The Nhl's Concussion Quandary Analysis
The Globe and Mail’s editorial, “The NHL’s Concussion Quandary”(2015), speaks out regarding the level of long-term harm professional hockey players are enduring due to the lack of guidelines when it comes to concussion protocol. Coming from a hockey family, with professional connections, one must consider what goes on between the players, trainers, coaches, general managers, and everyday fans being the issue not the regulations of the league. “The NHL’s Concussion Quandary” is finding players returning to the game too soon a pressing problem, what the outside eye doesn’t see is the player “sucking it up” to receive their pay check and bonuses. Although their main talent lies on the ice, professional hockey players have skill when it comes to
…show more content…
The Globe pressed the question “But if the sport became soccer on ice, would that really be so bad?” The answer is yes, it would be terrible, hockey is popular because of its rough, gritty demeanor. The Globe and Mail also debated “The streamlined, beautiful game exhibited at the Olympics every four years proves that a purer version of the sport can exist, once the will to adapt is there.” This sophisticated play comes from bigger consequences, yes, but also from the pressure of representing your country in positive light. Hockey player’s in the NHL however play for themselves, their club, and in present day most importantly, their fans. Fans want to see huge hits, fights and goals - in reality the spectators are who pays the players therefore players must preform to their liking. Discussed was the fact that professional sports do remake themselves to eliminate harmful parts of the game, an example used in the editorial regarding hockey is the banning of spearing, but players still spear which proves adding rules don’t fix everything. Players want to impress their teammates, coaches and fans, sacrificing their own well being to do
The Globe pressed the question “But if the sport became soccer on ice, would that really be so bad?” The answer is yes, it would be terrible, hockey is popular because of its rough, gritty demeanor. The Globe and Mail also debated “The streamlined, beautiful game exhibited at the Olympics every four years proves that a purer version of the sport can exist, once the will to adapt is there.” This sophisticated play comes from bigger consequences, yes, but also from the pressure of representing your country in positive light. Hockey player’s in the NHL however play for themselves, their club, and in present day most importantly, their fans. Fans want to see huge hits, fights and goals - in reality the spectators are who pays the players therefore players must preform to their liking. Discussed was the fact that professional sports do remake themselves to eliminate harmful parts of the game, an example used in the editorial regarding hockey is the banning of spearing, but players still spear which proves adding rules don’t fix everything. Players want to impress their teammates, coaches and fans, sacrificing their own well being to do