protective netting

[DamStrait]

I myself have seen countless games through protective netting. Does it take a brief period of adjustment? Yes. For maybe a period. Do you notice it after that? No.

NOTICE: Canuck has rendered his opinion, which shall hereafter be deemed fact. Those of differing opinions are therefore wrong. Perhaps someday, some of the rest of us can become a superior beings so that our opinions may become fact too. (Lose the 'tude dude)

[Canuck]

You said it yourself; I stated my opinion. I don't recall saying anything that implies my opinion is gospel.

Now, if you'll go back and re-read my post, you'll see that my problem lies not with people who don't like watching a game through the netting. My problem lies with people who are complaining before they even experience it.

Sorry for not toeing the "bitch-about-everything company line" on this one.

[DamStrait]

I don't recall saying anything that implies my opinion is gospel.

Now, if you'll go back and re-read my post, you'll see that my problem lies not with people who don't like watching a game through the netting. My problem lies with people who are complaining before they even experience it.

Well, let's see...

Canuck Posted on Sep 13 2004, 09:43 AM

Some of you guys are unbelievable. Nevermind this change came as the result of the death of a child.

Sounds to me like you're pretty much cloaking yourself in righteousness, but as an inferior being, what the heck do I know?

I'm not trying to start a pissing match here. I was just trying to point out that your message stood a good chance of being lost in the way it was delivered.

FWIW, I have seen games behind the netting and I don't like it. My seats in the REA will likely not be affected, for which I am glad. If I ever change seats, I will avoid being behind netting. If my seats were affected, and REA didn't give me an option to switching to similar quality unobstructed seats, or try to find those season ticket holders that would prefer the safety of obstructed seats to arrange swaps, I would definitely be non-plussed, but I don't know that I'd pitch a fit or anything. I can certainly understand those that are displeased at now having seats obstructed by netting. When I go to NHL games I make a special effort to get seats that are not behind the netting. And yes, when I go to a baseball game, I don't get seats behind home plate because of the netting.

BTW, I believe that the little girl that was killed also had a previously undectected congenital neck defect that exacerbated the incident. Under those circumstances, I think it's perfectly reasonable to consider protective netting a possible overreaction.

And I respect your right to hold a differing opinion.

[airmail]

How far does it extend? Does it go all the way to the blue lines?

Anyone?

[Godsmack]

I think the rush to require netting was a bit hasty on the part of the NHL. Let's consider the fact of how many games have been played (NHL, college, highschool, etc.) over the past 60 or 70 years in rinks with no netting and number of deaths that resulted. I think that statistically speaking the chances of getting killed by a flying puck are very slim. More people have died being struck by lightening than by pucks. I could be wrong but, I think this was the first death as a result of a puck leaving the playing area. Can anyone verify that? My condolences to the family of the little girl who was killed at the Bluejackets game but I think that the powers-that-be ought to have looked into all aspects of the issue before rushing out and putting up those nets in the NHL rinks. I've paid good money for Avalanche tickets and I don't like the netting-it's distracting. I bet that the rest of the WCHA will follow suit as they don't want the liability. In today's high tech age, you'd think that a less obstructive netting could be invented which would have less impact on the spectators' view of the play.

[Canuck]

Sounds to me like you're pretty much cloaking yourself in righteousness, but as an inferior being, what the heck do I know?

Um, ok.

Anyways, while I do share in the sentiment that far too many fans don't pay the proper attention to the game while sitting in these "danger areas," in my opinion that still does not overide the fact that this safety precaution is needed. The game has become so fast, particularly the velocity with which the puck travels, that even the most focused fan is in danger of being struck by a puck. To me, personal safety (for everyone) is more important than a minor inconvenience (for some).

Instead of continuing to argue semantics, how about those of us in favor of the netting call it a "necessity" and those of us against it call it a "necessary evil?"

The bottom line is, these nets are being installed for two reasons: 1) to protect the safety of the paying customer and 2) to protect the team/organization from any kind of liability lawsuit.

In the grand scheme of things, in my opinion, this should not warrant significant criticsm. Obviously we'd all prefer to not have to look through netting to watch a hockey game. Obviously a best-case scenario would not have netting obstructing anyone's view, nor would a best-case scenario have anybody being injured by an errant puck. But since this is simply not realistic, we have to make do.

Which brings me back to my original point (which, I might add, was never aimed at people like DamStrait); don't complain about it if you have yet to watch through it. DamStrait has and doesn't like it. I have and don't mind it. We have a right to complain about it or defend it.

But if you complain without trying it, well, then you're bitching just to bitch, which is why I made the "complaint department" crack in my original post.

[choyt3]

[Canuck]

And for the record, the only thing I've ever been "cloaked" in is buffalo wing sauce.

Oh, and once, in college, I woke up cloaked in my own vomit.

[jloos]

This would mean netting would be in front of 103 - 106, and 111 - 114. That's according to this.

That is how it looked for the WJ evaluation camp. I understand some peoples concerns about the netting. I sat in Schmiddoggydog's seat and his view is very obstructed by the net. I imagine it would be something you would get used to, but for the $$ spent on season tickets you shouldn't have an obstructed view.

The puck hitting the girl didn't actually kill her - this is from the Columbus paper. I believe she also had a pre-existing condition - her artery in her neck was already damaged.

The puck struck her in the forehead, causing a skull fracture and some bruising of the brain in the area," Lewis said. "But that wasn't what led to her death. It was the snapping back of the head and the damage to that artery.

Lewis said he consulted with other pathologists on the rarity of the injury. He said that a fellow pathologist had not encountered a similar injury and death in more than 25 years as a doctor

While it was tragic, it is not like people are constantly getting picked off by pucks. You cannot protect people from everything. Personally I don't pay 100% attention at all times during a hockey game. However if I'm sitting in a seat behind the net, I don't turn away from the play when it is going on. If I'm watching warmups I for sure keep my eyes on the ice all the time.

That said I understand the arena's putting up the net to minimize their liability. Likely they are getting a fat deduction in their insurance premiums. Although suing sports teams for getting hit by a ball/puck is nearly impossible. Everything in life has inherent dangers. It is hard to argue a rink is negligent because a hockey put flew into the stands.

BTW excellent usage of the word cloak Canuck.

[Hopper]

I've played bubble hockey for years, and never had a puck leave the game. Perhaps the REA could install a huge bubble over the entire arena. Of course, this would cut down on souvenirs for the kids a bit.....

[ethanm]

My brother and I were sitting along the goal line a 5-6 rows up during warmups for a Sioux-Badger game. We were watching the Sioux at the other end of the ice. He just got finished making a comment about wanting to get a puck when he got drilled in the knee from a puck that a Wisconsin player shot that must have climbed over the end boards. The puck ended up landing about 20 feet away where some kid picked it up. Being the caring brother that I am, I told him he just got his wish for wanting a puck. Having the protective netting back then would have saved him from a sore knee.

[Smoggy]

Instead of continuing to argue semantics, how about those of us in favor of the netting call it a "necessity" and those of us against it call it a "necessary evil?"

I don't agree with the nets, and I don't think are a "necessary evil" either. I believe that the girl that was hit was the only death that the NHL has experienced because of a flying puck. My grandma has had endzone seats for decades and I've gone to a lot of games and never even seen someone draw blood from being hit with a puck. I think the high plexi-glass has done a good job of keeping the powerful slapshots out of the fans laps.

[SiouxTupa]

Instead of continuing to argue semantics, how about those of us in favor of the netting call it a "necessity" and those of us against it call it a "necessary evil?"

In the grand scheme of things, in my opinion, this should not warrant significant criticsm. Obviously we'd all prefer to not have to look through netting to watch a hockey game.  Obviously a best-case scenario would not have netting obstructing anyone's view, nor would a best-case scenario have anybody being injured by an errant puck. But since this is simply not realistic, we have to make do.

Wow, been talking to John Kerry lately?

It's just a discussion. There is no need to get all uppity. The fact is that the netting will be there whether we like it or not, either we get used to it, or we get other seats.

I've been very fortunate to have only one prior game seen through the netting. It's annoying, but you get used to it....which seems to be the consensus opinion.

Looking forward to getting tickets this weekend, and to see us beat up on Manitoba in a couple weeks.

[schmidtdoggydog]

I've played bubble hockey for years, and never had a puck leave the game. Perhaps the REA could install a huge bubble over the entire arena. Of course, this would cut down on souvenirs for the kids a bit.....

Bubble hockey rules!!!

Btw, protective netting on the ends is just the beginning. It won't be long before some fan sitting on the side somewhere gets plucked with a puck and suffers a serious injury and then more netting will be installed (note to the extremely sensitive, I am not making light of injuries or injured fans). Somewhere down the line, hockey will likely be played in a bubble, but instead of a plastic/plexi "dome" there will be netting running from the players' benches around to the penalty boxes. It seems silly, but it is certainly forseeable.

[jloos]

Bubble hockey rules!!!

Btw, protective netting on the ends is just the beginning. It won't be long before some fan sitting on the side somewhere gets plucked with a puck and suffers a serious injury and then more netting will be installed (note to the extremely sensitive, I am not making light of injuries or injured fans). Somewhere down the line, hockey will likely be played in a bubble, but instead of a plastic/plexi "dome" there will be netting running from the players' benches around to the penalty boxes. It seems silly, but it is certainly forseeable.

Have you been in the new rink in SW Fargo? They have protective netting around the entire rinks! It makes me sick trying to watch games in those rinks, the netting is white, which actually is worse than black. It reminds me of watching a steel cage death match. Maybe youth hockey plans to start fighting to the death instead of having overtime?

[UNDProud]

My seats are directly behind the goal but protected by the glass. I have seen people get hit that are WERE watching the game. When that puck comes flying the normal person can not react that fast. To say if you get hit you are not paying attention is not at all accurate. If this will protect even one person from getting hurt, then it is worth it. I think that REA is doing the responsible thing. Good for them.