Monday, March 09, 2009
Don’t let us hit each other
The NHLPA is asking the NHL for stiffer penalties on headshots:
The NHL Players’ Association would like to see a league rule that would penalize intentional hits to the head. Union boss Paul Kelly proposed the rule while giving a presentation at the NHL’s general managers meeting Monday morning. He would like referees to have the option of handing out a minor, major or match penalty to players that “intentionally or recklessly” target the head of another player. It’s a big issue for his membership. “That’s probably the most significant concern on the part of players,” said Kelly. “I would say better than three-quarters believe that we need to have a new rule on hits to the head, that protects players. “We’re looking for not all hits to the head—there are accidental and inadvertant hits that don’t cause a great deal of injury.”
On a workplace issue that has no implementation cost on the part of the owner, I see no reason that you need the owner’s buy-in on the issue. The workers agree that if someone intentionally hits another worker in the head, then that worker needs to be punished. Indeed, over 75% of the workers believe they need this rule in place.
Suppose the owner says “no, we won’t create that rule”, what happens? Say you have a death. Wouldn’t you then be able to sue the owner for not having a safer workplace. The “assumed risk” cannot mean “assumed risk, as described by the owner” can it? It’s the “assumed risk” as per the expectations and wont of the participants, isn’t it?
Anyway, I see no reason for the owners to even have an opinion on the matter. Nor, for that matter, should I, or the fans, or anyone else. This is a pure workplace safety issue, that has no cost to anyone other than to the players. Indeed, why would they even need Colin Campbell (league decider of suspensions) to be involved? The players can suspend themselves.


Recent comments
Older comments
Page 1 of 344 pages 1 2 3 > Last »Complete Archive – By Category
Complete Archive – By Date