IMPACT OF REGEHR HIT MAKES YOU WONDER: WHAT ABOUT PADDED WETSUITS?

If you begin or end your day to the sports highlights, then you probably saw the replay of Flames defenceman Robyn Regehr's hit on Aaron Downey that sent the Canadiens winger to the hospital with a severe concussion.

Regehr delivered what appeared to be, both live and on replays, a clean open-ice shoulder check. Regehr didn't leap to deliver the check; it wasn't a "high hit," no matter what any Habs fans try to claim. Still, Downey is hurt, who knows for how long, and maybe it could have been avoided. It's a little troubling when severe injuries result from clean checks.

My mind flashed back to the chapter on injuries in former pro Mark Moore's recent book Saving The Game. Plenty of hockey commentators have wondered about the equipment these guys wear, but Moore went one step farther. He writes of how of he once asked an equipment company rep why they didn't make a "padded wetsuit" similiar to that worn by fencers or speed-skiiers.

"His reply shocked me: he said they did. Their design staff came up with prototypes very similar to what I was dscribing, he said. But here was the reception they got: they were scoffed at and ridiculed by the sponsored pro players they showed them to, who said they looked absurd and vowed they would never wear them. And they were rejected by consumer parents in test-marketing, who statistically always preferred the biggest, bulkiest, most armourlike equipment offered, for their kids."

That's not really shocking that players would be reluctant to try something new. Hockey players, even compared to other athletes, are not especially noted for maverick behaviour. However, they set a bad example.

Why would parents who only want the best for their kids reject those "padded wetsuit" prototypes for their hockey-playing daughters and sons? Probably because they don't look like what the NHLers wear. So they buy a giant pair of Robocop shoulder pads for little Cooper or Sydney and then go have a chuckle out at how cute he or she looks "struggling to skate beneath heaps of restrictive equipment." (Moore's phrase, not mine.)

You can't blame the equipment makers who are in business to make money for not pushing a product that no one wants to buy, even if it is a good product. However, the NHLers don't have all the answers here and nor do the hockey parents. Maybe some influential media guys can talk about this, Canada Safety Council-types can promote it, and the equipment makers can take another stab at trying to get someone to put on the "padded wetsuit."

Why wouldn't people in the sport promote the use of equipment that could reduce the likelihood of injury, be easier to move in and provide more protection? Sadly, if you say "no reason at all," then you don't know the old-guard hockey types -- who aren't necessarily old -- that tend to push back hard whenever someone suggests the time-honoured practice might not be the only way.

That's another column, though. One wonders what's become of those "padded wetsuit" prototypes Moore was told about.

CASSIE CAMPBELL ON HNIC

There's not much to add this late in the game about Cassie Campbell's big debut as a fill-in colour commentator on last Saturday's Flames-Leafs telecast, other than to say it's strange what some media outlets assume about sports fans and the quote, unquote "overwhelmingly male" hockey audience.

That was the phrase used last night on Rogers Sportsnet by reporter Erin Paul, who was garnering opinions from the Toronto Star's Chris Zelkovich and and Ray Ferraro, who does colour for Edmonton Oilers games for the cable network. Both were fair and generally positive, which might indicate that there's really no controversy.

As for the "overwhelmingly male" comment, here's hoping that was just how the question has phrased and it doesn't reflect the general point of view among Paul's employers.

If you check the blogroll on the right side of this page, there's several hockey blogs written and edited by women, including Double D(ion), D.C. Sports Chick, Girls Don't Love Hockey, Hockey Will Tear Us Apart and The Universal Cynic. That's not a representative example, but it goes to show that the TV folks shouldn't assume that it's 90% guys watching, and that those guys all go for the lowest common denominator beer-and-babes equation that's used to sell sports.

Personally speaking, as a male in his late 20s who grew up alongside girls who competed in sports and were interested in sports, and who has had female bosses and supervisors at work, having Campbell do colour commentary just seems like a natural progression.

It is a big deal, but any controversy only seems to be a media creation. Not all sports fans are all beered-up knuckle-draggers. Not true. Some of us prefer our gin-and-tonic.

From here, it looks like the Hockey Night in Canada producers just exercised common sense. A freak snowstorm kept Harry Neale from driving to the game from his home in Buffalo (had it been a Leafs-Senators game, one would have suspected mass prayer on behalf of Sens fans), so everyone took one step to the left.

Besides, Hockey Night in Canada, and sports broadcasting in Canada in general, could stand to move from being bastions of WASPy white males (this coming from someone who is one) and
be more reflective of today's Canada.

In fact, right before the Campbell segment, Sportsnet anchor Mike Toth made some comment about how "we need to get a ring card girl in here." Thanks for showing why we need more diversity, Mike.

That's all for now. Send your thoughts to neatesager@yahoo.ca.