Sidney Crosby's setback has many worried

Sid should retire, he has nothing more to prove and his health is more important.

Agreed. The worst of the damage has been done and he'll never recover from it. Continuing to play will only be setting him up for an even worse injury that will destroy his entire life before he hits fifty years old.

I'd like to think that permanently losing the league's star player would be enough to finally get them to ban all headshots altogether, and to permanently ban all that goddamn plastic military-grade body armour they're wearing for shoulder and elbow pads these days. But both the NHL and the NHLPA are controlled by such rotten assholes that they're just going to put down the end of Crosby's career as the price of doing business. Hockey is entirely unserious about doing anything to stop career-ending cheapshots. They've been like this forever and they're never going to change.

Damn, that doesn't sound good.

Already happened 10 years ago. Nothing was, it seems, learned from Eric Lindros' injury.


It's not just the shoulder and elbow pads. They should take the helmets back out of the game. Back in the day before helmets, players were vulnerable and, as a result, there was shared respect. The same is true of rugby. It's an intense and rugged sport, but the lack of equipment means the players police the safety themselves.

Not to sound insensitive, but why is his injury more important than everyone elses?

Was there this much press about these guys?
http://www.thecheapseats.ca/2011/04/top ... sions.html

I realise he's good, probably the best in the league, but still, seems odd.

If Sidney Crosby has to retire it's the final straw that broke the camels back on this serious issue in the NHL.

Having a concussion and being misdiagnosed changes your life forever.

There's certain sports that I've just written off as too dangerous to watch. I won't watch the Snowbirds for one. The high speed acrobatics by jets. Every few years there's a accident somewhere in the world and for what, entertainment. Boxing, hockey, car races, some of the airshow stunts. I'm not entertained.

Actually, in some cases, yes. Lafontaine, Lindros, and Primeau got a fair amount of press, while for many of the others, the lack of press was because of their lower stature in the league (stars get most of the press theses days, right or wrong).

Already happened 10 years ago. Nothing was, it seems, learned from Eric Lindros' injury.


It's not just the shoulder and elbow pads. They should take the helmets back out of the game. Back in the day before helmets, players were vulnerable and, as a result, there was shared respect. The same is true of rugby. It's an intense and rugged sport, but the lack of equipment means the players police the safety themselves.
In the last week of watching hockey, I would have seen at least 3 players seriously fucked up getting hit by the puck or a skate if it wasn't for their helmets.
There's only one reasonable solution but I don't see the NHL or NHLPA going for it.
Besides being an automatic suspension, headshots should also have the stigma of seeing the offending player suspended for as long as the injured player is out of the game. If the injured player is unable to return to the sport, the offending player is banned from returning to the NHL.
Maybe the players will be more respectful knowing they could see the end of their own NHL career if they deliberately target another player's head.

And that's my point. If the players didn't have helmets, the style of play would have to change. How come guys weren't being seriously fucked up by pucks and skates pre 1980s? Because the lack of equipment dictated the play.


Maybe. Maybe not. We KNOW that removing the helmets works because the game was played that way for the better part of a century. It wasn't until players started putting helmets on that headshots became an issue.

And that's my point. If the players didn't have helmets, the style of play would have to change. How come guys weren't being seriously fucked up by pucks and skates pre 1980s? Because the lack of equipment dictated the play.


Maybe. Maybe not. We KNOW that removing the helmets works because the game was played that way for the better part of a century. It wasn't until players started putting helmets on that headshots became an issue.

You're kidding right? You want to take helmets out of hockey? Ever played the game? Helmets are there to protect the players from impacts, ie pucks, sticks, the ice. They don't protect your brain from rattling around inside your skull. Watch some old hockey videos from the 50's and 60's and see how how many guys got cut up by stick work, it will shock you at how brutal it was.
By your reasoning, the goalies should take teir masks off as well, thatway the players won't shoot the puck as hard.

Kidding? No. Exaggerating, yes.


Not per se. I'd like to see fewer concussions though.





Wrong. The old 70s/80s Gretzky-style Jofa helmets were designed, as you say, to prevent injuries from errant pucks and sticks. Modern insulated, molded Robo-Cop helmets are designed to prevent brain injury. And what they've done is just increase the severity of head contact in the game.


Where were "stick work" injuries suffered? The face, which remains unprotected today. The helmet does nothing to prevent facial injury. Compared to today's game, 50s and 60s hockey was a non-contact sport. Sure, sticks caused cuts, but nothing compared to the degree of injury today. I'd sure as hell rather have a few stitches than my bell rung.


We're not talking about goalie injuries, are we? But before goalie masks, the puck was kept down. Players took more care in shooting the puck because of the vulnerability. In today's game, the equipment has taken away the fear-factor and the respect for the other guy's safety. In that sense, the old ways were better.

Actually, in some cases, yes. Lafontaine, Lindros, and Primeau got a fair amount of press, while for many of the others, the lack of press was because of their lower stature in the league (stars get most of the press theses days, right or wrong).
Ah ok, I had never heard so I didn't know.

Hope he's okay though.

You must'a missed watching Gordie Howe and Eddie Shack play the game It's actually kind'a funny you also mention "Gretzky era" helmets cuz let's face it, Gretzky wouldn't have lasted 2 seasons in the old 6 team league



Funny, I could'a sworn that goalie masks originally came into use as a result of the slap shot, not the other way around.

If we take an honest look at head injuries today, it's become an issue because of awareness and knowledge about concussive effects. How many players pre-90s got their bells rung only to be back on the ice within a few shifts? Plenty of 'em.
And I don't know where you get this idea that the old style was a friendlier game. While today's players are bigger and the game is faster, in the 6 team days and even after the first expansion, the game was certainly nastier.

Don't get me wrong, I don't enjoy watching someone's career coming to an end because of a fucking cheap shot. But I think without cluttering up the sport with any more rules, the NHL needs to 1)get rid of the damned armoured exo-skeleton they call "pads", 2)make the offending player far, far more responsible for injuring a player especially if it's career ending, and 3)bring back the centre ice line. You can work up a lot more speed through the neutral zone if yer not worrying about the old two line pass.

In all seriousness, besides the speed of the game and size of the players, the only major difference between the 80s and 90s and the game today is the padding and no centre ice line.