Roger Spurgeon writes of the fracas-filled weekend of U of Michigan hockey
"the CCHA supervisor of officials should have noticed the incredible violence
of Friday's game and that both LaDuke and Rutherford were contributors to it."
Which brings up an interesting issue: what responsiblity does the coach(es)
have to avert violence spilling-over from one game to the next 1)in the eyes
of the NC$$; 2)in the eyes of the college president; 3)philosophically, to the
players and the good of the game.
 
1. I don't know what rules govern the responsiblity of coaches to monitor their
players and restrict their violent behaviors.  I know that the NC$$ has in the
past seen fit to issue special penalties to hockey players who engage in
particularly egregious behavior, i.e. Jason Zent in last year's NC$$
championship.  Has the NC$$ ever held an individual hockey coach responsibility
for his team's misbehavior--suspensions, limitation on recruiting, fines, etc.?
The NHL holds a team's coach responsible when a player engages inextraordinary
conduct, or continually engages in violence (the 2 game misconductrule.)
Brian Murray of the Red Wings is now experiencing this penaltyfirst hand.
 
 
2. I would imagine that different college presidents would treat the issue
differently depending on the value of the hockey program in the administration
administration's eyes.  Yes, that means that some colleges, and even some
conferences are more tolerant of a coach's antics than others--but I'm not
going to be lured into suggesting who.
 
3. A coach must exercise control of his players.  I am not criticizing the
Michigan coach, because I have no idea of the fact situation, but I would
note that a coach should probably discuss a particularly violent game with his
charges both after the game and before the next one.  While it is a fine line
between encouraging aggressiveness and condoning violence it is the coach's job
to navigate between the two.  In the case of the Michigan/Michigan State game
a word to the players prior to the game to watch the chippiness and the
retaliations may have been in order.  Or a coach might want to notify his
players that an inconsistent pair of refs was working that night's contest.
Maybe this goes on all the time.It certainly should.  Some coaches certainly
encourage a more physical style of play than others.  And spontaneous fights
do and will continue to occur in hockey games--that's the nature of the beast.
But all coaches must be aware of the potential for violence, be it a heated
rivalry, an incompetent batch of refs, a baiting crowd, or whatever.  And
the coach should take measures to avoid his team being caught up in it.
 
I would be interested in  comments from any coaches out there on the list
on how they keep their teams out of trouble.
 
                    _
            "NYS   // Hockey"
        Go 'Gate  //   Brian Morris
          Go RPI //      Albany, NY
          ______// [log in to unmask]
         (______/