Checking In Womens Hockey

[siouxkid12]

On ‎4‎/‎13‎/‎2017 at 0:23 AM, Old Time Hockey said:

Dumbest thread ever.  Comments from a bunch of clowns that never played hockey thinking checking would better women's hockey.  I used to post on here a lot, but the constant idiocy drove me away.  I came back to see what the village idiots were saying and this is what I find.  Glad to see most of you agreeing with gfhockey on this subject.  

 

By the way, how do you explain the ever exciting football program losing 2.3 million?  

What a joke!

Well you weren't missed.

[Vegas_Sioux]

On 4/13/2017 at 5:10 PM, Wildfan said:

Wasn't the deficit not including sponsorships and alumni donations? If I had to guess more than 99% of the REA sponsorships would be there with or without WIH. FB draws their own, and have a huge alumni base. The loss of FB donors would in my opinion hurt alot more than WIH donors. The two most successful alumni for WIH had to go and make a big fuss to get more pay and benefits of a full time position to play one week a year for their country when alot of people would love to play for their country for free (if there would not have been a big backlash at these girls asked to play if boycot im sure many would've taken the offer). 

And they posed for a skin issue of a publication available at the local high school library well complaining about unequal pay. 

[ArchyAlum11]

I can't think of any logical reason why checking isn't allowed in women hockey, seeing as how they wear "mostly" the same padding and the rules are otherwise the same. While I don't think it would ever be as popular as men's hockey, just due to the fact that the level of play in men's hockey is faster, at least it would be a similar game,  and not what it is right now. A very high-level game of squirt hockey.