Final Call from Kerry Fraser

[DarkStar50 679]

http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=369227

The veteran referees leaving, the influence of the Hockey Ops department regarding on ice calls, the effect of head shots is laid out in Fraser's final column today. Will things get better with Shanahan? Not necessarily.

[Law Goalie 147]

Very, very shrewd way for Fraser to publicize his book, which should (on the strength of the columns) make for a damn fine read.

Frankly, I remain amazed that the owners - the people who invest $40-$60 million a year in their payroll - don't try to keep that payroll protected from injuries that A) are hard to diagnose and impossible to treat, B) can drag on forever, C) is vexingly internal, so it can't be sold the fans as 'war wounds' in the way the crutches or surgical scars can be: it's hard to keep pumping someone as a warrior when their principle occupation is sitting in a silent, dark room trying eat without vomiting.

If the owners and the PA got together, the concussion problem would be dealt with in a heartbeat.

The revised R48 language should be easy to work out. Don't make it relative to the head; make it relative to the torso. If the principal point of contact is above the line of the shoulder (exactly as in the high-stick-to-puck rule), it's a headshot. If the player in possession lowers his head below and ahead of his shoulders, so that it become effectively impossible *not* to hit him in the head (eg. Weight on Sutter) or there is such a disparity in size that head-contact even in a perfectly formed and thrown check becomes potentially unavoidable (Chara on St. Louis, say), fair enough: that's the risk that a stupid player putting his head down takes, and that a very small player hazards in a game with a guy whose retirement projects include playing Goliath in Scorcese's new adaptation of The Story of David.

There also needs to be some major innovation on the equipment side. I still find it shocking that players and goalies are prepared to spend nearly a grand on skates, the same on a handful of sticks, and $1500+ on leg pads, but hesitate to break $100 on a helmet, or $300 on a mask.

[Chadd 916]

He could have called out Colin Campbell by name as being the heart of the problem, instead of beating around the bush. Never met Kerry, but his son Ryan is a good guy.

[DarkStar50 679]

I thought Kerry was a straight shooter through all columns during the playoffs. I give him a ton of credit for that. Knowing a few things from another ex-NHL official, I was surprised and glad he called out Walkom and Hockey Ops for their role in what has been going on since the lock out. There is a lot of blame to be passed around about how the game is played in the NHL today and not all of it falls on the players' behavior towards one another.

This equipment issue as the cause of so many injuries is not one I am automatically buying in to. The pros have been wearing original Jofa hard cap elbow pads and shoulder pads since the mid 80s when the Euros entering the NHL brought that gear with them. North American NHLers quickly got rid of their soft Cooper EK-46 or CCM EP-1 elbow pads for those Jofa elbow pads. The Jofa EPs were known around the league and industry as "the jawbreakers." No explanation needed, right? The Jofa shoulder pads with the large plastic shoulder caps quickly replaced the Cooper SP-95 shoulder pads. By the mid 80s, the Cooper Defender shoulder pads were made in Canada as a response to the switch over of the Jofa shoulder pads. So, as far as I'm concerned the equipment that a lot of people want to blame for today's player injuries and concussions has been around for over 25 years. It is the players on ice attitude and size that have changed the game to where it is today. Change the player's on ice mentality and then you can effectively change the game.

[goblue9280 33]

What about the evolution of media? 25 years ago it was still about making it into the newspapers box score, or a few words in the write up... then came the Sportscenter top 10 -> youtube -> HD DVR's... now it's all about making it into the 30 second highlight reel. I think that has had a huge impact on the way the physical side of the game is played.

[chippa13 1844]

The thing that always amazes me, and I've mentioned it a couple of times, is that the NHLPA doesn't take a firmer stance with their membership on getting things cleaned up. I always find it interesting that players complain about something that players do that needs to be out of the game. If players really wanted head shots out of the game then they would stop tomorrow but because everybody has to defend their teammate nothing happens. Ference commented negatively about Paille's blindside hit and Ference is the guy that gets lambasted. However, it is that kind of peer pressure that teammates need to exert to really solve the problem.

[camhockey16 5]

So, as far as I'm concerned the equipment that a lot of people want to blame for today's player injuries and concussions has been around for over 25 years. It is the players on ice attitude and size that have changed the game to where it is today. Change the player's on ice mentality and then you can effectively change the game.

I think there are lots of parties to blame - but i think changing the equipment does help. I think the "hard capped" equipment has made a lot of injuries worse over the last 25 years - but the players were different back then and if they got lit up they would just continue to play and ignore symptoms. I bet the majority of them would never even let the team doctor check them out. Hopefully today's teams don't allow that to happen. There were 154 reported concussions in the nfl last year which is up 21 percent from the year before - it's not necessarily because the players are playing dirtier or bigger and stronger, it's because teams are finally taking concussions seriously and actually running the proper tests and reporting it like they should have been doing all along. It's a culture change. Now the nhlpa and the owners need to step up and come up with a solution.

[ktang 34]

It was interesting to see Walkom go from reffing to being the supervisor of officials, and then back to reffing. He was one of the final 4 referees for the Stanley Cup finals this year, so that's good...

I think Walkom forced Fraser and a few of the other senior refs out with mandatory succession plans and retirement, something that Fraser spoke out against in his book, so I can see Fraser's antagonism against Walkom and his policies; vets don't always like those with less experience setting policy for everybody else.

But I like Fraser's points about Rule 48, and his experience on the ice led him to the correct prediction about head injuries.

I think that the NHL has had trouble with the NHL Officials' Association in the past, so that may be why the NHL Operations department has not solicited enough input from its veteran officials. Whatever comes of Rule 48, it has to be understandable by the players, but just as, or even more importantly, it has to be callable by the on-ice officials (not from a slo-mo replay at a 45 degree elevated viewing angle).

[Chadd 916]

It was interesting to see Walkom go from reffing to being the supervisor of officials, and then back to reffing. He was one of the final 4 referees for the Stanley Cup finals this year, so that's good...

I think Walkom forced Fraser and a few of the other senior refs out with mandatory succession plans and retirement, something that Fraser spoke out against in his book, so I can see Fraser's antagonism against Walkom and his policies; vets don't always like those with less experience setting policy for everybody else.

But I like Fraser's points about Rule 48, and his experience on the ice led him to the correct prediction about head injuries.

I think that the NHL has had trouble with the NHL Officials' Association in the past, so that may be why the NHL Operations department has not solicited enough input from its veteran officials. Whatever comes of Rule 48, it has to be understandable by the players, but just as, or even more importantly, it has to be callable by the on-ice officials (not from a slo-mo replay at a 45 degree elevated viewing angle).

The are cliques among the refs, just like anywhere else. When Walkom got the job, Kerry and a couple others knew their days were numbered. As for Walkom being good enough to be in the final four, that goes back to the cliques as much as anything. The officials might as well have skipped a couple of the games, given the lack of rules enforcement. Those guys would have been suspended at any other level of play for not calling glaring and obvious infractions. There is also the issue with certain individuals in the Hockey Ops department not wanting "soft penalties" that has lead to the neutering of the post lockout rule changes.

The existing rules have always covered the head shots, contrary to so many of the comments. Call them what they are,an "Attempt to Injure", and hand out match penalties.

[Jason Harris 31]

Frankly, I remain amazed that the owners - the people who invest $40-$60 million a year in their payroll - don't try to keep that payroll protected from injuries that A) are hard to diagnose and impossible to treat, B) can drag on forever, C) is vexingly internal, so it can't be sold the fans as 'war wounds' in the way the crutches or surgical scars can be: it's hard to keep pumping someone as a warrior when their principle occupation is sitting in a silent, dark room trying eat without vomiting.

I suspect the majority of owners had been in the dark about this until recently, considering the issue of concussions (and their longterm effects) has become so public only during the last two to three years. Prior to that, I think owners realized their bread was buttered -- i.e., continued loyalty from their core fans -- by big hits and fights, so I suspect they weren't too keen to tamper with the product. Now that the issue is becoming more well known, what will be telling is how the upper echelon of NHL management (owners, Presidents and G.M.'s) react. If they only pay lip service to the issue, and couch it under terms of protecting the history of the game, it will become obvious they have a cynical view of their players as commodities.

The existing rules have always covered the head shots, contrary to so many of the comments. Call them what they are,an "Attempt to Injure", and hand out match penalties.

The fact that it's labeled "Attempt to injure" might be why refs are hesitant to call it, because we really don't know whether Rome was trying to injure Horton, momentarily stun him, or intimidate him for future puck possessions. If they remove the language of intent, and only worry about whether a hit to the head occurs, I think it's easier to administer.

[Chadd 916]

The fact that it's labeled "Attempt to injure" might be why refs are hesitant to call it, because we really don't know whether Rome was trying to injure Horton, momentarily stun him, or intimidate him for future puck possessions. If they remove the language of intent, and only worry about whether a hit to the head occurs, I think it's easier to administer.

The only thing you can do when you hit someone in the head is to injure them. The degree of injury attempted isn't relevant. You have a senior VP in Colin Campbell that averaged more than one penalty per game. He wants to see guys play like he did and doesn't want them punished for it. The league needs to move forward, not backwards.

[xrickyb86x 1]

"Decisions on the ice can sometimes become a silent debate with oneself as to how a call will be perceived at "mission control." In other words, as a result of feeling like the league is second-guessing him, the referee begins to do it to himself and does not react instinctively. Those who have never worn the stripes wouldn't understand that."

Never thought about this. Kinda blew my mind.

[DarkStar50 679]

The only thing you can do when you hit someone in the head is to injure them. The degree of injury attempted isn't relevant. You have a senior VP in Colin Campbell that averaged more than one penalty per game. He wants to see guys play like he did and doesn't want them punished for it. The league needs to move forward, not backwards.

Chadd,

I agree and understand your point about Campbell but that doesn't explain naming Shanahan to take his place. His career PIMs are way up there, too. I'll wait until Shanahan's first decision to see if the NHL is really making a change in structure of discipline. I also love that Kris King is a major player in the Toronto War Room. Another former NHLer known more for his fists than his assists. Change? I'll believe it when I see it.

[Chadd 916]

Chadd,

I agree and understand your point about Campbell but that doesn't explain naming Shanahan to take his place. His career PIMs are way up there, too. I'll wait until Shanahan's first decision to see if the NHL is really making a change in structure of discipline. I also love that Kris King is a major player in the Toronto War Room. Another former NHLer known more for his fists than his assists. Change? I'll believe it when I see it.

Shanny is only handling the suspensions, he's not taking over as the senior VP, nor is anyone else. As long as Campbell is in charge of the Operations department, nothing is going to change for the better. I do think it will continue to change for the worse. While Shanny racked up the PIMs over his career, most guys still consider him to be a classy individual. I have never heard anyone try to claim that about CC.

[DarkStar50 679]

Craig Janney might disagree about "classy individual."

[camhockey16 5]

do you guys think that a lot of the problems are created by the "old guard"? Whether they are gm's or nhl officials or referees.. Something to the effect of "When i played in the nhl i took headshots like that every game - and i played through it". If so how do you fix that? Clean house?

[Law Goalie 147]

While calling headshots as attempt to injure is certainly appropriate, I think there is a need for a meaningful guideline that can be substantiated with examples. The whole point of R48 was to indicate a special case that was, because of long-standing precedent, going unpunished.

What I'd like to see is a combination of a clear, concise headshot rule WITH occasional match penalties: give the 'Attempt to Injure' call in cases where there is no reasonable hockey play involved, or where there is an excessive degree of force aimed at the head. It is possible to catch someone in the head with a shoulder and not have meant to do so; that should still be punishable, but not to the same extent as a flying shoulder into someone's temple from the blind-side after the puck has been gone for a two-count. Speaking entirely second-hand, I think most refs have a clear idea of what attempt to injure is, but still appreciate the ability to not necessarily use it every time someone is hit from behind, or boarded, or punched.

[Chadd 916]

do you guys think that a lot of the problems are created by the "old guard"? Whether they are gm's or nhl officials or referees.. Something to the effect of "When i played in the nhl i took headshots like that every game - and i played through it". If so how do you fix that? Clean house?

Yes, go back and read the emails from Colin Campbell that became public last year. As the head of the Hockey Operations department of the league he has a huge impact on what the referees call. They need someone in that position that is committed to the "new NHL" and not someone looking to excuse the conduct that has proliferated over the last handful of seasons.

While calling headshots as attempt to injure is certainly appropriate, I think there is a need for a meaningful guideline that can be substantiated with examples. The whole point of R48 was to indicate a special case that was, because of long-standing precedent, going unpunished.

What I'd like to see is a combination of a clear, concise headshot rule WITH occasional match penalties: give the 'Attempt to Injure' call in cases where there is no reasonable hockey play involved, or where there is an excessive degree of force aimed at the head. It is possible to catch someone in the head with a shoulder and not have meant to do so; that should still be punishable, but not to the same extent as a flying shoulder into someone's temple from the blind-side after the puck has been gone for a two-count. Speaking entirely second-hand, I think most refs have a clear idea of what attempt to injure is, but still appreciate the ability to not necessarily use it every time someone is hit from behind, or boarded, or punched.

Officials abuse the right of discretion at every level. Ask most of the vets (privately) what they feel about the new standards being introduced after the lockout and they will (almost) all tell you that it was their fault that the league had to do it. The problem is you have a group of people genuinely trying to move the game forward and a very small number in positions of power that are undermining every attempt that the larger group makes.

[IPv6Freely 2092]

Can't wait for his book, is all I can say. If his columns on TSN.ca are any indication, it's going to be a fantastic read.

[All Flash 49]

Agree with Law Goalie about the 'head shots' and hitting to the head not always being intentional in cases of body position and the like. Never mind that the lockout brought in new rules to change the game physically and strategically when all they had to do was enforce the rule book that existed at that time. The current state of the game is a testament that those changes did not, and do not work. The game does not need to be changed as much as lets say 'Officially tightened up'. Who knows really? Maybe there is a good ole boy system in place that does not want to give up power and keep the game roughly the same. Unlikely, but possible. As for having high penalty minute ex NHLer's in disciplinary positions..... Im sure its ok. The game of hockey is fast, physical, and as most of us know, dangerous. All that play it assume the risks because we love it so. This years playoffs were almost a disaster because of poor officiating for the most part and a lil bit because of the ugliness that occurred in Vancouver afterwards, but ultimately entertaining. The best part for me personally, besides the hockey of course, was summed up by Shawn Thorton of the Boston Bruins, who makes his living mainly as a player punching other players in the head repeatedly, stating after game 3 of the finals(and the Rome hit on Horton) that; "We need to get head shots out of the game." LOL On a side note this whole topic has made me more interested in Frasers book.

[flaming_june 2]

I think there are lots of parties to blame - but i think changing the equipment does help. I think the "hard capped" equipment has made a lot of injuries worse over the last 25 years - but the players were different back then and if they got lit up they would just continue to play and ignore symptoms. I bet the majority of them would never even let the team doctor check them out. Hopefully today's teams don't allow that to happen. There were 154 reported concussions in the nfl last year which is up 21 percent from the year before - it's not necessarily because the players are playing dirtier or bigger and stronger, it's because teams are finally taking concussions seriously and actually running the proper tests and reporting it like they should have been doing all along. It's a culture change. Now the nhlpa and the owners need to step up and come up with a solution.

I agree.

He could have called out Colin Campbell by name as being the heart of the problem, instead of beating around the bush. Never met Kerry, but his son Ryan is a good guy.

I honestly think there are more people at fault than just Colin Campbell.

It is a tough line to walk. I understand and agree with some of the things he said in the article. However things are just so hard to determine what is right and wrong. Are you going to outlaw all types of hits that are over the line of, separating the body from the puck? That may be like flag football instead of normal contact football. There are sooooo many other issues than just headshots as well. One of them is the work done after the lockout, how are you going to maintain that type of officiating, consistency in the first game of the season, to the seventh game of the finals.

[Chadd 916]

I honestly think there are more people at fault than just Colin Campbell.

It is a tough line to walk. I understand and agree with some of the things he said in the article. However things are just so hard to determine what is right and wrong. Are you going to outlaw all types of hits that are over the line of, separating the body from the puck? That may be like flag football instead of normal contact football. There are sooooo many other issues than just headshots as well. One of them is the work done after the lockout, how are you going to maintain that type of officiating, consistency in the first game of the season, to the seventh game of the finals.

I agree that there are more people at fault. I'm just saying that if you look at his comments, the email that became public and his overall position on these plays, you can see that he has done everything to undermine the progress that the league has made. He is also in a position where he gets what he wants as well. If you don't do what he wants, you don't have a job in the NHL.

As for the difficulty in keeping the standards high, they were able to do it for a year or two before things started to slip. At that point there was a conscious decision to undermine the new standards. This season was the worst in terms of regression over the course of one season that I've seen since the lockout. Another year or so and we will be right back where we were before the lockout.

[ktang 34]

I think it was Shanahan who was one of the original people who convinced the league to go with the more rigorous enforcement of the obstruction calls after the lockout. Maybe in his new position he can ensure that this carries on throughout the playoffs too.

And with all headshots being banned and boarding being easier to call, there should be an adjustment period coming up with quite a few suspensions. Like the NFL?

[IPv6Freely 2092]

I think Shanahan is the perfect man for the job. He's got a big voice when it comes to BOTH the league and the players. Everyone seems to respect him. He's a guy from the "old NHL" who seems to be very pro-"New NHL", which means he "gets it" when it comes to considering what we want to keep in the game, and what we want to remove.

I personally will very much miss big N-S hits (and the "best" hits are always the open ice "head down" hits). However, I agree that they are too dangerous these days. It sucks that something that has been such a huge, celebrated part of hockey has to be removed because of injuries (I personally don't like knee-jerk reactions to hockey plays that cause injury - flukes are flukes), but since they are becoming much too common, you don't really have much choice (they aren't really flukes, anymore).

I do wish somebody would finally listen to Don Cherry though...

[flaming_june 2]

BUT: An old NHL person like Shanny may be of the habit described in that article, where discipline is rescinded just because the aforementioned player is a "good guy".