[log in to unmask] wrote:
 
<The game has always been physical and to an extent violent.
 
BUT, not near what it is today. According to Hockey News and dozens of other
articles I've read, a lack of respect for other players and officials is
pervasive. It's a fact that the NHL has recently cracked down on illegal play
with stiff fines; it's a fact that Kariya can't play without a body guard;
it's a fact that the NHL instituted a league wide concussion evaluation study
due to the prevalence of concussions; it's a fact that scoring is down,
partially due to illegal plays causing unnecessary penalties.
 
According to the Montreal Gazette of March of 88, "players are bigger,
stronger and faster." The players of yesteryear were minuscule compared to
today. If you put that player equation in the same size playing field, your
bound to have more injuries. Most ice surfaces are still the same dimensions.
Not all have converted to the larger ice surface, which does change the
dynamics of the game.
 
You have to look at more than just facial and dental injuries when providing
the best protection for the total head area. The more serious debilitating
and life threatening injuries have to do with the brain and the spine.
 
Here's a quote out of USCHO's Todd Milewski's piece called "Sudden Impact."
"The more I talk to doctors, the more we discuss things, the actual
concussion really has not a lot to do with the helmet the guys are wearing or
the mouthguard or anything," he said. "It's just guys get banged hard enough,
with the way the brain sits in the skull, if it's banged the right way, it's
possible to get a concussion."
One part of the debate on the emergence of head injuries is the equipment
players wear. By NCAA rules, players must wear a helmet with a face shield
and a mouth guard when on the ice. But, Johnson said the debate goes further.
 
"There's a lot more to it than just those two things," he said." T.R. Moreau
of Wisconsin had his mouthguard in, he had his helmet on, it was all in
place, and yet he still had a significant head injury."
 
 
< USA Hockey also allows legal adults (18) to sign a waiver and take off the
mask. Overwhelmingly, players sign to wear a half or no shield. Yes, with
some it's peer pressure, but with most it's comfort and visibility--as well
as respect.
 
The only thing this tells me is that USA Hockey won't sanction the half
because of liability. Overall, that must mean insurance companies are heeding
the medical sector, like the American Medical Association, which in part put
pressure on the NCAA to use helmets and full face protection. I agree totally
with you that the half affords more comfort and visibility. Coaches want the
half so players will have better peripheral vision, thus seeing the ice
better and the players around them. It makes sense if you could get rid of
stick work and other upper body infractions, which can cause serious head,
facial and spinal injuries.
 
<Hockey is a physical, tough game. If you don't like it go watch ringette.
 
Just because I'm against excessive violence and illegal intent to injure play
(you can't DENY it's existence) doesn't mean I don't LOVE HOCKEY. You guys
see everything as BLACK or WHITE. Because I'm criticizing some aspect of the
sport you infer that means I don't like it, and I should watch ringette. No
way. The girls are not as skilled as the guys (ON THE ICE).
 
 
Vicki
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.