Women's hockey rules

What a game, what a great fight! I'm talking of course about the semi-final between Sweden and USA this evening in the olympic games in Turin. The game had it all. Tension, great goals, over time, penelty shoot out and spirit... ohh the spirit. It was the spirit that won the game for Sweden. They wanted the victory more than Team USA did.

But, it's not this fenomenal success of the swedish team that makes me write this post, even though it sure deserves all the words in the world. I'm actually writing this because I'm upset. I can't understand why the rules in women's hockey are what they are. Have they been written by men or women? Why shouldn't women's hockey be as hard and tough as men's hockey? In women's hockey NO body check is allowed. I can't understand that. Are women that more frail than men? It's not men they meet in the rink, it's other women. This rule damages the game more than it helps it. It lessens it's attractiveness and it's flow. You can see that the women really wants to follow through with their checking, and when they do they're instantly shown to the penelty box, no matter how puny the body-check was. The need for visors is obvious in hockey and it's the men who are stupid enough not to wear them.

There is only one reason I can find why the rules in woman's hockey are what they are. What I'm getting at is that maybe there isn't enough women players in a town or country, except in Canada and perhaps the US, to get a full team with strong and big players. Therefore there is a great difference between the players when it comes to sizes. If a big (1.80 m) and strong player body checks a small (1.60 m) and not so strong player the result could be very ugly.

But on the other hand, those differences could also apply to men's hockey. So what is the reason behind this gentler version of hockey?


Other blogs on the game and on the rules:

gunnerswebblog.blogspot.com
gina1978
mirtle.blogspot.com