More Layers, More Mush

BOSTON--it's good that this is the one area in which there actually appears to be some limited sense of co-operation between the league and the players.

The competition committee is split between representatives of the two, and theoretically should produce rules and ruling that reasonably effect the needs and desires of both sides. Once upon a time, at the tail end of the 2004-05 lockout when the idea was first developed, the concept was that the competition committee would consist of 10 individuals, each there to vote their conscience regardless of what their constituency might be.

Those quaint old days are long gone. As seen today when the competition committee met at a downtown Boston hotel, this has grown from its original notion into a new level of bureaucracy and, really, an extension of the collective bargaining process.

At various times there were upwards of 30 people in the room, including NHL commissioner Gary Bettman and NHL Players Association chief Donald Fehr. The players are now represented on the committee by Chris Clark, Chris Campoli, Mike Cammalleri, Ryan Miller and David Backes. Miller and Backes participated by phone today, while Steve Montador was present as well in a, well, non-voting, informal way.

For the owners/management, the voting reps where Jim Rutherford, Ed Snider, David Poile, Steve Yzerman and Joe Nieuwendyk, with the league's new hanging judge Brendan Shanahan in attandance as well along with other hockey ops people like Colin Campbell and Rob Blake as well.

The main result people were looking for was some kind of agreement on the changes Shanahan wants to make with Rule 48, the legislation guiding head shots. Basically, it appears the idea will be add the word "defenceless" to the rule and take out "blindside," and all members of the committee appear to agree.

How this will make Shanahan's new job any easier is, well, mystifying. But this layer of NHL bureaucracy has given it a rubber stamp, with the governors next. More language, a controversial rule sliced into smaller and smaller sections, all to avoid the place where the NHL eventually has to go; a total ban on hits to the head.

Comments

[Jim M]

It's amazing how much one can learn about the wider world and human nature by reading about what goes on behind the scenes in the NHL. But I also like to visit this blog when I am not having a particularly good day because I can usually find something to lift my spirits.

By way of reciprocation, I have an amendment to Rule 48 to suggest, which I will leave to the people I got the idea from to 'flesh out' for you. Thanks, Damien.

http://youtu.be/yJ_UuPH3cyw

[Don DesJardine]

Since it is the players who are most at risk I find it hard to believe that the NHLPA are not demanding that ALL hits to the head are penalized with a 5 minute plus game misconduct, plus $100,000 fine which is approximately 5% of the NHL average salary, plus a suspension of minimum 5 games (additional loss of salary) for the first offence. Increase the suspension by 5 games for each additional head shot and after three head shots suspend the player for 1 full season including any playoffs his team is involved in. Maybe the coach should also be fined $50,000 every time a player delivers a head shot. Then, everyone would get the serious about head shots.

[Bruce Kellam]

Damien
Thanks for continuing to be a voice of common sense for the benefit of the players and of the (potentially greater) beauty of the game. I don't know if you have made this exact ananlogy before but I think it would fit with your viewpoint. Banning head shots totally is as easy as banning high sticking totally. A stick to the face is an automatic penalty, doesn't matter how it happened. Should be the same thing for headshots, automatic penalty. Referees can always use their discretion, which they do anyway, if they think that somehow somebody intentionally stuck their head into another player's shoulder and was trying to get a concussion in order to draw a penalty (lol).

[othermark]

Call me a knuckledragger if you like, but really, at what point does this rule (and your call for no hits to the head Damien) become ridiculous? If I am a guy like Zdeno Chara and Scott Gomez is cruising in North/South and I hit him (South/North) while he's not paying attention it's almost inevitable part of my body will contact his head. Is that a dirty play by Chara, deserving of a penalty/suspension? In my books.... never. If it puts Gomez on life support, too bad. He should keep his head up, like we've all been taught to do since we were 6 years old. Shanahan wants to replace 'blindside' with the word 'Defenseless'? Maybe next they will use the word 'Clueless'.

[Jeff]

With this rule i fear that players will learn to skate with thier heads down...just like they learned to turn their backs to an oncoming checker.

Hockey people know how hard it is to stop a check once committed. And when that guy turns his back, its too late most times.

I think a more effective rule would be 2 minutes for turning your back to an oncoming checker, or skating with your head down. However i realize you cant call penalties for players turning their backs or skating with their heads down.

I do fear that this rule will make things worse, not better/