The National Hockey League’s general managers have agreed to a rule to address the situation of blindside hits. The rule essentially amounts to the calling of a “minor or major penalty for any hit where the primary point of contact is the head.”

The rule change will need to pass approval with the competition committee.

The proposed wording of the new rule is as follows: “A lateral, back pressure or blindside hit to an opponent where the head is targeted and/or is the principal point of contact is not permitted. A violation of the above will result in a minor or major penalty and shall be reviewed for possible supplemental discipline.”

The rule change is certainly long overdue and it is about time that the league has come up with something, but many feel that the rule should be implemented immediately to address some of the more recent issues. It is compelling to note that league disciplinarian Colin Campbell elected to not issue any sort of punishment to Matt Cooke despite the opportunity arising on the same day as the GMs decided on the new head shot rule.

Nevertheless, it is a step in the right direction and should represent a sea change in the mentality of the NHL. The NHL is at a crossroads currently and must address the issues raised by the modern game. Failure to do so could stifle competition and could threaten marquee players.

In any event, the efficacy of the rule largely depends on its consistent application. It helps that the majority of the players are on board with the rule change, save for maybe Joffrey Lupul who expressed his disappointment earlier on Twitter.

There will always be those old school players who, in the words of goalie-turned-analyst Kevin Weekes, will feel the need to merely soldier on as a hockey player. But the fact remains that one cannot really be expected to soldier on with a head injury. Protection is necessary in the NHL of today and the rule change addresses and issue that should have been addressed years ago.

Blindside hits are not tough and they do not represent tough hockey, either. They are, instead, cowardly acts and must be immediately eradicated. The NHL should not wait to implement this rule change and should address the Matt Cooke issue properly with the new rule in place. As a repeat-repeat-repeat offender, he is as good a player as any to use as an example of the NHL policy of zero tolerance.

Posted by Jordan Richardson.

With the general managers set to meet at Boca Raton in Florida, it’s clear that the issue of head shots finally needs to be addressed in a concise, meaningful way.

There are a number of ways to tackle the issue, of course, and everybody has his or her own set of answers that they believe add meaningful context to the discussion. But the reality is that it is the logistics of enforcing any sort of head shots rule that will be the most complicated facet of this whole thing.

Head shots will need to be defined clearly and little wiggle room can be left. Contact to a player in a vulnerable position is at the top of the agenda, as in the blindside hit laid on Marc Savard by Matt Cooke. Players who go out of their way to deliver head shots deserve special consideration and there must be a clear policy in place for repeat offenders.

Head shots have long been at the top of the agenda for the GMs, but a concrete policy has been elusive thus far. That’s something former NHLPA execs Glenn Healy and Paul Kelly know all too well, as their presentation on the topic at meetings a few years ago left little by way of actual answers from the managers.

The topic tends to gain ground after significant incidents, as it did in November when the GMs met just after the Mike Richards hit on David Booth. Perhaps the latest Cooke-related incident will help provoke more serious dialogue among the GMs. Perhaps not.

As with most of these types of discussions, there is a fear associated with addressing head shots in a meaningful way that any rule change may take hitting out of the game altogether. Still, there appears to be some wiggle room on the topic after the November talks. “[The conversation] was quite a bit different, some of the guys who have taken a strong position that it may take hitting out of the game have adjusted their views a little bit,” Carolina Hurricanes GM Jim Rutherford said then.

There are options on the table, such as the CHL’s current system of assessing an automatic minor penalty for any hit to the head. But some GMs still believe the CHL system discourages hitting overall, although there’s little to no proof that that’s the case.

Bruins GM Peter Chiarelli has said that he feels the managers will find a way to address head shots and feels even more confident that it will happen after the Savard incident.

Any rule changes proposed or agreed upon by the GMs at the meeting will need to be put before the competition committee for approval.

Posted by Jordan Richardson.

As the league’s 30 general managers wrapped up meetings on Wednesday they were closer than ever to a recommendation as to how to address the dangerous headshots plaguing the NHL. With designs on getting a small committee together to deal with the issue before the next meeting in March, it’s possible that some new rules might be in place for the 2010-2011 NHL season to deal with the problem.

Headshots have always been discussed by GMs at these meetings, but this time things seemed different.

“It was quite a bit different, some of the guys who have taken a strong position that it may take hitting out of the game have adjusted their views a little bit,” said Carolina Hurricanes GM Jim Rutherford. “If we continue down what was talked about today then we will see a change.

The tone of the conversation seemed to have deepened in seriousness, with a few notable checks this season drawing the issue into the light. The Mike Richards hit on David Booth and the Willie Mitchell hit on Jonathan Toews were among those discussed, although neither hit resulted in suspension as there’s nothing in the current rules to determine such a punishment.

Whether those hits (or any other hits) deserved suspension is not the issue, in my opinion, as the NHL clearly needs to set forth a policy on what is and what isn’t acceptable in the land of hitting. And there will doubtlessly be purists that assume the hazards of high hits as part of the game, but protecting the players within reasonable limits has to be at the forefront of the GM committee.

Bodychecks to unsuspecting players is also on the list of some GMs.

“A player should have an ability to anticipate a hit, prepare for a hit or avoid a hit,” said Toronto Maple Leafs GM Brian Burke. “If he doesn’t have those, then I think the onus has to shift to the hitter. He’s got to deliver a safe hit.”

“The Booth hit in particular, I personally feel that if that was my son I wouldn’t want for that to be the way he was hit,” said Pittsburgh Penguins GM Ray Shero. “What Mike Richards did was within the rules we have currently. That’s not the issue. The issue is making the game as safe as can be. I don’t think we’re looking for a big rule change, but maybe we can tweak something.”

Making the game as safe as possible should be an ultimate goal that all hockey fans, purists or not, can agree to. Surely we want to protect the ability of players to enjoy long, productive careers and surely updating the rules in terms of hitting can be a part of such protection.

Posted by Jordan Richardson.