So this is a topic that is somewhat near and dear to me. A little while ago, Hockey Alberta decided to take body contact out of the game in all tiers of the Pee-Wee level, and obviously anything before that. To say that this created a controversy is a bit of an understatement, as sports fans, players, and parents have yet again been found on opposite sides of the widest debate in sports: what is safe, and where does it cross the line?
The decision to act makes tons of sense. Concussions in hockey and all sports are becoming too common, and the frightening consequences of these injuries down the road are becoming more known. Parents have every right to be concerned for their children playing sports involving body contact, as much of their futures can be negatively affected by what goes on during a game. Key word, game.
But before I go any further, gather around. Its story time.
Back when I started played hockey, I believe hitting was allowed in Pee-Wee rep teams, and any tier after Bantam. But when we got to the Bantam level, the district association decided to change the rules a bit, making hitting illegal for any house-tiered team in Bantam and Midget. At the time, I played "B" hockey, so that meant no hitting for us during regular league games and playoffs. But at the time, Alberta had no such ruling, and since we were less than an hour away from the Alberta border, we played many exhibitions and tournaments in Alberta, as well as in the USA. Because we had to change the style of game back and forth, it was clearly hard to adjust, creating two problems:
The first one is that we racked up penalty minutes in league games, because we were too used to hitting to be able to change our game. This wasn't a huge safety issue for us, but the teams we played against didn't see this coming, and were unprepared for the hit, which is a huge safety concern for them. The second problem is almost the opposite, when we played in places that allowed hitting, we got rocked, on the scoreboard and physically. We weren't prepared because we couldn't hit constantly, so we ended up getting more hurt.
A third problem arose for the "bubble" players, that got called up to play on the "AA" team here, or later on when the Junior teams called us up when we were in Midget. When they got called up, they had no chance of keeping up with the physicality of the higher-levelled teams, because of the lack in practice of hitting. The teams would look at the player like he's unready, and would send him down.
So the theme I see from this, in a player's standpoint, is that no matter how long you remove hitting from hockey, you will eventually be thrown into a hitting situation. If you're looking to play anything Junior or above, or play on any carded teams, hitting is and always will be around. So as a player, unless you don't intend to play (or try to play) hockey at a higher competitive level, it is in your best interest to learn how to hit and take a hit.
And here's the thing, if you're a player who hasn't played contact hockey ever, and you're playing in Bantam or even Midget against players who've been hitting for maybe 5 years by now, then you're not asking whether or not you will get hurt, you're asking WHEN you'll get hurt.
Now granted, I have absolutely no scientific proof on my side, only common sense and my own observations. But I would have to say that the majority of hockey injuries are caused not by the hitting player, but by the unreadiness of the checked player. Not saying its the checked players fault, there are penalties for reasons, but too often players skate with their head down, or facing the boards in a vulnerable position, thinking they'll be safe. Why? Because they were taught that. In no-contact hockey, players can play as dangerously as they want, and they "shouldn't" get hit.
So that being said, take a player that has been used to skating with their head down and other dangerous acts for a few years. The longer they get to play like that, the harder of a habit that is to break. So when that person finally gets called up in Midget for his shot at a carded team, he has no chance, because he's a stretcher-blanket waiting for a place to happen.
So remind me again how this ruling makes the game any safer...
For as long as hitting stays in the NHL (which I see no reason it ever wouldn't), it'll stay in the leagues that directly seed their players there, including college hockey and major junior. As long as those leagues keep hitting, players who play the game aiming to become a professional will want to hit too. No one wants to take a liability player. Thus, its inevitable that hockey will always be in the youth game. The question is, where is the line? There needs to be a certain age when hitting starts, because players too young to understand the dangers of hockey need to be protected, and I totally understand that.
But as I said earlier, putting the line too late in the player's youth career, or only having it in certain tiers, can lead to more injuries, not less. I think the perfect time to learn is right around the Pee-Wee age group. The game is slower-paced still, and bodies aren't fully grown, so the impact of the hits are minimal compared to Midget, Junior, etc. And if they learn how to play responsible hockey earlier on, they have a better chance at playing responsibly later on. No coach, referee, or rule is stopping a player from making a dirty hit, but maybe what he knows and how he's learned to play the game can. The players, after all, are responsible for their actions on the ice. The coaches' jobs are to teach the players how to play responsibly and respectfully. I believe the younger that those two things are taught, the better, as they're more likely to stick with the player always. Plus, if players are taught hitting through all levels, that leaves little room for physical "mis-matches" where teams who don't hit get thrown in with a team that does.
On equal footing, everyone keeps their head.
To finish with my story from earlier, I played up until my final year of Midget. Through my last 3 years of hockey, I played mostly on the house "no-contact" teams, but we played semi-regularly in tournaments across the provincial and national borders, which introduced hitting into the games. I was also a "AA" call up in my last year of hockey, playing about 10 games at higher-level hitting hockey. In those 3 years, I suffered a very significant amount of concussions, enough to say that I should have quit before I did. I don't regret playing those years, as I had the time of my life, but my health has suffered because of it. Was hitting the problem? Yes, but taking it away isn't the solution. Its actually part of the problem. Playing on-again/off-again hitting, I could never adjust to one or the other, or get a full amount of practice giving or taking a hit. I think that if I was introduced to hitting full time earlier on, and kept in a hitting environment throughout, then I wouldn't have had the concussion problem that I've had.
So theres my take on it. I know I probably stepped on a few toes in this article, and maybe my take on it is biased. So I really want to hear your comments. If you disagree, say so, because I'd love to hear it. But I think that this is a very important discussion on hockey, and I'm simply stating my case why taking hitting away is not necessarily the right answer. Feel free to debate that one with me.
No comments:
Post a Comment