Quote:
Originally Posted by jaxmagicman
What is the point of "no touch" icing? I don't like that rule.
|
I like it. I don't see the need for guys to get absolutely destroyed, and as a result have limbs pointing in directions they weren't designed to point in, on an icing call. Don't get me wrong. I like clean shoulder checks. They're an integral part of the game, but somewhere along the way the players have forgotten that the guy they're laying out and sending into convulsions has a family and friends too. There's no accountability whatsoever. Look at the ridiculous rise in head shots in the last little while and the NHL's seemingly stubborn refusal to do anything time and again in the wake of the carnage. I'm not naive enough to think that players don't assume a large amount of risk every time they step out on the ice: they do. I just think the NHL is doing a piss poor job of protecting their assets/the guys the fans pay big bucks to see. It seems to have started when the instigator rule was put in: without policing amongst the players, the cheap shot artists were given free reign. Then when the players came back from the lockout it seemed the speed had increased ten fold, so that the collisions were ten times harder (ball park guestimate of course
). Maybe I'm out of step with the times and people want to see more stretchers and body bags.
I'd rather see skill, offensively, defensively, and goaltendingly.
Admittedly it's moving back in that direction, but it still has some room for improvement. Oh yeah, and eff Gary Bettman.
