Hit the Post is a weekly question and answer blog by the HU staff. Submit your questions about any hockey topic to
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Q. What's causing all of these injuries this year?
A. This is certainly a question that has been on the minds of many hockey fans, and there really is no right answer. There are currently well over 100 NHL players sidelined with injuries – an absolutely staggering number that has thrown the league’s standings into chaos. But more striking than the volume of players out is the quality of players. Ovechkin, Malkin, Kovalchuk, Gonchar, Markov, Luongo, Hossa… the list goes on. With players like that sidelined, people start asking questions.
Personally, I have two theories as to why injuries are so rampant this year. First, the game has changed drastically since the lockout. Each year, players get bigger (even Ovechkin managed to add some muscle this summer) and faster (guys like Myers and Hedman can skate??). That’s a dangerous combination. And with these bigger and faster players playing a full-on attacking offense (the new NHL), someone is bound to get crushed – and hard.
Second, I have to think that with the increase in player injuries over the last several years, trainers and doctors are being a bit more cautious with minor injuries than they used to be. A bruised rib may have been no big deal five years ago, but now the chances of getting hit hard with that bruised rib have increased. So trainers are going to keep the player benched a week or two longer to fully heal.
Most likely it’s a combination of these two issues, plus a bit of coincidence, that’s sidelining the world’s best players. But with a compact schedule this season, don’t expect the injuries to slow down.
Q. I was watching a game last night where the broadcasters used a replay to prove the linesmen wrong. Is this legal and, if so, should it be?
A. Officials in any sport are, of course, imperfect. I have felt for quite some time that the NHL has some of the finest officiating in professional sports, second only to the NFL. It’s natural for players, fans, and commentators to get on an official’s case after a bad call, but using instant replay against them is inappropriate. Is it illegal? As far as I know, there’s no specific rule against it. Many times, an instant replay is shown to review a penalty, and you may inadvertently notice it’s a bad call. That’s one thing. But from your question it seems like you said ‘linesmen’ for a specific reason. I, too, have seen FSN use instant replay to prove that linesmen made a bad call on icing or offsides. While I do appreciate seeing the play again, I have to wonder if it’s worth it to prove these officials wrong.
It really gets to the root of television vs. sport. Obviously, demonstrating controversy (bad calls) or showing fights will improve the ratings of a hockey broadcast. But at the same time, it makes the league, and the sport, look bad.
I wouldn’t go so far as to say broadcasts shouldn’t review offsides and icing plays, but maybe a little less bad-mouthing of the officials wouldn’t hurt. Then again, simple solution here: the officials should make better calls.
Q. Since Mike Liambus was suspended for an entire season for a legal hit on Ben Fanelli, I've been wondering: should the punishment fit the crime or the injury?
A. This is a big question in hockey, and has been for quite some time. When cheap shots garner the same length suspensions as incidental contact that causes permanent injury, many people will claim hypocrisy. As far as I’m concerned, whether the intent to injure is there or not, the hitter needs to be held accountable for any injury sustained by the “victim”.
Adobe Flash Player not installed or older than 9.0.115!
Now, I’m not saying that suspensions should last the exact amount of time the victim is sidelined. After all, wouldn’t that mean that anytime a player is hurt, another player would be suspended? Rather, if a hit that is technically “legal” causes long-term, or even permanent, damage to the victim, there should most certainly be some response from the league. In the Fanelli case, the response may have been a bit harsh. Most likely, that has something to do with the age range of the players. Would such a hit have earned a season-long suspension in the pros? Probably not.
Point is, hockey is a dangerous sport, and big, fast players can’t go into a hit without the slightest concern for the other player’s safety. These players must learn, especially in junior, that they can do serious damage to others. And, more importantly, they must learn that it’s not acceptable.
A. This is certainly a question that has been on the minds of many hockey fans, and there really is no right answer. There are currently well over 100 NHL players sidelined with injuries – an absolutely staggering number that has thrown the league’s standings into chaos. But more striking than the volume of players out is the quality of players. Ovechkin, Malkin, Kovalchuk, Gonchar, Markov, Luongo, Hossa… the list goes on. With players like that sidelined, people start asking questions.
A. Officials in any sport are, of course, imperfect. I have felt for quite some time that the NHL has some of the finest officiating in professional sports, second only to the NFL. It’s natural for players, fans, and commentators to get on an official’s case after a bad call, but using instant replay against them is inappropriate. Is it illegal? As far as I know, there’s no specific rule against it. Many times, an instant replay is shown to review a penalty, and you may inadvertently notice it’s a bad call. That’s one thing. But from your question it seems like you said ‘linesmen’ for a specific reason. I, too, have seen FSN use instant replay to prove that linesmen made a bad call on icing or offsides. While I do appreciate seeing the play again, I have to wonder if it’s worth it to prove these officials wrong.