Comments on: Should Andrew Ladd Be Suspended for His “Big Hit”?

By: Stooven

Stooven — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 03:24:59 +0000

“The difference was that Ladd went airborn to hit D’Agostini whreas Mittchell did not.”

Crip, you’re wrong. Ladd doesn’t leave his skates until after the hit.

Not to sidestep the problem, but can something be done mouthguard-wise for better protection? Maybe ban shoulder pads so the hitter thinks twice?

By: Rafal Ladysz

Rafal Ladysz — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:55:08 +0000

Good to see that you’re not expressing a biased opinion seeing as how Chicago is your team and I agree Ladd should get a game for that. Great work Jim just one correction, Mike Richards was the guy who threw a controversial hit (on David Booth) not Brad Richards.

By: Bruce Hollingdrake

Bruce Hollingdrake — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 19:48:39 +0000

Absolutely – rules need to be modified to account for the massive increase in size of players and speed. Keep in mind – it’s not only faster players but removing the red line has also increased the overall speed.

By: BJA

BJA — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 19:12:42 +0000

The length of a ‘head start’ cannot seriously be considered as supporting evidence to suspend a player for a hit. D’Agostini had the puck, and Ladd went to make a play on him. If anything, this ‘head start’ should have given D’Agostini even more time to defend himself if he was actually looking up. It’s not Ladd’s fault that he didn’t see him coming.

Additionally, it is not ludicrous to compare Mitchell’s hit to Ladd’s. Both were hard, legal hits where the victim had no idea it was coming. And if you are going to say Ladd had this ‘head start’, then you would have to say Mitchell had one as well. When Mitchell stepped out of the box, you can’t say that he had no intention of hitting Toews when he saw the puck go towards him. He also probably knew that Toews wouldn’t know he was coming out of the box.

At any rate, Ladd has received enough punishment. Ladd led with his shoulder, and the guy had his head down. Unfortunate that he got hurt but what can you do

By: Crip

Crip — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 18:50:16 +0000

The difference was that Ladd went airborn to hit D’Agostini whreas Mittchell did not. I am a Hawks fan and was quite pissed to see Toews sprawled on the ice and equally scared when he tried to skate off the ice. But, Mitchell’s hit was a hard hit where Ladd went high…and I am a BLACKHAWKS FAN.

I really do not want to take the physical play out of the game…it is just to great a sport. But, the sheer physics of bigger, faster players created a heightened potential for injury and we need to make it clear to the players out there that head shots are not to be tolerated. Years ago there were bench-clearing brawls amid much discussion about whether or not it was hockey. Rules have drastically reduced these so I would think that rules again can make a positive difference,

By: wirtzGMnomore

wirtzGMnomore — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:51:30 +0000

“This is a ludicrous comparison, considering that there was absolutely no evidence that Mitchell deliberately hit Toews in the head…”

And you have evidence either way, HOW?

Mitchell & Ladd hits were identical.