New OHL rule will curtail fighting

by James Mirtle on Jan 14, 2009 3:07 PM CST Comment 18 comments

13-fight_medium

The Ontario Hockey League has instituted a game misconduct and an automatic one-game suspension for players who remove their helmets or undo their chinstraps before or during fights.

The OHL previously fined a team $100 when a player took off his helmet to fight.

— The Canadian Press

Good on league commissioner David Branch for being proactive here, although I think what you'll see as a result is a sharp decrease in fights in the OHL going forward.

Not that that's a bad thing.

It's incredibly difficult to fight while your opponent is almost guaranteed to have his bucket on the whole time. A lot of players break or severely injure their hands on helmets in fights, which is why you often see them come off before or during the course of a scrap.

In the OHL, where visors are mandatory, players were removing the helmets themselves. Fighting an opponent with a visor is very difficult, and not removing your helmet when you wear one was seen to be against 'the code.'

Will the NHL follow suit? Or at the very least get rid of the rule that penalizes players who wear visors and fight?

Not right away, that's for sure.

Fighting in junior hockey has sharply decreased in the past 10 years, dropping from about 1.30 fights per game to .90 this season. Now that they'll have to take place with helmets securely fastened, expect that number to drop significantly.

Poll

What do you think of the OHL's new rule to keep helmets on during fights?

I support it at the junior level

97 votes

I'd like to see it in the NHL, too

79 votes

I'm against it

119 votes

295 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 18 comments | Add comment | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I’d be curious to hear the explanation for the votes against the rule.

Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.

by PPP on Jan 14, 2009 3:29 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Because I like fights. At least the rare good ones.

by Ghwomb on Jan 14, 2009 3:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

FINALLY!!!!!!! Someone who is honest. Good on you, Ghwomb, although i hold a different view.

Frankly, it is the dishonesty of the arguments in favour of fighting that drives me to distraction.

by Gerald on Jan 14, 2009 4:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I like fights too but what’s the harm in making sure that the guys don’t crack their bare heads on the ice?

Plus, couldn’t the risk of a broken hand keep the stupid useless fights from happening? *

*facetious

Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.

by PPP on Jan 14, 2009 4:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

CUTS!

Get ready for lots of cut hands, sliced fingers and stitches on cheeks… The BCHL (the league I call games in) has a mandatory helmet rule for fights and the result has been a lot of nasty cuts. Try punching the side of a piece of Plexiglas to simulate a punch to the visor at the wrong angle.

Not a fan of the rule, as helmets still get popped off about a third of the time during the fight anyway. Theoretically, you could slice and hand/cheek, lose a lid and still have a head first drop to the ice.

"It's a great day for hockey" - BBJ

by jealous broadcaster on Jan 14, 2009 3:42 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I hear you, but I honestly don’t think they should even be fighting at that level. I remember in high school my friends, at 15 or 16, going to BCJHL or WHL camps and getting the crap kicked out of them.

What a joke that is. And a recipe for disaster.

by James Mirtle on Jan 14, 2009 3:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I find it really fascinating where fights will break out. It’s become so normalized at so many levels – hell, I’ve had to break up fights in ball hockey when I referee the guys. I went to watch one of my buddy’s play Senior B lacrosse, and a fight broke out there. I don’t know, I find it ridiculous enough when there’s fighting in professional hockey, but the fact that it filters down to Joe Average who is heading off to work the next day, it really baffles me.

by dare_ on Jan 14, 2009 8:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I’d bet that there’s an easy way to avoid cutting your hand on someone’s helmet in a fight.

Now, if only I could think of what that is . . .

by J. Michael Neal on Jan 14, 2009 3:48 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Now you’re just talking crazy.

by Gerald on Jan 14, 2009 4:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I can’t imagine the NHL won’t dump the automatica penalty for not taking off the visor. After the Sanderson death, a rule like that is a massive lawsuit waiting to happen.

“Your honor, my client’s husband would still be alive today if not for a league rule that forced him to remove the equipment that would have saved his life…”

Down Goes Brown - Unapologetically nostalgic for the past. Brutally realistic about the present. Grudgingly optimistic about the future.

by Down Goes Brown on Jan 14, 2009 7:47 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

With all legal-ese when a professional contract is signed and all the risks that inherently infers, I couldn’t imagine the estate of a professional player suing a league for a fight the player voluntarily engaged in.

by Hooks Orpik on Jan 14, 2009 11:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

This rule is a joke, and a sad one at that. Massive overreaction to an isolated tragedy.

I especially feel sorry for linesmen in this one. If a player loses their helmet, they have to immediately step in? Wonder how long until one of them gets popped in the face stepping into the middle of an ongoing fight?

by Resolute on Jan 15, 2009 11:04 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

On the one hand, I like fights. On the other hand, I think it’s perfectly sensible to force underaged players to protect themselves, since they’re certainly not going to do so on their own.

So I said, “I support it at the junior level.” As I said before, though, this is a helmet issue more than a fighting issue, and I’d hate to see it conflated into such (whoops, too late).

by Doogie2K on Jan 15, 2009 12:24 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Ridiculous

David Branch is talking out of both sides of his mouth here. The OHL continues to put in rules to deter fighting and to “increase player safety”, yet they continue to allow fighting. If they actually want to deter fighting, just ban it. For those who say that banning it wouldn’t work, just look at the NFL. Fighting isn’t a regular occurrence in the NFL because it isn’t allowed and there are serious repercussions if it does.

I love a good fight as much as anyone, but I don’t think it’s a necessary part of the game for one second, and I don’t think that it does anything to protect skilled players. I think it’s an artifact of the rough and tumble old days and in modern hockey, it’s really nothing more than an entertaining sideshow.

by eboy71 on Jan 15, 2009 12:35 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Oddly enough, you hit the key word – it’s entertaining. That is what business these leagues are in – the NHL, the minor leagues, the CHL and the CJHL. They are all about creating a product people want to pay for.

And you are also right, Branch is being a complete hypocrite. They pay lip service to player safety by introducing rules that will have a negligible impact on player safety while continuing to condone fighting, because quite simply, no arena ever goes silent or boos when a fight breaks out. 20,000 fans at an NHL rink, 5000 fans in an OHL rink, the reaction is always the same.

Fans enjoy fighting, and these leagues provide what the fans enjoy.

by Resolute on Jan 15, 2009 2:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think it’s going to be banned eventually in junior.

by James Mirtle on Jan 15, 2009 3:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

A friend and I have been in a long-standing debate about fighting. We both enjoy a good fight, but we have differing opinions about whether it actually has a positive impact on the game. I wanted to prove him wrong, so I did some basic analysis comparing the # of fights an NHL team has with points and found a negative correlation — the more points a team has, the less fights they have. That in itself doesn’t prove anything, but I do find it interesting.

Some other things that I think would be interesting to look into, but I’ve never gotten around to it:
- does the # of fights have any correlation with # of games lost to non-fighting injuries (one of the pro-fighting arguments has always been that tough guys protect star players)?
- do star players perform any differently if a tough guy is in or out of the lineup?
- what is the correlation between fighting & stick infractions?
- even without fights, does just presence of a tough guy have an impact on team performance?

Some of those will be difficult to answer, but I’d be very interested in seeing the results. Has anyone here ever seen anything that statistically answers some of those questions?

by eboy71 on Jan 16, 2009 8:35 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Interesting. I would think that all of these questions lend themselves well to statistical analysis. If this was baseball, the SABRmaticians would have done it long ago.

by Gerald on Jan 16, 2009 9:12 AM CST reply actions 0 recs