Since Boston Bruins’ player Zdeno Chara rode the Montreal Canadiens’ Max Pacioretty into the centre-ice stanchion on Mar. 8, there has been an uproar surrounding the issue of head shots in the NHL.
But where has most of the outrage been coming from?
It’s been from journalists, pundits, corporate sponsors and politicians.
One common factor uniting many of these critics is that they have never played the game of hockey at a high level.
But if change is going to come, it should be motivated by the professionals who actually play the game, not desk jockeys who can’t skate.
Many players – both past and present – have called for a ban on head shots. Among them are Claude Lemieux and Bobby Clarke, two of the dirtiest players the league has ever seen.
But so far the only consensus for a ban on head shots is coming from the chattering classes, not the players.
Change needs to be driven by stakeholders within the game of hockey, namely players and general managers. That means showing leadership.
So far the players’ union has kept conspicuously silent on the issue. Donald Fehr, the NHLPA’s new boss, says he isn’t yet familiar enough with the game of hockey to make a judgment.
The more likely scenario is that he doesn’t want to take a position on an issue that will divide his membership.
But Fehr needs to take a stand and show leadership by calling for a ban on headshots. Further dithering will only weaken his position. Besides, it doesn’t take a hockey expert to realize that head injuries are quickly becoming a crisis for the NHL.
Pittsburgh Penguins owner Mario Lemieux has emerged as one of the leading opponents of headshots.
But if he is so committed to making the game safer, he should release Penguins forward Matt Cooke, one of the league's most vicious headhunters.
Meanwhile politicians and pundits need to stop treating NHL players like children.
NHL players are professionals who understand the risks they take every time they set foot on the ice.
They should be the ones who take charge of their own working conditions.
During my four-year junior hockey career, I understood that injuries were a part of the game. I’ve seen teammates seriously hurt. But never once did they express regret about playing hockey at a high level.
A friend and teammate who was destined for an NCAA scholarship now has his playing career in doubt after sitting out a year and a half due to post-concussion syndrome.
But I've never heard him complain about his injury.
As players, we spoke out when we felt the league wasn’t protecting us. But the last thing we – and any hockey player – wanted was for someone with no knowledge of how to play the game advocating for changes.
The issue has become red-hot this year because hockey’s marquee player Crosby was sidelined for over half the season. Pacioretty’s injury has just brought further emotion into an already heated topic. But emotion won’t solve the game’s problems.
The NHL has released a five-point plan that will aim to curb head injuries.
Among the highlights includes the mandatory removal from a game of any player showing concussion-like symptoms. Doctors will now assess players who may be concussed in place of team trainers.
These are good changes, but the NHL is also right to not bow to public pressure and make drastic changes.
Body contact has always been a part of the game. And as long as there are highly trained athletes hitting each other, concussions will never disappear. Until then, the best the NHL can do is continue to crack down on repeat offenders.
Meanwhile, critics should take their cue from the players.