11/21/24
June 07, 2011
Bruins' Horton Out for Finals: Boston Bruins forward Nathan Horton will miss the rest of the Stanley Cup Finals with a severe concussion after taking a blindside hit from Vancouver Canucks defenseman Aaron Rome during the team's 8-1 victory in game 3 Monday night.
According to folklore that's what, 75 regular-season games?
I get that being out for the rest of the final is a big deal, but regardless, 4 games is not enough. Not if they seriously want to stop this from happening again.
posted by fabulon7 at 02:01 PM on June 07, 2011
I want to express my concern for Nathan's well being and wish him a quick and full recovery," Rome said in a statement. "I try to play this game honestly and with integrity. As someone who has experienced this type of injury I am well aware of its serious nature and have no desire for another player to experience it. I will not take away my teammates' focus on the task at hand and intend to speak at an appropriate time in future."
According to Murphy, Rome's defence was simple, "that it was a hockey play that went bad. They're my words, not his, but that's basically what he said. It was a one-on-one play. The puck was released. He stepped through with the hit."
Murphy said the suspension was for the lateness of the hit and the seriousness of the injury. It was not a contravention of the NHL's blindside head rule 48, which was introduced at the start of the season.
"If it was immediate, after he'd released the puck, it would be a legal hit," said Murphy. "We have them all the time - because it was a north-south play.
So, basically the league is now (newly) tying the severity of injury into length of suspension. This is new, and the finals is an interesting time to be introducing it. I wonder if it will be applied consistently or how it will be made operational. The rest of the league's analysis I agree with: late hit, otherwise a legal hit (i.e. not a headshot).
I agree fully with the league taking steps to reduce concussions and certainly knocking Rome out for the playoffs sends a strong message. Concussions are wrecking football and hockey needs to take meaningful steps back on a path it is halfway down. Four games is stiff, but looking at the big picture and not as a forty year Canuck's fan, it's a good thing for hockey.
I also sincerely hope that Horton makes a full recovery from a nasty injury. He is an admirable player who would grace any team in the league.
posted by rumple at 02:39 PM on June 07, 2011
The rest of the league's analysis I agree with: late hit, otherwise a legal hit (i.e. not a headshot).
I don't understand how it isn't a headshot if he was rendered unconscious by a shot to the head...
posted by grum@work at 02:50 PM on June 07, 2011
Some of the impact came from the landing. That said, Rome hit with his elbow as he was jumping into the check (something it seems a lot of Canucks do - Torres nearly beheaded a Bruin at the boards but missed the hit). Game 4 is going to be fun - hope the B's can keep their tempers like they did in Game 3.
posted by kokaku at 03:00 PM on June 07, 2011
Rome might have been suspended as a way of putting him into protective custody. It would be very tempting for one of the Bruins to go hunting for him. The suspension removes any temptation and gets the teams back to playing hockey. I have looked at the hit over and over, and I still see Rome deliberately putting his shoulder into Horton's chin. Rome could have gone lower, tried to throw a hip check, or even tripped Horton. All would have earned a simple minor and kept both players in the series. I do not call this a "dirty" hit or Rome a dirty player. Rather, the hit was careless and showed no thought by Rome of the possible consequences.
Before the NHL can get this stuff out of the game, it needs to put out a clear and unequivocal policy. The draconian measure of banning all contact by stick or body part with an opponents head, in any circumstances except a clear case of the victim "ducking" into a hit, might be necessary. Injury or no injury, no head shots allowed!!!
posted by Howard_T at 04:08 PM on June 07, 2011
From Vancouver's Georgia Straight:
As much as the NHL has spent years promising to address the problem of head shots, league brass has been long on talk and woefully short on action. The issue isn't exactly a new one; headhunting has been a black eye for the sport ever since retired New Jersey Devil defencemen Scott Stevens started ending careers in the 1990s.
But, until now, no oneor, more accurately, Colin Campbellhas had the balls to do anything about it.
The Rome suspension was handed down by Mike Murphy, Campbell's former assistant. Murphy is expected to turn over the disciplinary chores to recently retired NHLer Brendan Shanahan next season.
Murphy has just done Shanahan a huge favour. For the first time since Campbell become the league's top cop 15 years ago, the National Hockey League has sent players a clear-cut message: the punishment for head shots will now be severe. How severe? In the entire history of the NHL, only three players have ever been suspended in the finals. All of them got one game.
posted by rumple at 05:07 PM on June 07, 2011
What I don't get is this - I seem to recall a few years back that jumping into a check became a penalty (or if it was already then it was really going to be called). Yet, all over the place, I see players jump into checks. Combine that with throwing elbows and you see more head shots and injuries (especially when you add the boards to that equation).
I know we all bag on the NHL for inconsistency, but the solution seems pretty simple - call the penalties that are on the books.
posted by kokaku at 08:58 PM on June 07, 2011
How the fuck can they say it isn't a head shot?
Just look at the position of Rome's shoulder and Horton's head from image 3 to image 4. Horton's head is getting wrenched backwards.
posted by grum@work at 10:23 PM on June 07, 2011
Been a while since I wrote a column.
By the way, rcade -- same issue with the slashes appearing after apostrophes again. Can you fix the title? And I didn't if we were doing the FFP for columns or not.
posted by wfrazerjr at 10:24 PM on June 07, 2011
Grum, the evidence is striking, thanks for that.
posted by dfleming at 06:16 AM on June 08, 2011
Notice in those pictures that Horton is accelerating into the zone without looking where he's going. One of the first things I was taught when I learned to play hockey was to keep my head up when I'm skating down the ice. The one time in my playing career I didn't I caught an elbow to the jaw and got a concussion and a broken wrist. Had I kept my head up, I would have been able to defend myself or dodge the player that hit me. Horton broke a cardinal rule of hockey and he paid for it. Rome's hit was only half a second late, if that, and Horton should have known he was fair game and should have had his head up. He's a professional hockey player, for chrissakes. Further, when Horton badly boarded Steve Downie in game six of the conference finals, taking Downie out of the game, Horton didn't get suspended and scored the game winning goal in the next game. Chara didn't get suspended for his blatantly dangerous play on Max Pacioretty where he drove his head into the stantion. I don't know if the Bruins are held to a different standard than the rest of the league but they haven't paid the price for suspendable offenses.
posted by insomnyuk at 11:33 AM on June 08, 2011
I don't know if the Bruins are held to a different standard than the rest of the league but they haven't paid the price for suspendable offenses.
Matt Cooke pretty much ended the career of Marc Savard, and didn't get a single game suspension. I think they've paid their dues from the other end.
Horton broke a cardinal rule of hockey and he paid for it.
Yes. He let another player hit him in the head.
Ignore about how Horton was skating or looking, and accept the simple fact: if Rome doesn't hit him in the head and instead goes shoulder-to-shoulder (or throws a hip into him), then all that happens is Horton takes a big tumble and Rome probably gets an interference penalty.
I have the same problem with the line of argument being used here ("If he was just looking where he was going..."). It falls into the same category (but obviously not the same severity) as "If she just wasn't wearing those clothes..."
posted by grum@work at 11:50 AM on June 08, 2011
Jesus Christ grum, it's hardly comparable to blaming a rape victim. Are you saying Horton got raped? Are you serious?
posted by insomnyuk at 12:18 PM on June 08, 2011
Jesus Christ grum, it's hardly comparable to blaming a rape victim. Are you saying Horton got raped? Are you serious?
Jesus Christ insomnyuk, did you read the rest of my comment?
It falls into the same category (but obviously not the same severity) as "If she just wasn't wearing those clothes..."
It's "blame the victim" mentality.
posted by grum@work at 12:27 PM on June 08, 2011
I don't know if the Bruins are held to a different standard than the rest of the league but they haven't paid the price for suspendable offenses.
Oh please. Like Colin Campbell dismissing Savard as a "little faker"? If you can see a grey area in this hit, how come you can't see on with Chara on Pacioretty?
posted by yerfatma at 01:03 PM on June 08, 2011
Jeez, grum, black and white world much? It's common in a civil suit, say, for the jury to assign the car manufacturer as 70% responsible for a death for having faulty seatbelts, while the driver is 30% responsible for speeding while drunk and slamming into a pole. It's a lot more like that than your offensive rape analogy.
In this case, Rome is, let's say, 70% responsible for the injury by virtue of the late hit, and Horton is 30% responsible by virtue of, as insomnyuk says, breaking a cardinal rule of hockey and crossing the blue line with his head turned 90 degrees. They teach that in peewee, for heaven's sake.
It's more or less the social contract on the ice: don't attempt to injure the other player AND look after yourself. This is why suddenly turning your back on a player about to hit you along the boards hoping to draw a penalty is a shitty and cowardly play. Running around with your head down and then complaining when you get hit just doesn't fly in hockey and basically that is what the league and the players are saying.
posted by rumple at 01:07 PM on June 08, 2011
Head turned or not, Horton doesn't get upended onto his head if Rome isn't jumping up with his elbow. Let's not blame Horton for Rome's dirty hit.
posted by kokaku at 02:23 PM on June 08, 2011
It's common in a civil suit, say, for the jury to assign the car manufacturer as 70% responsible for a death for having faulty seatbelts, while the driver is 30% responsible for speeding while drunk and slamming into a pole.
Your analogy is flawed. In the Horton/Rome incident there is a second party involved that is committing an act against the first party. If Rome doesn't do what he does, then no one gets hurt. Period.
If Horton continues to skate into the zone, no one gets hurt. If Rome hits Horton in the body and not the head, the chances he gets injured is reduced IMMENSELY.
posted by grum@work at 02:42 PM on June 08, 2011
My mom served on a civil jury in Texas and was asked to assign percentages of fault for an accident. After they settled on something like 60%/40% with the injured plaintiff getting less of the blame, the case ended and she was told the plaintiff gets nothing. There was a secret rule the jury wasn't told -- the plaintiff's percentage can't exceed a certain number or they get squat.
posted by rcade at 03:02 PM on June 08, 2011
If Horton has his head up, the chance he gets injured is reduced IMMENSLEY. Rome steps up but is basically standing still when the hit occurs. Horton skates right into him because he has lost his own situational awareness.
As for his elbow, his shoulder, whatever, no one seems to be able to articulate exactly what is wrong with the hit other than it is late. The league specifically said the hit was legal other than being late. Given that they suspended the guy for the longest finals suspension ever, I don't see why they would go out of their way to point out the hit was otherwise legal.
Maybe they will bring in a new Aaron Rome rule next year which states that defenceman aren't allowed to get run over by distracted wingers. They have already introduced a brand new standard never before articulated by the league that the severity of injury will factor into the length of suspension. Bringing this in in the middle of the finals is, well, uncool. They could have suspended him however much they wanted without that justification - which, by the way, would probably see Chara still serving a suspension for the hit on Pacioretty. (A hit I don't think was a dirty hit as I said at the time)
If Horton continues to skate into the zone, no one gets hurt.
One of the roles of defencemen is specifically to stop forwards just skating into the zone. All else follows from that. I mean, if the goalie didn't stop the puck, the shot would score, etc.
posted by rumple at 03:03 PM on June 08, 2011
If Horton has his head up
That's the hockey equivalent of, "If she hadn't been wearing that skirt ..."
posted by wfrazerjr at 03:40 PM on June 08, 2011
the plaintiff's percentage can't exceed a certain number or they get squat.
Not to derail, but that is only the case in certain states (NV is one) who follow the modified comparative negligence standard. The majority of states still allow recovery, even if the plaintiff is 99% responsible. That plaintiff can still recover for the 1% caused by the negligence of the defendant.
Sorry about the torts lesson; I'm taking a break from studying for the NV bar exam right now
posted by tahoemoj at 03:56 PM on June 08, 2011
Bringing this in in the middle of the finals is, well, uncool.
They were supposed to legislate against futurecrime? How do you do that exactly?
posted by yerfatma at 04:08 PM on June 08, 2011
Rome steps up but is basically standing still when the hit occurs. Horton skates right into him because he has lost his own situational awareness.
What are you talking about? Rome skates into him. He makes a bee-line to intercept him at the blue line to hit him. He is in no way "standing still" when the hit is delivered.
Sure, Newton's law says that when they collide that he might stop moving...
Given that they suspended the guy for the longest finals suspension ever, I don't see why they would go out of their way to point out the hit was otherwise legal.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
It was a hit to the head. The evidence in the pictures shows it. If the league wants to call it "a hockey play" (the worst phrase they've used, too many times) they can do that. But anyone looking at the video/picture evidence can see that he succeeded in hitting him in the head.
One of the roles of defencemen is specifically to stop forwards just skating into the zone. All else follows from that.
...within the rules. I mean, another method of stopping the forward from skating into the zone is stabbing him in the groin with the pointy end of the stick. Yet, players and officials agree that isn't really the right thing to do.
Maybe players and officials will also agree that hitting forwards in the head really isn't the right thing to do.
I sure hope that happens soon.
posted by grum@work at 04:37 PM on June 08, 2011
There was a secret rule the jury wasn't told -- the plaintiff's percentage can't exceed a certain number or they get squat.
The game theory side of me LOVES this story.
posted by grum@work at 04:37 PM on June 08, 2011
NHL suspends Rome four games for hit on Horton