Pierre-Marc Bouchard out with "Concussion-like Symptoms"

He is looking outside the organization for help as long as he doesn’t have to gut the core prospects.

Who are players he’s willing to part with?

But I think any expiring veteran contracts should be moved for whatever, roster players, picks, prospects.

The NHL talked about stopping head shots and head injuries last season. Cracking down on concussion causing hits. Probably received the most news when Nathan Horton was concussed.

Watching the games this season, the NHL started to follow through with their claims. Any contact with the head during the preseason resulted in fines and suspensions of 5+ games, regardless of a player’s history of discipline (or lack thereof). Preseason suspensions ignored intent and which player was responsible for what happened. If you contacted another player’s head, you were suspended/fined. If you checked someone and they hit their head on the ice, you were suspended/fined. If you were near somebody who hit their own head, you were suspended/fined.

When the regular season started, a change occurred in that stance. I do not know if the NHL thought the message had gotten across or what, but the suspensions and fines drastically decreased in frequency and severity. Sticks to the face, elbows to the head, checks from behind, punches to downed or restrained players continued to occur with the same frequency as before. The only real difference is that the NHL was not instituting additional discipline after the games with that same severity and frequency.

Rather, the supplemental discipline has been erratic. At times, almost biased. The NHL’s officials have been given the ability to review the games after they have been played. Going by the videos Shanahan has filmed, he is able to watch the plays on which penalties have occurred and assess potential supplemental discipline. Why do those officials not use those videos of the games to assess supplemental discipline on plays they would have suspended/fined players for back in the preseason, even though the on-ice officials did not assess an in-game penalty for it? The league is able to take away penalties to players after the game, why is it they do not give penalties as well? I do not mean that upon review after the game they caught Bouchard holding another player’s stick and he should get 2 minutes for it in a future game. That is a minor penalty. I am referring to high sticks and slashes to the face, hits to the numbers, attacking restrained or downed players. If it was an offense worthy of suspension at another point in the season, why is it not even worthy of a minor penalty now? No warnings issued. No reprimands. Not even a scolding for behaving recklessly and not protecting your fellow players.

The reception of a concussion should not be used in determination of supplemental discipline need. I want Bogosian punished for the hit on Bouchard more now that it looks like Bouchard has another concussion, but it is not the right thing to do. Because concussion symptoms can take many different lengths of time to develop. Some develop them immediately. Others do not develop them until weeks later. You cannot cite a concussion as a reason for suspension or lack of a concussion for lack of suspension. It is that very reason. It can take a month’s time before a player can be diagnosed as having suffered a concussion. If you do not give a suspension because the player did not develop concussion symptoms quick enough is taking the stance that concussions are not as serious as previously claimed. 4 weeks later after saying he didn’t deserve to be suspended because the other player was not concussed looks like something was being covered up; like a certain person is being protected. The concussion was later diagnosed. Fans of the hurt player will look at the league and wonder why they said he wasn’t concussed when it has been proven that he was.

That said, stricter enforcement of NHL policy must occur. If a player screws up, the player must be held responsible quickly. But haste must not be taken. Review of plays should extend at least a week after the game. Allow officials to actually review it rather than quickly rule upon it because they don’t want to miss a rerun of Jersey Shore that they have on DVR. Just because on-ice officials did not rule a hit illegal does not mean the hit was not illegal. They have to make several rulings in significantly less time and without review than off-ice officials get for a single ruling.

For a summary, the NHL needs to be consistent in its enforcement of its own policies throughout its operating period. Preseason, regular season, postseason. Equal enforcement non-stop. The NHL needs to adequately review all of the games rather than just 10 second popular snip-its. Do not blame the injured player for a dirty hit (good lord, the NHL absolutely needs to stop this). Define what you mean when you cite something as reason for punishment or lack thereof (His head was down. Ok, what angle does a person’s spine need to be for it not to result in “his head down”? Or is it a certain height above the ice?).

The videos explaining suspensions is a step in the right direction. Add videos explaining penalties and references (like the head is down). Add videos explaining why 1 hit was clean while another was not. None of this “TOE PICK!” in text form only. Have the gall to tell hockey fans why 1 player’s hit causing an injury was legal while another player’s hit causing an injury was not.