The National Hockey League has announced changes to their concussion protocol regarding the use of concussion spotters. Last season, the NHL introduced concussion spotters into their protocol by stationing spotters at every single NHL game to watch the games live with access to live feeds with replay capabilities.
The NHL’s system of concussion spotters had some glaring flaws from the start, such as the spotters not needing any medical training or expertise to identify concussions. Although spotters were required to study materials provided by the NHL, the spotters still have to identify visible symptoms of a concussion. The NFL’s spotters on the other hand, require athletic training experience and a certification by the National Athletic Trainers’ Association. So while Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly and NHL are correct in saying the spotters “aren’t evaluating the players or diagnosing whether or not they have a concussion,” because “that’s the job of the doctors and trainers,” having some sort of experience should be valued in detecting something as important as concussions.
Other issues with the policy stems from the teams employing the spotters, rather than mandating neutral, league-employed spotters like the NFL. One possible reason the NHL could have decided to utilize team-employed spotters was that the hiring of ineffective spotters would put the hiring team at fault, relieving the league of some liability. That said, there are league-employed spotters available for teams that prefer not to use a home arena’s spotters. Those league-designated spotters have to log all incidents that include one visible symptom of a concussion, even when the player receives the necessary medical attention, and submit these reports to the NHL.
Team-employed spotters cause some skepticism because they may not be incentivized to treat concussions with as much caution, turning a blind eye towards concussed players. Additionally, team-employed spotters do not have to submit any report to the team or league so the NHL will have no way of knowing the effectiveness of the spotters. This implementation, while seemingly well intentioned, furthers questions surrounding the NHL’s overall attitude towards concussions.
Get The Latest NHL Tech News In Your Inbox!
In response to these criticisms, the NHL made changes to their concussion spotter policy. Starting this season, concussion spotters will monitor NHL games via television. There will be four “Central Spotters,” that are independent trainers, with no affiliation with an NHL team, that will alert the team if a player needs to leave a game based on visible signs of a concussion.
According to Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly, “It’s a pretty major revamp from what it was last year. We’re going to have both those (remote and on-site) spotters, plus you have the clubs’ medical staffs. We’re just building in reinforcements, really, to make the system work better.”
Also added is that these spotters will have the authority to remove players from the game to undergo the concussion testing. Previously, the spotters reported to the trainers and, if the player or trainer felt it necessary, the player would leave. This change resembles the NFL’s “Julian Edelman Rule,” which allows the concussion spotter to remove potentially concussed players from a game. “Players get removed for visible signs, and that’ll be mandatory removal and that’ll be done at the league level,” Daly explained.
Thus far, when needed, the NHL’s newly renovated protocol appears to have been effective. During the World Cup of Hockey, Team Canada’s Brad Marchand collided with Marian Hossa. A central spotter contacted Team Canada’s trainers to remove Marchand from the game for further evaluation. Logan Couture also left a preliminary game against the United States after a hit from T.J. Oshie to undergo the concussion protocol. Both players were cleared to return to the game after undergoing testing.
Couture hurt pic.twitter.com/CpvEYhPbZL
— Stephanie (@myregularface) September 10, 2016
Team Canada and Toronto Maple Leafs coach Mike Babcock noted how the updated protocol protects players. This is particularly noteworthy given that last season Babcock said that players could play as long as they felt up to it—which has been an issue in the past for players. “We’ve just got to smarten up and look straight ahead and not show that we have any kind of reaction (when a player is removed) even when we think it’s not worth it,” he said. “What we’re trying to do, and player safety, is look after the players. So it’s imperative we handle that in the right way. Do I think sometimes it’s needless and foolish? One hundred per cent. But I think with all rules there’s an intent to the rule and sometimes it probably doesn’t work out the way you want it, but that’s life.”
NHL concussion spotter pulled Brad Marchand off the ice last night. Was allowed to return after clearing tests
— Elliotte Friedman (@FriedgeHNIC) September 22, 2016
It is likely that the recent attention brought to the NHL’s concussion management facilitated the change, along with backlash from the Dennis Wideman situation. Additionally, the failings of the NFL’s concussion policy during the first game of the NFL season, when the Carolina Panthers faced off against the Denver Broncos, highlighted concussion policies––specifically concussion spotters.
Cam Newton, quarterback for the Carolina Panthers, took a hard hit to the head against the Broncos during Week 1 of the NFL season. The NFL said that the protocol was adhered to after review the next day, concluding “there were no indications of a concussion that would require further evaluation and the removal of the player from the game.” While it turned out that the Panthers followed the protocol, it still brought unwanted attention to the hits to the head that players are facing and the appearance of a lack of due diligence to potentially concussed players.
The NFL’s statement continued, “During stoppage in play while on-field officials were in the process of administering penalties, the unaffiliated neurotrauma consultant and team physician requested video from the spotters and reviewed the play. They concluded there were no indications of a concussion that would require further evaluation and the removal of the player from the game.”
This incident occurred after the NFL announced changes in their concussion protocol for this season. The NFL’s policy changed by adding procedures to discipline teams that violate the protocol. The NFL and NFLPA will have authority over the disciplinary action, with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell having the ultimate authority over penalties for violating the protocol.
Similarly, the NHL may have been inspired to make changes to its concussion protocol by the recent Dennis Wideman incident. When Calgary Flames’ Dennis Wideman cross-checked NHL linesman Don Henderson, it was directly after Wideman was checked into the boards by the Nashville Predators’ Miikka Salomaki, which ended up concussing Wideman. Later on, when asked about his cross-check to Henderson, Wideman attributed his actions to a concussion bringing perhaps unwanted attention towards the state of the NHL’s concussion protocols.
When Wideman was suspended by the NHL for twenty games he appealed, first to Commissioner Bettman and then to an arbitrator. At the same time, the NHLPA consulted neurologists. Although admitting to a concussion after the fact, Wideman was not seen by a neurologist at the time of the injury, so the NHLPA set up an examination via FaceTime. Those neurologists supported the position that Wideman’s actions were due to his concussed state. The arbitrator, James Oldham, reduced Wideman’s suspension to ten games. In response, the NHL sued the NHLPA to overturn the arbitrator’s decision.
The NHL opposed Wideman’s concussion defense. No trainers’ notes mentioned any concussion symptoms. Instead, those notes cleared Wideman after he returned to the bench. So, if the arbitrator’s decision stood, the league worried it could set a precedent for players being able to avoid discipline for violent actions due to concussions.
Unfortunately, Commissioner Gary Bettman’s decision to uphold Wideman’s suspension did not focus enough on the failures of the league’s concussion policy. The onus may have been on Wideman to leave, but most players are not willing to leave a game even if they are injured. It begs the question why a potentially concussed player would be deemed to be in the right state of mind to decide whether or not he is healthy enough to stay in the game. Why should the burden be on a player to make these decisions at all? Isn’t the point of the concussion protocol to place the responsibility onto the teams and trainers?
As it turned out, Wideman was approached to be removed from the game due to his concussion symptoms. The concussion spotter stationed at the arena told a trainer of his visible symptoms, and when the trainer asked Wideman to leave the game for testing, he declined. Wideman continued to play the rest of the game with a concussion rather than being forced to leave for exhibiting symptoms. It was not until later on that Wideman admitted to suffering from a concussion.
In his decision to uphold the suspension, Bettman wrote: “I note that Mr. Wideman gave a postgame interview in which he essentially denied having been ‘woozy.’ Mr. Wideman testified at the hearing that he had been instructed to give a misleading answer if asked about his condition and that he followed that instruction. During the hearing, the NHLPA introduced evidence that the Calgary concussion spotter log shows a notation of ‘motor incoordination/balance’ problems and that the Player should have been removed from the game and evaluated pursuant to the NHL-NHLPA concussion protocol. I make no finding at this time on whether the Club violated the concussion protocol, a question that need not be decided here and that I reserve for another day.”
In that statement, Bettman essentially belittled the significance of a concussion and the league’s concussion protocol. The entire situation is certainly complicated, but having this response from Bettman only furthers the belief that the NHL is not doing enough to minimize and manage concussions. Bettman wrote that decision less than a year ago; how could the Commissioner make the protocol seem so insignificant and in such a short time make it seem like a priority again? It seems more like compensation for the mishandling of the Wideman situation than an actual desire to improve concussion management.
Ultimately, any changes to improve the concussion protocol should be welcomed because it shows a much-needed effort to protect players from the potentially devastating effects of concussions. However, the intentions of the NHL are questionable, as are their efforts––will the NHL continue to diminish their own policies or will it be treated with the importance it merits? Unfortunately, history has shown that, as the NHL advances in their concussion management, they tend to regress, potentially rendering these changes that should be momentous to instead be inconsequential.