No Hitting in Hockey?

Let's start by saying, the hit in an OHL game on October 30th, was a terrible result and we hope for nothing but a full recovery by Ben Fanelli.
The topic of high hits and head shots has been brought up many times over the years, but it takes a big incident for it to dominate the headlines again. Should changes be made? Maybe, but what changes can be made.
The problem with this particular situation is that the Fanelli hit was not a dirty hit. Liambis entered the zone with speed, stopped striding well before the hit and pounded Fanelli into the boards. There was no elbow, no charging and no elevation. Fanelli surveyed the situation while pursuing the puck and turned his body to reverse the puck, he was in a vulnerable position, but as long as the hit is within the rules, it is not the fault of the hitter. Another thing that is getting talked about is that he is a 16 year old kid. This is irrelevant, but was the biggest reason for the knee jerk reaction of many around the hockey and media world. It is not the responsibility of any player on the ice to know the age of every player on the ice and gauge his intensity and effort to coincide with that. If you put a jersey on in any league, you need to know where you are playing and the risk involved, you do not and should not get special treatment because you are younger. Again it was an unfortunate result, but within the rules. On the flip side Liambis was suspended for an entire year. Now he is getting punished for playing within the rules and his career may be over, all because none of the decision makers have the gall to do what is right and stand up for the game and the rules. It is easier to suspend a guy and make "most" people, who are reacting emotionally and irrationally, happy. Emotion needs to be taken out of the decision making process. It needs to be based on the rules and the rules do not say anywhere that punishment should be based on the result. It is the action that is punishable. In this case and many more the action is not even a penalty, let alone a suspension.
This was the biggest "case" of hard hits this year, but there have been others.
Why wasn't Jarome Iginla suspended for his trip of Edmonton's Sheldon Souray in game 3 of the season. Iginla used his stick to tap the skate of Souray to throw him off balance and he went crashing into the boards. That is a very dangerous thing to do and player have been doing it for years, usually on touch icing, but it happens often. Iginla probably did not mean to hurt Souray, but it happened on a play that is punishable with penalty and that is tripping. Which proves that tripping can be dangerous as well. Many players get hurt with stick infractions, be it tripping, slashing, high sticking, etc, but unless it is a vicious play like a slash to the head there is never a suspension. The point is why does there have to be a precedent set for hard hitting within the rules. A player gets suspended for a clean hit. Well actually the result of the hit. If suspensions for results are used than why does Iginla (as an example, he is not being single out) NOT get suspended for the result of a trip (which is a penalty) intentional or not. It seems there is a double standard and punishments are doled out to appease the emotional, knee-jerk reactions.

Big Z