Series thread: Pittsburgh vs Washington
- Thread starter Darryl
- Start date
So last night Crosby was knocked pretty hard into the boards (he didn't jump) and went into them head first:
[tweet]861739677388349440[/tweet]
www.twitter.com/PeteBlackburn/status/861739677388349440
A lot of people on social media were wondering why the heck the concussion spotters didn't take him off the ice after that, especially considering that he JUST returned from a concussion. Thankfully, Bill Daly provided a completely rational explanation for that today:
That's Bill Daly, deputy NHL commissioner, telling the world that crashing headfirst into the boards is not a "mechanism of injury" as far as concussions are concerned. Based on their "studies".
[tweet]861739677388349440[/tweet]
www.twitter.com/PeteBlackburn/status/861739677388349440
A lot of people on social media were wondering why the heck the concussion spotters didn't take him off the ice after that, especially considering that he JUST returned from a concussion. Thankfully, Bill Daly provided a completely rational explanation for that today:
That's Bill Daly, deputy NHL commissioner, telling the world that crashing headfirst into the boards is not a "mechanism of injury" as far as concussions are concerned. Based on their "studies".
bustaheims
Active member
CarltonTheBear said:
Oh, that NHL . . .
I mean, the first part of the statement - being slow to get up does not necessarily mean concussion - I accept. Guys can be slow to get up for a number of reason. But, the rest? Garbage. Absolute garbage.
bustaheims said:
Based on their guidelines, if a player is "slow to get up" after a blow to the head via another players shoulder, contact with the ice, or an ungloved fist then the concussion spotter is supposed to pull him off. So basically any head shot except for crashing into the boards. Because the boards are softer than that stuff I guess.
herman
Well-known member
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9dF1b-E2Tw[/youtube]
The only possible thing I can think of as to why they'd exempt boards from the concussion protocol, is that the boards are designed to have give and flex to soak off some of the momentum. However, the amount of give is inversely proportional to the distance from the bottom, and Crosby struck pretty close to the bottom (i.e. where there is no give).
The only possible thing I can think of as to why they'd exempt boards from the concussion protocol, is that the boards are designed to have give and flex to soak off some of the momentum. However, the amount of give is inversely proportional to the distance from the bottom, and Crosby struck pretty close to the bottom (i.e. where there is no give).
bustaheims
Active member
CarltonTheBear said:
Yeah. That's all kinds of dumb. I mean, head hitting the glass? Maybe, I can understand that. There's a lot of movement in the glass, and generally, a player's head going into the glass isn't going in with much force. The boards? They have some give, but not as much. There's also some pretty solid pieces there in order to give it structural integrity - and, as herman points out, there's a lot less give at the bottom than the top.
hockeyfan1
New member
CarltonTheBear said:
The factual understatement of the year.
Kin
New member
I was low-key pulling for Washington here. Say what you want to about them, they had real problems with two pretty shaky defenses between the Leafs and Pittsburgh.
Leaving aside the damage the cap is going to do to them, I really wonder how you could bring back the same group and expect more at this point.
Leaving aside the damage the cap is going to do to them, I really wonder how you could bring back the same group and expect more at this point.
bustaheims
Active member
Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:
A number of key pieces are UFAs, so, they're likely going to see a pretty significant makeover even without trading their centrepiece.
herman
Well-known member
There's a good deal to be learned from how the Pens handled their decimated defense corps(e) and pushed to victory. It's more than just Crosby (semi-concussed) and a resurgent Malkin.
I forget which podcast I was listening to, but I think it was Matt Cane on LeafsGeeksPodcast April 21, that mentioned how the Penguins weak defense was structurally hyper aggressive at the blueline on any turnover situation for the sole purpose of slowing down the breakout to give their much speedier forwards time to clog and retrieve the puck. The Capitals had no real answer for it because their game relied on setting up in the OZ on the cycle.
Edit: Jeff Marek pointed this out on MvsW as well in their post-series podcast
I forget which podcast I was listening to, but I think it was Matt Cane on LeafsGeeksPodcast April 21, that mentioned how the Penguins weak defense was structurally hyper aggressive at the blueline on any turnover situation for the sole purpose of slowing down the breakout to give their much speedier forwards time to clog and retrieve the puck. The Capitals had no real answer for it because their game relied on setting up in the OZ on the cycle.
Edit: Jeff Marek pointed this out on MvsW as well in their post-series podcast
I am glad the Capitals lost solely because of the Crosby hit. They deserve to loose after taking a cheap shot at Pittsburg's best player. I am still disappointed the NHL did nothing about it, shocked actually.
WAS feels a lot like SJS, to good to blowup but never getting over that hump. I expect more of the same in the future from WAS and don't expect a massive shake up.
WAS feels a lot like SJS, to good to blowup but never getting over that hump. I expect more of the same in the future from WAS and don't expect a massive shake up.