Because the world needs more hockey bloggers...

I've been meaning to re-create an old hockey blog, long-since forgotten, and haven't found the time. Now seems like a perfect opportunity, to start up anew on a controversial topic. Yes, everyone's talking about Mike Liambas' devastating hit on Ben Fanelli in the OHL, but I'm going to weigh in on it myself.

I grew up with WHL hockey. My first hockey game may have been an NHL game, but the vast majority that followed in my developing years were Seattle Thunderbirds games. I like to think maybe this gives me an interesting insight into the game itself, because I've always maintained, the kids who play in the CHL leagues (WHL, OHL, OMJHL) play almost a more pure game - some may make it to the Show, but a lot, they'll play here, they'll play in university somewhere, they'll play rec league, but it won't be a career for them. They're out there for a love of sport that simply starts failing to translate once the first million dollar paycheque is deposited into a bank account.

I've been reading and listening and talking and questioning everything that went on from when Liambas started down the ice toward Fanelli, up until today, where I thankfully heard that Fanelli's going home from the hospital, and that the Erie Otters are considering appealing Liambas' career-ending suspension once Fanelli's a bit better. I'm not going to re-hash the hit itself, most people have seen it, it's on YouTube if you haven't. But I will say this: It wasn't an illegal hit. It was devastating, yes, but it was not dirty. In fact, David Branch, Commissioner of the OHL has said it wasn't illegal He still suspended Liambas for the remainder of the season/playoffs anyway, but as Branch also said, it was because of the severity of injury to Fanelli.

Going back to my love of Jr. hockey, I've moved on from the T-Birds (now of Kent), and am a season ticket holder for the Everett Silvertips. Over my years of watching hockey, I've seen devastating hits. I've seen dirty hits. I've seen vicious hits that made me question how the player delivering them was allowed to continue wearing skates. Hits to the head, checks from behind, heads slammed into glass... you name it, I've seen it. I can vividly remember watching a player I call a friend, his back to the play, digging the puck off the boards, and another lining him up from a good distance back, skating in full force, and checking him at such an angle his head bounced off the dashers. He missed a few weeks from a concussion he never should have received, and the guy who hit him got not so much as a penalty for it. (side note, they're both in the NHL now, one growing into more of a finesse player, and the one who laid the hit is lauded constantly for his "gritty" play and yet, all I can ever see him for is being a dirty player now - and hits I've watched continue from him reinforce this in my eyes). I've seen players get absolutely leveled, knocked unconscious even, from shoulder-checks to the head with little more than a "well, he should have kept his head up." I don't even disagree, you need to keep your head up in this game, to be aware of what's going on around you at all times. And to not turn your back on an incoming check. I often wonder just how many hits, particularly along the end boards, that end up causing injury would be simply an impact blow absorbed by body and boards with everyone skating away if someone had just not turned their back at the last possible second.

As is the case with Fanelli. I am not, in any way, shape, or form, blaming him in any way, for what happened. I'm simply wondering. He turned his back; what would have happened if someone, his goalie, a defenseman, someone had warned him of the incoming hit, or even moreso, a d-man had gotten in the way - we used to see that happen a lot more than it seems to these days - and his back wasn't to Liambas at the worst possible moment. An awful lot of what-ifs to wonder at, when at this point, nothing matters but a 16 year old kid who will never be the same, no matter what happens, because of a hit he took, and a 20 year old kid who will never be the same because of a hit he delivered.

I was reading an article this morning by Damien Cox (Was this OHL tragedy avoidable?) and I found the root of my problem with everything that's happened in the last few days. Two words: David. Branch. Okay, I knew he was my problem with a lot of it to begin with. I don't know how well anyone who doesn't follow the CHL leagues knows of what Branch's views on hockey are, but a lot of them are summed up pretty well in Cox's article. Branch is a reactionist. There, I said it. Something happens and he reacts. Sometimes, this isn't a bad thing, but often, he makes snap decisions that affect the OHL - and often spread to the Dub and the Q (see: new fighting rules, not taking helmets off for starters) - because something flukey happens. The helmet rules after the tragic death of Don Sanderson are a prime example, one horrible, but extremely rare occurrence of something going wrong and Branch moves to start taking it from the game. But this post isn't about the fighting restrictions (I'll come back to that later, I'm sure). If anyone doesn't think that Branch is being reactionary in his suspension of Liambas, I'd like to quote him:

"I would say without question the injury played a factor. Without question."

"In the purest sense nobody is saying the hit was illegal, but it is our opinion the distance he traveled and the speed at which he chose to travel at did not demonstrate sufficient respect. If there is an injury then you are going to be held accountable."

What Branch is doing is delivering a punishment clearly - and admittedly - based more on outcome than action. If Fanelli had skated his next shift, Liambas would have spent a couple minutes in the penalty box. Because Fanelli was transferred to hospital instead, Liambas' OHL career is over. Damn near every person I've heard agree with the suspension thinks like this, which I have to say, concerns me and I hope none of you serve on a jury anytime soon. Actions have consequences. Actions are what should be punished. Outcomes are often more, or less, tragic than the action would seem to create. To make a "statement" about how you feel about hits in hockey (how do you really feel, Mr. Branch? I'm curious), by turning a, in your own word legal hit into a punishment far outweighing a crime is if not unconscionable at least completely unreasonable. And reactionary.

I guarantee you, Mike Liambas will punish himself for this, long after everyone but he, Ben Fanelli, and their familes have forgotten all about it. My heart breaks for these kids, both of them, their lives have been horribly and irrevocably changed because of this. It's just a shame to see the league's brass making it worse.