Time to leave the OHL and Branch behind?

To me, it seems clear the OHL has changed approach in recent years. Once a typical major junior league providing opportunities for all kinds of players, the league has been changed dramatically by David Branch and his followers, whom we will call the Branch Davidians. The Branch Davidians are the hockey equivalent of elitist intellectuals. From high upon their ivory tower, everything seems so simple. Let's suspend players for hitting too hard, after all, they should know precisely the level at which a big hit becomes too big -- if there is such a thing. To this group, armored shoulder pads and inflexible glass have no impact, it's just a perceived lack of respect among players that lead to hockey's issues. They overlook that 99% of the time a players sees another player in a vulnerable position, they let up, just as has always been the case. The difference, of course, is the results are far more severe thanks to increased speed in the post-lockout era (thanks to increased standards of rule enforcement), padding that has become a suit of armour, and the inflexible glass in many OHL arenas (such as Kitchener). 

This group tends to eschew traditional, physical, gritty hockey. They value speed, skill, and skating. They think grit, jam, and passion are dated, pre-lockout notions. 

These elitists have a presence in the media, particularly certain newspapers. As fans, they are especially present in Kitchener and to a lesser extent in London, but seem to have a reasonable following in several other OHL markets. 

Then we have Oshawa. I see the majority of Generals fans being similar to myself. We appreciate effort above all. Grit, jam and passion are what draw us to the game. A big hit is as likely to bring us out of our seats as a pretty goal. We struggle with the new rules -- we don't enjoy games with 17 power plays. We don't agree with Branch, but idolize Hockey Night in Canada. Don Cherry could easily be our leader. We miss organ music, don't want to hear club music or rap at the games, and like to see a tougher brand of hockey. 

We do not think like the elite who have grasped control of the OHL. We have different thoughts, beliefs, and philosophies on the game. 

As time goes on, I wonder what the place of Oshawa is in the OHL. I also wonder about Barrie, Sudbury, Sault Ste. Marie, Sarnia, Niagara, and to an extent, Windsor. Except for the Spits, none of those teams are among the OHL's annual powers. We have watched for years as draft picks call their own shots, saying they will play NCAA unless they are picked by their preferred team. So Matia Marcantuoni, instead of going to a team who should have a high pick, goes to Kitchener. Restrictions on trading first round picks and players taken in the first round feel like rules designed to let this occur. 

How can the teams like Oshawa compete? The league seems to play favourites, they prefer teams and fan bases who watch the "new game." To top it off, this week, JP Labardo received a five game suspension for attempting (largely successfully) to avoid Kingston's goaltender, while Kingston's Erik Gudbranson received only eight games for a flying elbow to the head of Labardo, after the whistle, taking more than three strides and "leaving his feet" in the process. It is simply the latest in a very long line of double standards when it comes to the Oshawa Generals, and a sure sign the Generals will never get a fair shake. 

 And just as frustrating, the league has become about a small number of elite teams while the rest of the league seems to rotate between two bad seasons and one good one. 

I'm not sure the OHL is an option worth saving. But I do see several options. Surely, the owners who have half empty arenas because their team is not in the elite are displeased with Branch and the ways of the OHL. Oshawa isn't there yet, but fans will not put up with this bias forever. Not everyone in this league makes money -- in fact, it's a tough go in many markets. Fans in Sudbury like hard nosed hockey, and interest is waning. Sault Ste. Marie has a new arena, but in time, I could see the same result there.  

So where am I going with this? First of all, major junior hockey itself started in 1966 in the west. Several SJHL (Saskatchewan junior A) teams left the league over disagreements with the way things ran. The new league was initially called the Canadian Major Junior Hockey League and was considered by the CAHA (now Hockey Canada) to be an outlaw league. Players lost their eligibility in the Hockey Canada umbrella if they played in the CMJHL. It didn't matter. Within two years, it became the Western Canada Hockey League and was the preeminent junior league in the west. In 1970, Ontario changed their junior model based on the WCHL, splitting junior A into major junior A and tier II junior A. Eventually, the WCHL became the WHL, while Ontario's major junior a became major junior -- the OHL -- and the other level dropped tier II from the name and became junior A. 

Sanctions from Hockey Canada have been limited by a case involving the independent GMHL. Hockey Canada can not ban players for any longer than the current season for playing in an independent league. And with significant numbers of teams leaving, Hockey Canada inclusion would likely come within the first year or two. 

The current OHL acts as an incubator. Top level talent is grabbed at 16 (usually by Kitchener or London, under the threat by the player of going the NCAA route), protected by unreasonably tough rules for two years, then sent to the NHL. The second through fourth liners do not further their careers, they exist to help the stars move along. The days of grinders working hard and making the NHL are gone, at least in Ontario. Those players come from other leagues. 

Has the time come to follow the CMJHL route and have the teams I've mentioned -- and a few others -- leave the OHL and form a new league? The OHL feels too much like an elite incubator, similar to the NCAA a generation ago. There's plenty of parents and players displeased with the status quo. Sure, the elite talent might go the OHL route at first, but perhaps a top talent with an edge -- guys like Kassian, Domi, Pronger -- might prefer the alternate route. And being outside of the CHL-NCAA war could potentially preserve NCAA eligibility for these players. 

I'm ready for this option. It seems far fetched today...but at the current rate, it's a two tier league anyway. Why not roll the dice and see what happens?

Whine, whine, whine.

The clutch and grab days are over as well as head shots because we now know the true severity of concussions and their long-term effects. Legal hits are still very much around, even of the thunderous variety. The problem is that a lot of fans (and sometimes players) can't tell the difference between a legal hit and a head shot or even holding and interference.

The game is far better today than it was in 1995.

As for playing favourites, that's a load of crap. The officiating isn't perfect - it is what it is. These refs make mistakes because this is a development league for them too. They make mistakes evenly to all teams - perhaps not in the same game but over the course of the season. The Gens have had the benefit of the calls sometimes but fans don't notice when that happens, they only notice when they want to complain.

Junior hockey is the best $20 you can spend. There's nothing in any sport that can compare for the combination of atmosphere, top-notch arenas (especially in Oshawa) and high-level play for such a low price.

Sorry hockey beats I couldn't disagree you more , and you should refrain from your childish , whine , whine remark , fire branch wrote a very interesting article , which does inspire some thought , interesting notions though one may not agree 100 percent , furthermore , the game was much rougher , with more fighting in the 80 's and early 90's , with much fewer head injuries , go figure !
The 5 game suspension to labardo is a complete joke , but then again so is branch , I,ve been around since before branch and I have to tell you this leagues seriously needs an egnima , and I would start first by flushing this egomaniac branch

Thank you for your classy post, hockeybeats.

Your statement that the game is better than in 1995 is opinion. I'd give ten years of my life to have 1995 hockey back, and I truly mean that.

I moved to Ontario knowing nothing more than team names. The first time I heard the name Taylor Hall was in a Windsor Boston Pizza my first day visiting. I knew nothing. I observed bias. I'm not an Oshawa native, resident or employee. I live 150 km away and commute to every home game. I do so because I like the style of play. I bought tickets to all 34 home games in Kitchener last year, bought a Rangers sweatshirt and jacket and decided to make them "my team" because of their proximity to where I live. But after seeing them get the breaks in every game -- there is bias whether or not you want to put your head in the sand - I felt guilty cheering for them, and even wasted the tickets for the last 15 games. Because of their breaks and my unimpressed observations of Steve Bienkowski, I'm fervently anti-Ranger now. (I have a sweatshirt and jacket for sale cheap). It became clear that Oshawa gets the raw end of the stick. Is it because Branch's son, a former General employee, is no longer there? (he's in Belleville). Is it because Branch, a Whitby resident, bends over backwards to have no bias in favor of his hometown team? Is it something else? I don't know. But it's reached epidemic proportions and the time for action is now.

For those who question a bias, check out these numbers,'expressed in power plays against penalty kill situations (as of Sunday)

Oshawa -49 (194 vs 243)
Kitchener +69 (239 vs 170)
Belleville (Barclay Branch) +20 (210 vs 190)

Percent wise, those are of massive proportions.

That's because Oshawa commits more penalties than the other teams. I think the tendency of some Gens players to take silly penalties at inopportune times has been well-identified on this board. If Oshawa takes three dumb penalties in a game, the ref is under no obligation to call three more the other way.

As for my whine, whine, whine comment, it's not so much directed at the changes of the game. While I disagree with that opinion on 1995 clutch and grab hockey, that's a legitimate opinion. That was more directed at the idea that Dave Branch and the referees are involved in some sort of conspiracy against Oshawa. I've been reading the NOOF for years, Dave Branch has it in for Oshawa, Sudbury, Sault Ste. Marie, Owen Sound, Windsor, London ... you name it! Fans of every team think that Dave Branch is against them.

I'm typically rather diplomatic but for something that ludicrous, I'll say it again, you can go on and whine, whine, whine!

You can debate changes in style (which isn't just a Dave Branch thing, it parallels changes in the NHL) but blaming the league office for having more penalties, that's nonsense.

Fellow Gens Fans:
to see the favourtism in the OHL just go to last Sundays overtime game when a Gens is hauled down at the side of the London net in
overtime and no call, 30 seconds later Dehaan gets a questionable tripping call and its game over.
the idea of Gudbranson only getting 3 more games than Larbardo is luconic, only on planet Branch does that make sense?
The Gens are a young team that older teams try to intimidate and the kids push back often getting the retaliation calls
when it should be both guys going off.
Slewfooting calls against Valentine and Thomas this season were a joke yet when kirby rychel slewfoots jimmy mcdowell then starts
pounding him no call, no instigator no attempt to injure withthe slewfoot.
I know i am biased(don't remind me) but Firebranch agree with him or not writes a well thought out and provocative piece and hockeybeats
calls him a whiner. hockeybeats thats no cricket my friend!

Not taking the bait, don't want this to devolve into a NOOFish thread. I have expressed an opinion formed through observation. Further investigation into numbers have backed, not formed, my opinion. The Valentine slew foot match that clearly wasn't (later reversed) and the Thomas slew foot match (not reversed and led to a suspension of one game) were examples of blatantly bad calls, as was the Valentine head check that was shoulder to shoulder a few weeks ago. The Labardo one takes the cake.

As I said, I follow more than one team. I also track officiating at each game I attend. I rate them from 1 to 10. I rate it based on overofficiating and bias. In one arena I attend, they have received low scores a couple of times on calling too much on the team I follow but not at all for bias against the home team. In Oshawa, more often than not, bias against the home team results in a low score.

My average score in Oshawa is 4.5. In the other arena I mentioned, it's 7.5.

I am well past being a biased fan. Ive left the GMC (or whatever rink) energized and thrilled at the game I saw when the Gens lose. I've also left miserable when the Gens win because the game was not exciting. Winning and losing is not my concern. My concern is seeing good hockey, and good hockey can not exist without semi-competent officiating in my opinion. As a result, I do not feel I'm seeing good hockey.

Out of curiosity, were you working in the game in 1995? Were you attending 100+ games a year? I ask because I was seeing that many games at that time, and the junior games I saw were wide-open, physical, hard hitting, and as mygens said, far less head injuries and injuries overall. The structured, dull, system based junior game of today did not exist in junior hockey -- it was high scoring and passionate. The NHL became more defensive in the mid 90s, yet the systems have become only more conservative since the lockout. A left wing trap at least tried to create turnovers and transition chances at centre ice. A passive 1-4 is designed to force a dump and chase, no chance at all for turnovers.

The media talks about how much better the game is today. While I don't necessarily agree at the NHL level either, it's NHL they are talking about. Junior hockey in the mid-90s that I saw resembled more a 1983 Oilers vs Islanders game than today's trap fest.

I don't disagree that the officiating in the OHL is frustrating at times. Where I disagree with you is the reason. Creating a list of situations where the Gens were "ripped off" can also be done for a bunch of other teams. It happens because the best referees move up a level. The rest stay in the OHL. It isn't cheating or a conspiracy - just mistakes.

To clarify, my mid-90's comments were more reflective of the NHL. Junior hockey was always more wide open. However, if the NHL is going down that route, junior hockey must also go down that route to adequately prepare players for what they will face at the pro level. Hard hits are still very much allowed in both the NHL and the OHL but you can't hit someone who isn't the puck carrier (interference), you can't grab onto somebody (holding) and you these days, you can't go anywhere near the head or hit someone from behind. The problem with the mid-90s in the NHL is that so much clutching and grabbing and interference was allowed that the game slowed to a crawl. It was boring. These changes weren't necessary at the junior level because junior players simply weren't capable of playing as effective a trap as the NHL players can. They're too young. Somebody would eventually make a mistake and so the game remained quite wide open in comparison to the NHL. The reason the OHL had to change as well was simply preparation for the standard of officiating in the NHL.

Right now, both the OHL and NHL are still in a transition. The art of throwing a check was completely forgotten during the clutch-and-grab era, even in the OHL depsite it's more open game. The purpose of a bodycheck is to separate the puck carrier from the puck. Somewhere, some players have interpreted this as that you have to finish your check even if the player doesn't have the puck anymore - that's interference unless the puck just left and there isn't time to refrain from making the hit. In some cases, it was even interpreted as taking several paces and running at a player was acceptable.

You can hit the puck carrier shoulder-to-shoulder with a good, clean, hard check. The problem isn't that this isn't allowed now - usually, the good hard hits aren't called (yes, the refs screw it up once in awhile). The problem is that players have forgotten what the purpose of a check is and how to do it properly.

Eventually, the hitting will come back as players adjust to the new normal. Hopefully, good clean hard hits that can get the crowd excited without a 10-minute delay to bring the stretcher out and almost end someone's life. Those hits are unacceptable.

The hit you refer to is likely Liambas on Fanelli. I believe attention must be paid to the fact that the ten-foot glass in Kitchener is completely inflexible. In addition, the shoulder pads and elbow pads must be looked at and changed as well. I've seen many more vicious hits without the results of that one.

Regardless of whether or not you believe Liambas' hit was clean, I think we can all agree plays that are not "clean" occur every game. I don't believe it was charging, but some do. I've talked to former pro players who said it was clean. That doesn't mean that has to be everyone's opinion, but it means the hit was obviously not so heinous that everyone thought it was a problem. And even if it was charging, charging occurs hundreds of times a year. It will never be eliminated.

I'm basically saying, you can't legislate the game to safety, but you can modify the equipment and boards to create that safety. And that fact seems to elude Branch entirely.

Regarding bias, I have tickets in Niagara. And I can't come up with even one time they have been ripped off this year by the refs, but I can name double digits in Oshawa. Trust me, as someone who sees the league through different eyes than most, it's different when it comes to the Generals.

Firebranch wrote:The hit you refer to is likely Liambas on Fanelli. I believe attention must be paid to the fact that the ten-foot glass in Kitchener is completely inflexible. In addition, the shoulder pads and elbow pads must be looked at and changed as well. I've seen many more vicious hits without the results of that one.

Regardless of whether or not you believe Liambas' hit was clean, I think we can all agree plays that are not "clean" occur every game. I don't believe it was charging, but some do. I've talked to former pro players who said it was clean. That doesn't mean that has to be everyone's opinion, but it means the hit was obviously not so heinous that everyone thought it was a problem. And even if it was charging, charging occurs hundreds of times a year. It will never be eliminated.

I'm basically saying, you can't legislate the game to safety, but you can modify the equipment and boards to create that safety. And that fact seems to elude Branch entirely.

Regarding bias, I have tickets in Niagara. And I can't come up with even one time they have been ripped off this year by the refs, but I can name double digits in Oshawa. Trust me, as someone who sees the league through different eyes than most, it's different when it comes to the Generals.

Always has been and always will be. It was like that long before branch because of the way Oshawa played. Reputation has followed the Gens for years....even when the Gens had zero tough guys and played on the outside, the refs/league have treated them like the Philadelphia Flyers Broad Street Bullies. I don't get it, but it is a fact. The Refs are much harder on the Gens then Branch is. I don't support Branch, but this issue goes long before Branch.

Branch has everything to do with how the refs call the games throughout the league , there is no doubt about that . He rules , it's his way or the highway ,!

We are way off topic - I cheer on the GENS as a homer we will always see it as getting the raw end of the deal from the refs - BUT so many of you don't understand where you get good experienced refs from when many leave every year.

Fire BRANCH - like that will solve what - nothing the game is faster today and the positioning of 4 officials is difficult all we see is the infraction BUT when they are reviewed - it is in slow motion

I don't think anyone is out to get anyone - it may seem that way - play
smarter and you will get the breaks - like we had how many penalties in Saginaw 2 - so don't tell me we can't play smarter - we did and were rewarded

The OHL is a great with all of the new faster rules - I couldn't stand all the hooking , stick work from before and the centre line gone sure speeds up the game.

The meaning of a hit used to be to strip the player of the puck - not hammer him into the boards - I ' m sure if it was your kid on the receiving end you would think differently.

As far as Fire Branch - rant - no 1 is perfect - how about your solutions not problems - this is a developmental league for players and officials.

What many of us don't hear is what is said on the ice by players to officilals
and that reputation is carried forward from arena to arena

If the owners did not like the TOUGH job Branch has do you think he would still be there after all it is an appointed job

Mr Fire Branch - not sure where you are from but I suggest maybe you are following the wrong team - your rant is off base and few agree with you - The Ohl is what it is enjoy it or leave

Not gonna lie, I stopped reading about half way through this thread. I'm paying 13$ a game this year and as far as i'm concerned its really good value. If you want the best officials go to an NHL game. Sure I'd like better reffing but how much more per game are you willing to spend in order to achieve this? I see it costing lots of money, not only do you have to pay the refs alot more to keep quality officials in the league, major money needs to be spent on training and then they move on to other leagues.

No ones forcing anyone to be a Gens fan, or a hockey fan.

I agree with HockeyBeats its alot of whining, and I find it funny that he's the one that gets jumped on when people trash every member of the generals orginization on here as well as each other.

I do appreciate that it's your opinion and that you've backed up your arguements after giving them much thought. But I pay for season tickets as well and many of the things you don't like I really do (music for example).

You can't make everyone happy, I really enjoy the OHL so I pay to see the OHL the way it is.

I'm not trying to be rude or ignorant (i feel my comments come off that way alot) I admire your passion, but just want to point out that some of us like cats some like dogs, some apples some oranges. I find many Gens fans like myself, and think that to say most Gens fans feel one way doesn't make it true.

Gens Camper wrote:We are way off topic - I cheer on the GENS as a homer we will always see it as getting the raw end of the deal from the refs - BUT so many of you don't understand where you get good experienced refs from when many leave every year.

Fire BRANCH - like that will solve what - nothing the game is faster today and the positioning of 4 officials is difficult all we see is the infraction BUT when they are reviewed - it is in slow motion

I don't think anyone is out to get anyone - it may seem that way - play
smarter and you will get the breaks - like we had how many penalties in Saginaw 2 - so don't tell me we can't play smarter - we did and were rewarded

As far as Fire Branch - rant - no 1 is perfect - how about your solutions not problems - this is a developmental league for players and officials.

As far as good referees -- answer me this -- why is the officiating in junior A outstanding while the OHL is terrible? I watch a lot of junior A. I was at a game Friday night. Without exception, the referees there explain calls, communicate with players, officiate the game with a calm head. And i find the same at minor midget games. The officiating is fine. In the OHL, it's atrocious. One of two things is happening:

- The OHL/Branch is giving directive to act like little Napoleons
- The best refs are choosing junior A for some reason

On point A, I give you Darcy Burchell, who wears 17 as an OHL ref. In the OHL, he overofficiated, refuses to explain calls to coaches, and generally has the game get out of control. Yet I see him in junior B and the AHL, where he's a good ref. My ref score has him averaging a 4 this year in the OHL, an 8 in junior B and the AHL. For the record, I grade on tolerance, communication, explaining calls, mannerism, and not overofficiating. I have given 10s on nights with half a dozen blown calls, I am not expecting perfection.

On the second point, OHL refs are paid a measly sum, I believe $200 per game. For that, they are expected to travel a wide area on a regular basis, and once per season, travel to the distant reaches of the league from their home base. It involves a lot of travel and time off work. A junior A ref might not travel more than an hour all year for the same pay. And in some cases, GTHL refs make more, and travel is almost nil.

It is clear we are failing our refs. And you say I should provide solutions, so here it is. Go to a one ref system and make them full time -- this is the USHL model (uness it's changed in the past couple of years). Fifteen refs would be plenty to go around the league. A salary of $70,000 would be more than acceptable for the twenty and thirty somethings a program like this would draw. That is $1.05 million per season -- roughly $50,000 per team. That's less than the scholarship program, and would be covered easily by 50 cents of each game ticket (teams could add a surcharge or certain teams such as London could take their share out of massive profits).

For those who say it wouldn't help or fans would still complain-- let me assure you, from first hand witness, the worst officiated USHL games would still be above average in the OHL.

As far as improvements to the league/for players, I have a few of those too. I will add more if I think of them, this is just off the top of my head:

- disciplinary committee of three people. Branch has abused his power by giving draconian suspensions. Labardo's is a new low for him. 
- eliminate mandatory hit to head penalty. It has simply led to players ducking into hits. Keep the option of a penalty, just don't make it mandatory. Supplemental discipline would also remain an option. 
- toughen standards for helmets - football-style chin straps, increased concussion protection. If M11 is only one that meets standards (it's the only one I know of with football-style chinstraps), it is guaranteed other manufacturers will follow suit as they would have to in order to stay competitive. 
- regulation on flexibility of glass. The GMC's glass absorbs much of the impact of hits. The Kitchener Aud does not, it's a solid wall. I will ask my father, an engineer for forty years, to write a description for this board if anyone desires a better explanation from a physics point of view. 
- minor penalty for turning your back into a hit, and no check from behind will be called in that situation. This is the only way to get rid of players putting themselves in vulnerable spots. True checks from behind should be called vigorously, with major penalties being routine (but not mandatory). 
- Eliminate aggressor penalty in fights. If players persist once linesmen have stepped in, an unsportsmanlike or misconduct has always been an option. 
- Change penalties such as slew foot, etc., back to majors instead of match. Keep match as it's always been -- an option to give on any attempt to injure but not mandatory on any one infraction. 
- Once a player signs a pro contract, he is eligible to play in the AHL. Major junior is the only place a player can be drafted and not be able to play in the AHL for two years, after a ruling involving Jeremy Morin this past fall. 
- Consider abolishing the draft and going to recruiting-based system. This keeps players from making a mockery of the draft by calling their own shots anyway. Under table payments could be a concern, but most feel that's what's happening already. 

Also...if nobody is out to get anyone...how does Labardo get five games for a head check when replays are absolutely conclusive no contact was made with the head?

After that call, nobody can convince me there isn't a very severe bias.

Dave Branch, I want our game back, the one you took from us when you took its integrity.

I am afraid there simply is not a conspiracy. There is poor officiating from time to time that impacts all teams. Almost fans from every OHL team have claimed a bias against their team over the years. It just is not so.

As to Branch while I do not agree with everything he does any attempt to remove head shots gets a lot of credit from me.

Players today are bigger and stronger than ever. The equipment is better and with cages from day one being careful with your stick is not the same as it was when I learned the game.

Whether or not Labardo deserved the suspension is not the issue (I don't think it was warranted and Gubranson's was too light). The point is does Branch's approach make the game safer. I think so.

Shots to the head have to be out of the game period. There are simply too many head injuries to warrant any other approach. Players will have to adapt to that.

We now know the long term consequences of shots to the head (google "reggie fleming brain damage") so no one should have to worry that playing hockey is going to lead to that. This issue is a live one in all contact sports and one that has potentially very serious implications for hockey.

The only one of firebranch's suggested improvements I agree deals with helmets. The rest are step backwards and given the current medical knowledge just plain wrong.

Kids have to be taught from a very young age that blindside hits, hits to head or from behind will result in a major penalty. It is the player's responsibility to not make those plays. I do agree that players also have to be taught to avoid placing themselves in a vulnerable position.

I would actually go further than Branch and make any blow to the head a 5 minute penalty.

I bring no special knowledge to my views. Only a fan of the Oshawa Generals since the Civic Auditorium opened its doors.

Firebranch wrote:The hit you refer to is likely Liambas on Fanelli. I believe attention must be paid to the fact that the ten-foot glass in Kitchener is completely inflexible. In addition, the shoulder pads and elbow pads must be looked at and changed as well. I've seen many more vicious hits without the results of that one.

I wasn't referring to one specific hit, I was referring to a significant number of hits in the past and the ones in the future that we need to avoid. I won't re-enter the Liambas debate here because that will shift the discussion to the intricacies of that one play while we are talking about the overall changes in the game at a more general level.

As far as good referees -- answer me this -- why is the officiating in junior A outstanding while the OHL is terrible? I watch a lot of junior A. I was at a game Friday night. Without exception, the referees there explain calls, communicate with players, officiate the game with a calm head. And i find the same at minor midget games. The officiating is fine. In the OHL, it's atrocious.

Two reasons for less explanation of calls: Firstly, you have a much higher paid attendance and you need to keep the game moving. The referee is not going to explain every single call, otherwise that can add as much as 20 minutes onto the time the game takes to play. He should explain particularly important and controversial calls, particularly at important points in the game such as late in the 3rd period or any call in overtime. Secondly, the OHL has more irrational coaches that will simply chastise and bully the ref regardless of the explanation even if a penalty is completely justified. Have you ever seen someone like Dave Cameron yell? I wouldn't want to subject myself to that. He's a great coach, don't get me wrong - but I'm not a particular fan of his temper both at the officials and even at his own players. We didn't really see that at the WJC though so maybe he's changed a bit from when I used to watch him regularly at St. Mike's.

Some of your points on ensuring tough safety standards on helmets and the physics of the impact of the boards and the glass are valid but you make it sound like an either/or scenario and that is the only thing we need to look at. There's no more effective deterrent than strong consequences. You said that "you can't legislate safety" but if you take away automatic penalties for a hit to the head, you will have more hits to the head. It's as simple as that. You can't legislate safety and some players will still choose to commit dangerous acts in the same way that you can set a curfew and some teenagers will still choose to ignore it. However, a lack of consequences means that everyone will be breaking a rule. The harsher the consequence, the more people will follow the rule. If the ticket for running a red light was only $5 and no demerit points, a lot more people would be doing it.

Yet despite the fact that you have a few valid points, few will take you seriously if they see how many times you keep repeating these same points on your personal crusade against Dave Branch both on the NOOF and now you're travelling show through team message boards. Lots of fans criticize Dave Branch but nobody goes to the ridiculous lengths that you do to discredit him and every single decision that is made by the OHL and its teams, even on details so mundane as to what songs are being played in the arenas. You have some sort of irrational desire to sabotage the OHL and to those who only frequent this message board that were surprised by the bluntness of my "whine, whine, whine" because I'm not usually that blunt, this is the reason why. This is the same person who once accused the audio people of the OHL as being in some sort of conspiracy to mellow the atmosphere by playing less rock music so players would be less inclined to hit somebody. What makes it funny is that he was actually serious about the accusation.

As far as refs go - If they called every penalty that would be to much - we don't like it , coaches find it hard to explain to players where the line is.

I just don't always like it when we get 1 power play and the other team gets 6 - BUT changing the commissioner won't change that even the NHL has some refs that are not as good as others. We all all have bad days at work - the OHL is the best in the world - not perfect - I love it

AHL - Junior A have great refs - if they did they would have moved up a level - now was last nights game in Saginaw great refs or teams played smarter - we had 2 penalties - so go figure

Every league in the CHL has the same rules - why change - do away with the draft - great idea - then about 6 stacked teams every year

Players going to the AHL at 18 - playing agaist 30 35 yr olds - they would get killed - dumb idea

I say - lets drop this needless thread - Those of you who want to stay on as GENS fans - ups and downs - I'm in it for the long haul over 40 yrs now - if you would rather go elsewhere you won't be missed

Hockeybeats -- I haven't even regularly read the NOOF in a long time. I simply find the attitudes too petty on there. I post in Niagara and Oshawa. Not the NOOF.

this is a terrific thread , a lot of good points , good references , lets face it guys , would you want the same prime minister running the country for 20 yrs , i dont think so , a change once and awhile brings a certain freshness to the group , and undermines the potential for an "old boys " club doing what they want , without regard to the desires of the fans that support the whole procees .
secondly you talk about protection , well perhaps these hard pads the players wear are more of a detriment than a positive , i know I sure wouldnt want an elbow to the head with the current pads . perhaps these players wouldnt be so cavalier about running around hammering guys if said player wasnt so well "armoured " , think about it , makes sense to me .
i've been lamenting for some time , that we dont see any more hard bobby baun type hits anymore , without a bloody suspension being doled out , and it seems every hard hit today is a "head shot " regardless of what body part makes contact , the guy goes down hard its a headshot and a game or more , its getting ridiculous ! is this hockey or tennis ?
the game is changing guys , and the change is being orchestrated by the guy in charge , and in my view misguided , unless your intention is to reduce this physical sport to nothing but a game of shinny or all star game type of competition . For me the game was much more exciting and entertaining in the 80's , yes there was more fighting , but how many guys really get hurt in a hockey fight , its rare , yet today , we see many more concussions , its a complex issue perhaps , but the way the league is going about trying to solve it isnt working , not for me anyhow .
perhaps the league needs a different look at things , equipment ? the glass ? the quality of the refs ? guidelines given to the refs ?.........it would be nice if an independent hockey group studies this with a more broader perspective , than just , we are getting rid of fighting and headshots , by giving out suspensions .
my personal view is that will never happen with branch calling the shots the way he does, in any case the status quo isnt working ! not for me anyhow , i;m tired of seeing players thrown out of the game , and suspensions at every turn .
what would you do if you were branch ?

if i had branch's job ......i would

1. eliminate the instigator penalty
2. reduce the robocop body protection of the players
3.make sure the glass around the league had some give
4. permit helmets off during fight
5.stiff penalties for stick infractions , cross checks from behind into the boards .
6.stiff penalties for real elbows to the head , not just hard body checks .
7 stiff penalties for running a player , from a distance .

i really believe that if the instigator rule was eliminated , , infractions # 5, 6, 7 , would be greatly reduced , and these are the ones that cause the greatest injury .
ok guys what are your thoughts !
oh and i would pay the refs real money , trust me these owners can afford it , remember theses players dont get paid , wonder why everyone wants to buy an ohl team , its a cash cow baby !

Firebranch wrote:Hockeybeats -- I haven't even regularly read the NOOF in a long time. I simply find the attitudes too petty on there. I post in Niagara and Oshawa. Not the NOOF.

attitudes too petty = the vast majority of people disagreed with you

Like here, you had some supporters initially until you persisted on your anti-Branch crusade to a ridiculous level. If you have something personal against him (former disgruntled employee, he dated your ex-girlfriend, whatever), just declare it because your crusade is not something an ordinary fan would pursue to this level, you must have something personal against him.

I quit reading the Firebranch novels ( posts ) Reminds me of that hockeynightinontario guy that wouldn't give up on going on about the 11am Mississauga game. Wonder if its the same guy different name?

So tell me with the instigator rule not even in anyone's wildest dreams why do some of the old time player's have serious brain issues later in life.

In the past concussions were not properly dealt with. Someone got their bell rung and went right back out.

While the size of players and the type of equipment are factor the fact remains that any blow to the head has a significant chance of injury.

The game has to change not to a non-contact sport but to one were there is an absolute prohibition on any contact with another player's head.

The instigator rule has very little to do with this. The game has always included legal blows to the head by a shoulder. That cannot continue.

If you leave your feet to make a hit it should be a penalty.

I do not want to emasculate the game but I do not want players exposed to long term consequences for playing the game either. Finding the balance is difficult but it must be done.

If the issue of headshots is not dealt with properly and the medical evidence continues to develop as it is now the game will be hurt because parents will be become reluctant to have their kids playing. The development the non-contact league in Toronto is a first glimpse of this.

I actually think that the pressure to deal with hits to the head may come from the NHL owners and their insurers. Premiums will go up due to the number of injuries that have the potential to end a career.

How do you think the owners feel about not having one of their marquee players available for the all-star game due to a hit to the head (and an unnecessary one at that). The NFL is trying to deal with the issue of head injuries (and in my view they have an even better documented problem).

As to Dave Branch is the state of the game really so bad. I'm not one who thinks the sky is falling. I have watched some really good games this season.
As I said in an earlier post I do not agree with everything he does but I have to say he does a better job than Colin Campbell handing out discipline.

hockeybeats wrote:

Firebranch wrote:Hockeybeats -- I haven't even regularly read the NOOF in a long time. I simply find the attitudes too petty on there. I post in Niagara and Oshawa. Not the NOOF.

attitudes too petty = the vast majority of people disagreed with you

Okay, so I just went over to the NOOF, primarily to see if the suspension was being discussed there. I read a thread on officiating where someone had an idea similar to mine for paying refs (it must be me because you've decided nobody else could obviously think like me, therefore, anyone on any message board who thinks like me must be me!). And I see one poster start criticizing another because he spelled the name of a ref wrong and somehow tried to tie it to officiating accuracy. That is the very definition of petty, and the reason I don't post on the NOOF. But I will gladly continue to take credit for the posts of those who think like me. LOL