For the most insane, viscious hitting with absolutely no protective equipment, watch Aussie rules football. It makes rugby players look overly coddled with their long sleeves and the occasional ear protector headwear. 1970's basketball type shorts, tank tops and no fear (and sanity). It's like non-stop NASCAR wrecking, without protective harnesses. But some absolutely amazing athletes. Imagine a place kicker (built like a linebacker) running at full speed, kicking the ball fifty yards high in the air to a cluster of players from both teams running at top speed and all jumping for the pass at the same time. What we call face-guarding, interference, blindsiding, holding, horse-collar tackling etc. is just part of the play. You can be hit anywhere at any angle. There are refs and rules, and the most blatant hits to the head are called, with occasional ejections. But for the most part, the game itself is defined by great physical skills and typical Aussie macho swagger. I saw a series of exhibition games in person in the eighties and have been a fan ever since. A nephew has gone to med school there and will be living there permanently. He became a huge fan and goes to Sydney Swan games. We had a great discussion at Xmas about their championship season.


Re football rule changes. I think it's part of the prevailing new paradigm with North American sports about a focus on 'safety.'. Beyond the sporting mystique and the actual physical confrontations are vulnerable physical bodies. Where the players always knew the risk/reward dynamic was at play they simply were accepting the occupational hazards of the job for high salaries. No one compelled them to sign on, and in essence, they were simply continuing to accept the same risks they took at college, for no salary. And don't discount the lawsuit/legal angle. The NFL already has their hands full with the class-action accusations of past players about disregard for their safety. What wasn't dealt with in the past will now have to be explicitly addressed, and rule changes are intended to give the impression the league is cognizant of the issues and doing things to improve matters. But at some point, no matter how well-meaning and progressive a sport tries to be, there always will be physical danger because that's the nature of the job. There are many dangerous jobs in the world, and improving safety should always be part of the evaluation process, but the nature of the game entails potential serious hazards.


The same concerns and rules discussions are going on now in hockey. It's not simple or easy finding the balance. Equipment also is a big factor. Sometimes the modern helmets and pads serve as weapon like devices. In hockey especially, elbow pads and shoulder pads have been responsible for some devestating injuries. They are much leighter weight but way harder than the old school equipment of the past. Also, the more speed and power generated by more fit and muscular athletes today make the danger at impact potentially more intense. I don't know if the new NFL rule changes can do what they want them to alone. And they may in fact complicate play calling, strategy and actual athletic technique. But really, who wasn't taught to tackle with their arms? Aim for the legs, hit with the shoulders wrap up with both arms. And keep your head to the side if possible. A knee to the helmet can be a dangerous thing! I have to laugh sometimes watching defenders hurl their bodies with their arms not even used. Obviously perfect form is hard to execute all the time, but football has had basic techniques that have worked forever.


Maybe Ditka has something, though of course it seems radical. Remove face masks and the players will instinctively think of self-preservation more. And bring back leather helmets, or a better synthetic hybrid. it will never happen, of course. But draws attention to the equipment element of the problem. Hockey was played for at least for eighty years without helmets. When Bill Masterson cracked the back of his head on the ice in 1968 and died, that was the turning point. It wasn't from a collision with another player, a shot or stick, but the impact of the ice. But it wasn't till the eighties that the majority of players wore them. At first it was optional, then grandfathered as compulsory. Some players alternated between using them and not using them. Guy Lafleur for instance began his NHL career in 1971 and used a helmet his first three seasons. As the number one overall draft pick, big things were expected, but he had modest results. Not long afterwards he discarded the helmet and almost instantly began playing like the H-O-F superstar he became. It obviously was a confidence/psychological idiosyncracy. Who knows what his career would have been like if he came in at a time when helmets were compulsory? In fact, his legacy is definede visually by images of him flying down the ice with his blond hair flying in the wind. Later in his career he put the helmet on again, but was past his prime by then.


I don't actually know if goalie's are required by the rules to wear masks, but they all have pretty much since the late seventies. It was a slap shot to the face of Jacques Plante in 1959 by the Ranger's Andy Bathgate that led the innovative and eccentric Plante to bring out the flimsy fiberglass face-hugging model he devised. He got into fierce battles with his coach, Toe Blake, about using it because Blake thought it would cut down on his range of vision. But when Plante went on a long winning streak using the mask, it became a turning point in the sport.


In the end, as the decades slip by, adaptation and re-evaluation of rules becomes inevitable. Sometimes a sport is tweaked for the better, sometimes for the worse. Obviously each change in each sport is highly debatable. We'll have to see how these changes work.

Last Edited By: Arnold49 03/21/13 02:56 AM. Edited 2 times.