stronger and not reduced one iota by a two or three game suspension for the culprit. The fight becomes one of the most predictable acts in the NHL.

What is needed is a rethink of NHL rules and the disciplinary process. They need to focus on safety by implementing rules that either change the behaviour of the dangerous player or drive them out of the game. Penalties that severely punish the team of the offender will also change the attitude of the general manger and roster decisions by the coach. Make it costly for a team to dress a less skilled player who constantly plays on the edge, or over it. Eliminate the need for revenge and, with a small change in the fighting major penalty, the need to drop the gloves will naturally be reduced.

The basic strategy outlined below is patterned on what the USHL introduced for the 2012-13 season. I’ve outlined their new process and highlighted comments from USHL executives elsewhere. Any additional suggestions are not necessarily new. I’ve just tried to incorporate them into a disciplinary system that I believe will change behavior and make hockey a safer sport without fundamentally altering the game that we love.

Dangerous Penalties

Certain types of NHL infractions are either clearly intentional or potentially dangerous. These should be identified as such and carry added weight for both the offender and his team. The penalty time should increase, the offender should stay in the box for the entire penalty (no release upon a goal by the opponent) and the totals should be tracked for disciplinary purposes.

Dangerous penalties should automatically call for a five minute stint in the penalty box, and would include the following:

  • Boarding
  • Charging
  • Cross-checking
  • Elbowing
  • Slashing
  • Spearing
  • Checking from behind

Certain penalties should call for a five minute major AND an automatic game misconduct:

  • Fighting
  • Illegal Check to the Head

The calling of Dangerous Penalties, with the resulting full five minute stay in the box, would place the offending team at a tremendous disadvantage. It would immediately change the behaviour of players who would have to clean up their game to stay in the league. Coaches would be a lot more selective about who plays, rewarding those who can play tough and stay out of the box while sending the undisciplined goon or agitator to the minors. Players who would have tried to take revenge via a dangerous penalty or by fighting would understand going in that they are going to put their team on an extended penalty kill or they are going to the dressing room early.

The automatic game misconduct for fighting would pretty much put an end to the ridiculous and useless staged fight. Not many coaches would dress their fourth line enforcers for the opening faceoff, only to see them immediately tossed for the match. This rule alone would eventually convince teams to use that roster spot for a power forward with skill and eliminate the one-dimensional “enforcer.”

Supplemental Discipline for Dangerous Play

Players who have accumulated a set amount of Dangerous Penalties, say 20 minutes worth, would have to attend a hearing with the NHL’s Department of Player Safety, accompanied by their coach. The league would review the infractions with the player and ask what plans are in place to eliminate this activity from their play. Players who have accumulated 25 minutes of Dangerous Penalties would automatically be suspended for three games. At 30 minutes it becomes 10 games, 35 minutes would be 20 games and 40 minutes of Dangerous Penalties would result in a 30 game suspension.

The supplemental discipline for minutes accumulated will remove the so-called “rats” from the game. If they can’t learn to play tough without going over the edge then they’ll sit on the sidelines for extended periods and eventually be sent to the minors. The NHL will send a clear message to offenders and their coaches through the early intervention meeting. Overall, players will understand that they have to respect each other, and the game, or risk hurting the team and their careers.

This combination of changes to penalties and increased discipline has several advantages:

  • Working together, the NHL and NHLPA can communicate to fans, sponsors, advertisers and the sports media that they are serious about player safety. The image of the game will improve dramatically.
  • A full five minutes for a dangerous penalty, like cross-checking or boarding, will hurt the offending team and the culprits will be thinking about their actions while opponents are scoring multiple times during the resulting power play.
  • Including the coach in the intervention meetings, when players are called in to review their dangerous actions on the ice, communicates that both the team and the player are responsible for what occurs on the ice.
  • Players that can hit cleanly, with the intent of separating the opponent from the puck versus his head from his body, will be prized under these rules. Those who are reckless and prone to vicious hits or stick fouls will become rare. Hitting will become more strategic and injuries will be reduced.
  • An automatic game misconduct for fighting will very likely be the nail in the coffin for the goons who circle each other after an opening face-off or in the last few minutes of a blow-out.
  • Smart teams will make better roster choices and end up taking advantage of teams that value  intimidation in the form of violent and dangerous play. This will speed learning and adaptation to the new rules.
  • When players experience officiating and suspensions that have real consequences, the motivation for revenge will be greatly reduced. Fighting will become unnecessary and rare.

This new approach to reducing injuries and fights can be implemented in stages, allowing players to adjust and ease concerns that the NHL is altering the game too rapidly. Dangerous penalties could start at two minutes with full time served. If the behaviour of players doesn’t change, then increase it to three or four minutes. That incremental approach can be done by penalty type if the league is looking to reduce certain types of infractions. They can slowly ratchet down the dangerous penalty thresholds for suspensions and weed out those players who have no concern about injuring an opponent with reckless use of their stick or body.

The USHL has stated that the NHL’s Director of Player Safety, Brendan Shanahan, was consulted when the junior league was planning its rule changes for this season. Therefore this post may not be that far off what we see in the seasons ahead. That would be a positive change for the NHL and should result in fewer injuries and a greater emphasis on skill and tough but clean action. We can only hope league executives and the NHLPA recognize the need for a change and find the courage to cooperate in making it a reality.

 

A version of this post originally ran at It’s Not Part of the Game.

Read more on Sports.

Photo: AP

Premium Membership, The Good Men Project

The post A Blueprint for Reducing Fighting in Hockey [OpEd] appeared first on The Good Men Project.


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 6

Latest Images

Trending Articles





Latest Images