Race and Fighting in Hockey - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

silent_jay · 02-23-2009, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Does Race Allow the NHL to Get Away with All That Fighting?

The short answer is yes. Fighting is up 24 percent this year in the NHL, and while this amazes no one, maybe it should.

After all, there shouldn’t be any fighting in hockey and there already was plenty of fighting in the NHL before this year.

The only reason that hockey gets away with all of this goon-like behavior is because 99 percent of the league is made up of white players.

If hockey were predominately played by blacks there would be so much criticism and racial slurs thrown at the athletes that there would be a call to ban the sport.

NBA Commissioner David Stern is very careful to keep fighting and dirty play out of the NBA and is so concerned about image that the players have a dress code when showing up for a game.

As you know, the NBA is over 80 percent black while the majority of the fans are white. I do not think that Stern is being biased against the black players; it is just that, unfairly, society is less forgiving of blacks' unruly behavior than whites.

Hence, Stern, is wisely just protecting his product. Unlike NHL commissioner Gary Bettman, Stern, along with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell are actually good commissioners because they have the guts to makes changes that are good for their respective sports.

MLB, Soccer, and the NFL also keep fighting out of their sports. And football is a more inherently violent sport than hockey; hence, hockey has no excuse for all that barbaric, uncontrolled fighting.

Amazingly, some sports commentators feel differently. Recently on his ESPN show (“Rome is Burning”), Jim Rome (who usually has more intelligent opinions) argued that fighting makes hockey safer, and hence, was necessary.

He argues that the enforcers are necessary to prevent sticking, tripping, and checking from behind by the team’s goons against the star, skilled players. While this may seem like a logical argument on its service, this is shortsighted and moronic thinking.

First of all, the NFL is proof positive that this argument is logically flawed and just plain silly. Given how much he influences the outcome of a game, is there any player is sports that is more important to protect than the quarterback in the NFL?

Again, the short answer is no, and the NFL protects the quarterback (along with the wide receivers and running backs) by having rules AND enforcing them. And the NFL does it big time -- no wimpy two- or five-minute penalties, but with large fines and suspensions.

The NFL functions better than the NHL without any goons and enforcers, and is, as mentioned, a more inherently violent sport than hockey. Secondly, international, Olympic, collegiate, and pre-1970 NHL hockey (to a lesser degree) all manage(d) to get along just fine without all that fighting.

A commentator on ESPN’s “Around the Horn” said that you cannot keep fighting out of hockey because they carry sticks. This is another silly argument; after all, sticks are rarely used in a violent way in the NHL.

And when they are used in the NHL, Bettman actually gives the players lengthy suspensions to deter them from using them in the future. In addition, some District Attorney’s offices have filed criminal charges against some of these animals.

Plus, lacrosse, which last year was the fastest growing sport in the country, uses sticks and there is ZERO fighting in lacrosse. Imagine that!

Sorry, this is just another lame excuse by commentators and fans that like fighting in the NHL and will not admit the real reason that it exists: they enjoy it. Why? I do not know.

If the NHL gave more severe penalties for sticking, tripping, cheap shot checking, and most of all, fighting, it would all go away (OK, almost all of it).

And the sport would be more exciting because the more talented players would get to showcase their breath taking stick-handling skills (for example) more often. (As a side note, to help in this area, the NHL should make the rinks bigger like in International and Olympic hockey.)

Fighting is obviously in the NHL because the NHL and some of their bloodthirsty fans want it in the sport...not because it needs it to be in order to be a better and more exciting sport.

The NHL is afraid it will lose some of their fan base if they take out the fighting and other goon-like behavior. While this maybe true, they will also gain some fans if they clean up the sport and make it more athletically appeasing to the eye (i.e., exciting to non-blood-thirsty fans).

If you want fighting, then go to a boxing or UFC bout. Or better yet, go to a moronic WWE bout where you will find fans with a similar mentality as yourself.

The shortsighted Bettman and the rest of the NHL do not have the guts to take fighting out of the NHL and make it a better and more exciting sport.

And the reasons they get away with this is because some their fans have a barbaric mentality and because 99% of their players are white. Sad, but undeniably true...and we call ourselves an advance society and species.

This may be one of the most absurd articles I've ever read about fighting in hockey. I've never seen anyone in their right mind try to make the connection between race and fighting. Apparently this guy's never heard of Donald Brashear, Georges Laraque, or Peter Worrell.

To say that there is no fighting in Lacrosse is an outright lie, I've watched NLL games and trust me, they fight, probably more than hockey, if not more then on par. Trying to compare the violent nature of football and hockey is like apples and oranges, two totally different sports.

I don't buy most of the arguments people use to try and ban fighting in hockey. They say concussions, well that little rubber puck packs one hell of a wallop when you take it in the face, or then there's the headhunters who dish out head shots like they're candy.

I understand a young man died last month in Whitby, and everyone has a hard-on to ban fighting again, and I feel bad for his family, but he knew what could happen when he dropped the gloves. Helmets come off in fights, that was the first thing I always popped off my opponent, unless we both agreed to remove our own helmets and have at it that way. I knew once my helmet came off, my head could meet the ice in a not so friendly manner, I knew the risks, didn't stop me though.

When I was 17 I fought a guy who smacked my head off the ice after I missed him with a punch, did I get a concussion? Sure did. It wasn't the only one, I lost track of how many concussions I had in my 20 years of playing hockey. The majority of them came from hits though, not fights, and yes I did fight a lot in every league I played in.

Quote:

........pre-1970 NHL hockey (to a lesser degree) all manage(d) to get along just fine without all that fighting.

Now I didn't play hockey pre-1970, I was only born in 77, but I sure have watched my fair share of games from the good old days of hockey, and I don't know what this guy is smoking to say they didn't fight much back then, maybe we could bring back all the stick swinging that used to go on and show him fighting in hockey really isn't so bad after all.

Just found another article where an 'expert', guess being an associate dean make people experts on fighting in hockey these days, he seems to think it may be time for Canadian law to get involved so fighting is illegal and punishable. All I can say is these 'experts' should go back to their cozy little classrooms and labs and keep their mouths shut if they don't know what they're on about.

Quote:

TORONTO — Violence in hockey is a public health issue that should not be left to hockey leagues to police themselves, said Kevin Wamsley, associate dean of health sciences at the University of Western Ontario.

The National Hockey League has been “hesitant” to address the issue of fighting and it may be time for politicians to take charge, said Wamsley, who will participate on Tuesday at a symposium on violence in hockey in London, Ont.

“We permit fighting, we celebrate it, we endorse it but people are being hurt badly on a consistent basis,” he said. “It may be time for Canadian law to become involved and create a legal environment that makes fighting in hockey illegal and punishable.”

Dr. Graham Pollett, medical officer of health for Middlesex-London Health Unit said the symposium will bring together coaches, players and parents to raise awareness and explore the “culture of violence” in hockey.

“There are many people who think that fighting is just part of the game,” said Pollett, host of the symposium. “This is just a way of thinking that needs to be challenged.

“The game sells itself without fighting. Its speed, its competitiveness — those are the things we all love about the game and would exist without fighting,” he said.

Removing fighting from hockey is not an “attack on the game” but will require a cultural shift, he added.

Fighting in hockey has long been debated and was most recently back in the spotlight following the death of 21-year-old Don Sanderson, a senior men’s player with the Whitby Dunlops who died after hitting his head on the ice during a fight.

In the wake of Sanderson’s death the Ontario Hockey League announced new rules that would see players suspended for removing their chinstraps or helmets before or during an altercation.

Bryan Lewis, former director of officiating for the NHL said hockey rules have changed over the years to clamp down on fighting but eliminating it is unrealistic.

“They could ban it tomorrow,” he said. “But we would be fooling ourselves if we think it is going to stop.”

He said officials need to “go after” habitual offenders and would like to see rules written that would better protect players on the ice.

“I think there has to be stronger enforcement and rules written saying the moment a helmet is off that is the signal that this must stop,” he said. “You can’t play on the ice without your helmet so why should you be allowed to fight when you are still at peril?”

Dave Simpson, former captain of the London Knights said fighting is a “silly side show” that slows down the game.

It is not tolerated in any other major sport he said noting “we don’t call a 350 pound NFL linebacker a wussy because he can’t fight.”

“The media still puts a tussle on every night and says who won instead of treating it for what it is which is a grown man pulling another grown man’s underwear,” he said.

What do the hockey fans of TFP think, is race why the NHL gets away with fighting? Should fighting be banned at all levels? If it should be banned, first off, how? Suspensions, fines, criminal charges? My opinion on the subject is pretty clear, I've fought in hockey, never got hurt in a hockey fight aside from a black eye or a cut, which to me isn't hurt. Discuss.

Plan9 · 02-23-2009, 08:20 PM

I'm a hockey fan.

I used to go to college hockey games because there was a chance for a fight and nobody took it serious.

It's great. It's a sport with temper tantrums where you can be a ice-skating badass with a war club.

Get pissed? Easy to solve... just ditch the gloves, yank a shirt up, and start whalin' on some dude.

silent_jay · 02-23-2009, 08:45 PM

The shirt over the head is actually a penalty now, it's a game misconduct, because you're supposed to have your tie down secured.
Personally, I hate tie downs. They keep the jersey down, but it still comes up enough to be annoying. I remember seeing Ken Baumgartner take off his jersey and shoulder pads before a fight, Rob Ray did the same thing, I tried that once, guy I was fighting wasn't too sure what to do, he had nothing to grab on to, that was a fun fight.

djtestudo · 02-23-2009, 09:09 PM

The difference between hockey and basketball has to do more with the legality of all contact.

Basketball was created specifically as a non-contact sport; that's why there are so many fouls called. Hockey, on the other hand, just by the nature of guys moving very fast on a slick, hard-to-maneuver surface, allows contact up to a certain point.

The additional level of protection afforded in basketball, I believe, keeps much of the potential violence from escalating, whereas there isn't really a place to go in hockey except fighting.

Over time, hockey fans have just got used to the fighting as part of the game, while in basketball it was never allowed to get to that point.

Now, that doesn't mean that there isn't a racist element, but I don't think that's the main reason that explains the disparity.

Willravel · 02-23-2009, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

This may be one of the most absurd articles I've ever read about fighting in hockey. I've never seen anyone in their right mind try to make the connection between race and fighting. Apparently this guy's never heard of Donald Brashear, Georges Laraque, or Peter Worrell.

Hallelujah. This author knows even less about race than he does about hockey.

As much as people want to deny it, there is a legitimate place in hockey for fighting. Can it be excessive? Yes. Can it be fake? Yes. Still, it's a part of the experience, and when it's real and in the game, it creates part of what hockey is. Fighting is a part of hockey.

highthief · 02-24-2009, 03:43 AM

I'd say race has nothing to do with it - however, people being blindly tied to tradition does have a lot to do with it (i.e., "fighting is good for hockey because when I was growing up and when Granddad was growing up we used to throw down all the time").

However, I think fighting should go from hockey. There are sports every bit as rough and competetive that manage to largely do without it (American football, rugby, etc) without diminishing the passion or edge.

Leto · 02-24-2009, 09:05 AM

Stupid article. No fighting in pre 1970 nhl hockey? That's nuts. Why do they think there is an all star game anyways? No idea of the history of the game.

I don't mind fighting in Hockey. I prefer a good hit to a brawl, but the game is so multidimensional and the physicallity of it all just lends itself to good entertainment.

silent_jay · 02-24-2009, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by highthief

I'd say race has nothing to do with it - however, people being blindly tied to tradition does have a lot to do with it (i.e., "fighting is good for hockey because when I was growing up and when Granddad was growing up we used to throw down all the time").

However, I think fighting should go from hockey. There are sports every bit as rough and competetive that manage to largely do without it (American football, rugby, etc) without diminishing the passion or edge.

It may not diminish the passion or the edge(personally I think the edge would be gone), but it sure would be the end of the NHL as most people know it. It's the pussification of the game as Millbury put it, or the Pierre McGuireification of the game as he also said. Banning fighting essentially turns it into the European game, of diving, and stick work, and whining to the referee that so and so stuck someone .

We'd have a bunch of Jarko Ruttu's or Ulf Samuelson's running around like chickens with their heads cut off, because they could get away with their type of play(chickenshit) with no fear of retribution. Remember the knee job Ulfy gave Cam, then pulled the turtle when it was time to face the man who's career he tried to end?

Also how do you get fighting out of hockey? Fines? These players make millions, a few grand in fines won't stop them from dropping the gloves. Make it against the law and charge them criminally? Well then people just won't bother playing the game, I know I would have quit if they brought the law onto the ice.

Gary Goodman · 02-24-2009, 11:55 AM

The only race issue in hockey as I see it is the race for the puck! It seems ridiculous to suggest that fighting is a part of hockey due the majority of white players. I've played hockey for 35 years and I don't care what race any player is and can't think of any player who does. The "argument" is reaching for conclusions based on immaterial assumptions. Hockey is played on ice, with skates at a very fast pace. Full contact is legal upon an opposing player carrying the puck. There is no shot clock and no is play whistled dead until an infraction of the rules occurs. This means that the play can continue and develop at a very fast pace for an extended period of time. These are just some of the arguments for why fighting may occur in hockey. If there is to be a rule change to ban fighting, then so be it! But let's base that decision on facts. Not some inane quasi political non-issue. By the way, check the history of hockey. There are plenty of books and videos out there documenting pre-1970's hockey, fights and all.

jrwheel · 02-24-2009, 01:27 PM

Carrying a stick while skating at 30 MPH with boards all around makes for a very entertaining and physical sport. I have played,taught,coached,parented and been a fan of hockey for almost 40 years. I can say first hand that this is a sport that allows a player to royaly "piss off" his oponent. slash, slam, 30 MPH elbow in the jaw.... all of these things cause uncontrollable retaliation. it just is virtualy impossible not to punch someone who just butt ended you in the ribs or elbowed you in the head.
its a quick flury of swings and the odd one lands. it almost never gets out of hand. it is always broken up quickly. it is innevitable with the speed and strength and style of the game. all the things that make it the greatest game on earth make fighting in it OK in my book. and yes it deters some from taking liberties with smaller or more skilled players "keep your head up"!!!!!

silent_jay · 02-24-2009, 01:56 PM

I forgot to post the link to this 'article' when I originally posted this topic, just realized that, here's the link, the comments are funny, the guy seems to think he has a 'multi-layered theory' about fighting or something, rather than what he has, some words he's pulling out of his ass and hoping people believe him.

Yes the 'Jay' in the comments section is me, I wasn't going to bother engaging this guy in a discussion, but I couldn't help myself, people bashing Canada's game piss me off.

Does Race Allow the NHL to Get Away with All That Fighting? | Bleacher Report

highthief · 02-24-2009, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

It may not diminish the passion or the edge(personally I think the edge would be gone), but it sure would be the end of the NHL as most people know it. It's the pussification of the game as Millbury put it, or the Pierre McGuireification of the game as he also said. Banning fighting essentially turns it into the European game, of diving, and stick work, and whining to the referee that so and so stuck someone .

We'd have a bunch of Jarko Ruttu's or Ulf Samuelson's running around like chickens with their heads cut off, because they could get away with their type of play(chickenshit) with no fear of retribution. Remember the knee job Ulfy gave Cam, then pulled the turtle when it was time to face the man who's career he tried to end?

Also how do you get fighting out of hockey? Fines? These players make millions, a few grand in fines won't stop them from dropping the gloves. Make it against the law and charge them criminally? Well then people just won't bother playing the game, I know I would have quit if they brought the law onto the ice.

With respect, that's silly. Don Cherry talk. When rules are enforced consistently and with significant punishments, you won't have issues of "chickenshit" play.

Rugby is a great example - it's a passionate game, played with extreme physicality and far less protection from pads. But fighting results in ejection form the game, and the retaliation incidents will also get you kicked out or you will receive a lengthy penalty (like 10 minutes). Even back talking the ref will get you sin binned.

When a team loses 4 or 5 games in a row because they have players who can't control themselves and who get ejected or who get 10 minute penalties, those players won't be put on the ice by their coaches until they get the message.

The NHL has been a bunch of pussies about limiting fighting - they figure the only reason Yanks watch is for a fight or two. Market share won't drop even a percentage point in Canada if they eliminated or severely curtailed fighting.

silent_jay · 02-24-2009, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by highthief

With respect, that's silly. Don Cherry talk. When rules are enforced consistently and with significant punishments, you won't have issues of "chickenshit" play.

Rugby is a great example - it's a passionate game, played with extreme physicality and far less protection from pads. But fighting results in ejection form the game, and the retaliation incidents will also get you kicked out or you will receive a lengthy penalty (like 10 minutes). Even back talking the ref will get you sin binned.

When a team loses 4 or 5 games in a row because they have players who can't control themselves and who get ejected or who get 10 minute penalties, those players won't be put on the ice by their coaches until they get the message.

The NHL has been a bunch of pussies about limiting fighting - they figure the only reason Yanks watch is for a fight or two. Market share won't drop even a percentage point in Canada if they eliminated or severely curtailed fighting.

It's the same way in Jr.A or Jr. B when I used to play, you get tossed if you fight, all that resulted in was people waiting to the third period to fight. Then they brought in the rule if you fight in the last ten minutes you get a game suspension, all that resulted in was people clock watching and getting their fights in before the 10 minute mark.

Yes rugby is played with physicality, I played that back in high school, but the main difference is you don't have chuckleheads running around with sticks, that can be used to slash, spear, butt-end, cross-check your opponent. Talking back to the ref gets you penalties in hockey too, I sat for many a 10 minute misconduct over my career for telling the ref what I thought of the job he was doing.

How are you supposed to limit fighting though? They tried the instigator rule, that went nowhere I remember years ago CBC tried to turn the camera away from the fight so people at home wouldn't have to see it, that lasted all of a couple of broadcasts.

What's a significant punishment though? Tossed from the game? Suspensions? Fines? Criminal charges?

I beg to differ on the market share not dropping, if they keep screwing around and trying to change hockey they're going to break it sooner or later, and the fans won't watch it anymore. But we'll never know if the market share would drop unless they banned it.

I just find they're changing the game so much from the game I used to play it's getting boring, you can't even look at a player sideways nowadays without getting a penalty, calling more penalties isn't the answer.

We had Jarko Ruttu bite Andrew Peters a few weeks ago in a fight, and what did he get? 2 games, that's all, for biting someone, they should look at stopping stuff like that from happening, or the high hits that seem to be so popular these days, everyone wants to jump when they hit.

SteelGlider · 02-24-2009, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

This may be one of the most absurd articles I've ever read about fighting in hockey.

That pretty much sums it all up. Terrible article.

Dawolf13 · 02-24-2009, 05:28 PM

My question is, when does fighting in hockey not really occur?

At the most important time of the season, in the play-offs, where coaches want their top-skilled players on the ice and the "checking line" is made up of hard working players, not the Domi/Laraque-type players. The "enforcers" dont do not really get the ice time in that part of the season. So which begs the question, why do NHLers, the most skilled players un the world of hockey, need to do it.
As they say in any other sport, "let the scoreboard do the talking".

Now I also want to point out that the article is ridiculous and false. I agree with you guys on that. Black hockey players will fight just as much as white players. Ice hockey is played in areas where the demographic is prodominately white, thats all. Also, this has nothing to do with the other major league sports (especially MLS, thats just stupid). I would also like to point out that fights also occur in baseball (or the clearing of benches if the people want to aviod suspension).

highthief · 02-24-2009, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dawolf13

My question is, when does fighting in hockey not really occur?

At the most important time of the season, in the play-offs, where coaches want their top-skilled players on the ice and the "checking line" is made up of hard working players, not the Domi/Laraque-type players. The "enforcers" dont do not really get the ice time in that part of the season. So which begs the question, why do NHLers, the most skilled players un the world of hockey, need to do it.
As they say in any other sport, "let the scoreboard do the talking".

Exactly - when things matter, no fights. Play offs, Olympics, Canada Cup, World Championships, etc. Obviously, fighting is not an "integral" part of the game, it only becomes integral when A) less skilled players are allowed on the ice, and B) losing a game because you took a 5 minute major doesn't matter.

Perhaps if the regular season were of greater value - as it is in soccer, for instance - you'd see a dramatic reduction. But no one cares about the regular season what with everyone and their grandma making the playoffs.

SteelGlider · 02-24-2009, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by highthief

Exactly - when things matter, no fights. Play offs, Olympics, Canada Cup, World Championships, etc. Obviously, fighting is not an "integral" part of the game, it only becomes integral when A) less skilled players are allowed on the ice, and B) losing a game because you took a 5 minute major doesn't matter.

Perhaps if the regular season were of greater value - as it is in soccer, for instance - you'd see a dramatic reduction. But no one cares about the regular season what with everyone and their grandma making the playoffs.

I like the NHL, but I'd love it if they shortened the regular season by about 15-20 games. That would help put a little importance on the regular season. And the finals, IMO, should be wrapping up in late April or early May at the latest. Not mid June. It's crazy. With the league having expanded to 30 teams, having 16 teams make the playoffs isn't as crazy as it used to be. However, I'd be fine with them dropping it to 12 teams with the top two teams in each conference earning first round playoff byes, kind of like the NFL. But they're never going to do that. Just like the owners would never be up for shortening the season and losing some ticket sales. But it would improve the quality of the game IMO.

silent_jay · 02-25-2009, 12:12 PM

I agree with the shortened season, and the play-offs ending earlier, but I'd like to up it a notch and drop a few teams so the quality of players who make it to the NHL goes back to where it once was.

There are a lot of players in the league now who if this was pre expansion wouldn't have had a hope in hell of making it anywhere in the NHL. The talent has been so watered down in the last few years, I find myself watching games going "how the hell did he make it here?"

There's no fighting in the Olympics, Canada Cup, World Championships because the IIHF and the IOC don't allow fighting in their tournaments, remember the World Jr. Championship back in 1987 when the Canadians and the Russians had their bench brawl? Both teams got DQ'd for that little dance. So that's why there is no fighting in the Olympics, Canada Cup, or the Worlds. As for the play-offs, the referee's always 'put the whistle away' a little more when the post season comes around, and let the guys away with almost murder most times, so they get the guy back with another cheap shot rather than a fight.

highthief · 02-25-2009, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

There's no fighting in the Olympics, Canada Cup, World Championships because the IIHF and the IOC don't allow fighting in their tournaments, remember the World Jr. Championship back in 1987 when the Canadians and the Russians had their bench brawl? Both teams got DQ'd for that little dance. So that's why there is no fighting in the Olympics, Canada Cup, or the Worlds. As for the play-offs, the referee's always 'put the whistle away' a little more when the post season comes around, and let the guys away with almost murder most times, so they get the guy back with another cheap shot rather than a fight.

The brawl at the juniors was not one or two guys fighting, it was the entirety of both teams and they just wouldn't stop.

Individuals could fight at the Olympics if they wanted to - but guess what? The coach/manager tends to pick enormously skilled players to play on the team, rather than no talent guys who exist only to pick a fight. Names like Lemieux, Gretzky, Crosby, etc, are a lot more common at the big international events than Domi, Kordic, Probert (who at least could play a little), etc.

Coaches tell their players to fight or not to fight at the pro level - and that's why in the play offs, when coaches either don't play their goons or keep them on a short leash - you don't get a lot of fighting. The cost of losing because of a bad penalty is too high.

silent_jay · 02-25-2009, 07:14 PM

Of course they could fight at the Olympics if they wanted to, you could kick another player if you wanted to as well - but guess what? It's against the rules. Why doesn't fighting happen? It's against the rules. Coaches picking skilled players has nothing to do with it, it's against IIHF rules to fight in Olympic tournaments, or any IIHF tournament for that matter. Read the IIHF rules of fighting. The one on fighting is rule 528 – Fisticuffs or Roughing.

QuasiMondo · 02-25-2009, 07:26 PM

Reminds me of that old joke, "I went to see a fight and a hockey game broke out!"

I think hockey gets away with fighting because casual fans attend the games with the expectation of seeing at least one fight break out. They'll leave disappointed if there isn't one.

MacGuyver · 02-25-2009, 08:26 PM

This is absurd. Hockey fighting is under the gun because someone in a Canadian League died from hitting their head on the ice recently, so I've heard. If the NHL removes fighting, hockey in America will collapse, which would be a shame, since I feel like it's back on a real upswing.

silent_jay · 02-25-2009, 08:38 PM

You're right, his name was Donald Sanderson, he played for the Whitby Dunlops, it was tragic that he died, but as a former fighter in various leagues, you know the risks when you drop the gloves and remove your helmet to fight, or have your helmet removed by your opponent. I had my head whacked off the ice before, hurt like a bastard, got a little concussion from it, but otherwise I was fine, I knew it could happen again, yet I kept right on fighting and taking off my own helmet. They tried to change the rules so we couldn't take off our own helmets, all we did was take each others helmets off before the start of the fight, then we'd back up and square off and had at it.

highthief · 02-26-2009, 03:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

Of course they could fight at the Olympics if they wanted to, you could kick another player if you wanted to as well - but guess what? It's against the rules. Why doesn't fighting happen? It's against the rules. Coaches picking skilled players has nothing to do with it, it's against IIHF rules to fight in Olympic tournaments, or any IIHF tournament for that matter. Read the IIHF rules of fighting. The one on fighting is rule 528 – Fisticuffs or Roughing.

That's the point I'm trying to make - the cost of fighting at big tournaments is too high. You can get kicked out of the game and lose it for your team.

However, the games we've seen at the Olympics, Canada Cup, etc, have been some of the best ever. The games are not interrupted by useless fights and skilled players get to play the game as it should be played. I'd trade 82 regular season games for a hat trick of Rendez-Vous 87 games.

You know, in the European pro leagues there is no fighting - yet somehow the game survives and prospers.

If you ditched fighting you think there would be any drop in attendance at the Bell Centre or ACC? Not a chance. The only place it might drop would be in places hockey shouldn't be to begin with - the Nashvilles and Carolinas of the world. Which would be fine - then maybe real hockey towns like Hamilton or Winnipeg could get a franchise.

silent_jay · 02-26-2009, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by highthief

That's the point I'm trying to make - the cost of fighting at big tournaments is too high. You can get kicked out of the game and lose it for your team.

You don't seem to get what I'm saying, it isn't that the cost of fighting is too high at these IIHF tournaments, it's that it's against the rules, it isn't allowed, they don't use the same rules as the NHL, it's illegal, prohibited, not allowed, as I said before read the IIHF rules on fighting,and you'll see it has nothing to do with the cost of fighting and everything to do with the rule book.

Quote:

You know, in the European pro leagues there is no fighting - yet somehow the game survives and prospers.

Really? No fighting you say? You sure about that, because I can find plenty of videos that say otherwise.

Quote:

The only place it might drop would be in places hockey shouldn't be to begin with - the Nashvilles and Carolinas of the world. Which would be fine - then maybe real hockey towns like Hamilton or Winnipeg could get a franchise.

This I can agree with, I'd love to see a team back in Winnipeg again, even Hamilton would be cool, also I agree hockey shouldn't be in Nashville or Carolina, or Anaheim for that matter, Atlanta even.

It's safe to say though, you'll never completely get rid of fighting in the NHL, it just isn't going to happen, the players will still fight, the fans will still go nuts and cheer, and others will still complain it's barbaric and has to be gone.

silent_jay · 02-27-2009, 10:28 AM

For those interested, tonight on The Fifth Estate, 'The Code' Hockey's unwritten law of fighting and the men who live by it.

I always get a kick out of 'the code' to be honest, people who have never done it for a job, make it seem like it's some secretive society or something, really it's just about respecting the person who's doing the same job you're doing but for the opposite team. Also I don't really know how much 'the code' means today, the kids in the league don't seem to have the same respect that people used to have, like that Cal Clutterbuck kid, from the Minnesota Wild who fights while he wears a visor, but he's too embarassed to wear it to the box so he takes it off AFTER the fight, that's just bullshit to me, lose the visor if you're going to fight, be a man, a la Jerome Iginla.

Yes I know I sound like Don Cherry sometimes, but that's what happens when you grow up watching him and, agree with what he says on the subject of fighting.

Gary Goodman · 03-05-2009, 07:17 AM

Bring Back the Jets! Now you're talking....

silent_jay · 03-05-2009, 09:50 AM

I so wish the Jets would come back, the MTS Center in a nice arena, I was there for a Megadeth and Down concert a couple of years back, maybe small for an NHL team but they'd pack it every single game, so a barn really isn't an issue, the town would support the team, when I was living in Northern Manitoba the papers in Winnipeg would pick up on any little rumour that the Jetsa may come back, so they still love their Jets.

02-23-2009, 08:20 PM	#2 (permalink)
Plan9 I Confess a Shiver	I'm a hockey fan. I used to go to college hockey games because there was a chance for a fight and nobody took it serious. It's great. It's a sport with temper tantrums where you can be a ice-skating badass with a war club. Get pissed? Easy to solve... just ditch the gloves, yank a shirt up, and start whalin' on some dude. __________________ *Whatever you can carry.* "You should not drink... and bake."

02-23-2009, 08:45 PM	#3 (permalink)
silent_jay Her Jay Location: Ontario for now....	The shirt over the head is actually a penalty now, it's a game misconduct, because you're supposed to have your tie down secured. Personally, I hate tie downs. They keep the jersey down, but it still comes up enough to be annoying. I remember seeing Ken Baumgartner take off his jersey and shoulder pads before a fight, Rob Ray did the same thing, I tried that once, guy I was fighting wasn't too sure what to do, he had nothing to grab on to, that was a fun fight. __________________ Absence makes the heart grow fonder

02-23-2009, 09:09 PM	#4 (permalink)
djtestudo Baltimoron Location: Beeeeeautiful Bel Air, MD	The difference between hockey and basketball has to do more with the legality of all contact. Basketball was created specifically as a non-contact sport; that's why there are so many fouls called. Hockey, on the other hand, just by the nature of guys moving very fast on a slick, hard-to-maneuver surface, allows contact up to a certain point. The additional level of protection afforded in basketball, I believe, keeps much of the potential violence from escalating, whereas there isn't really a place to go in hockey except fighting. Over time, hockey fans have just got used to the fighting as part of the game, while in basketball it was never allowed to get to that point. Now, that doesn't mean that there isn't a racist element, but I don't think that's the main reason that explains the disparity. __________________ "Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen." --Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

02-24-2009, 03:43 AM	#6 (permalink)
highthief Junkie Location: Ontario, Canada	I'd say race has nothing to do with it - however, people being blindly tied to tradition does have a lot to do with it (i.e., "fighting is good for hockey because when I was growing up and when Granddad was growing up we used to throw down all the time"). However, I think fighting should go from hockey. There are sports every bit as rough and competetive that manage to largely do without it (American football, rugby, etc) without diminishing the passion or edge. __________________ Si vis pacem parabellum.

02-24-2009, 09:05 AM	#7 (permalink)
Leto Junkie Location: The Danforth	Stupid article. No fighting in pre 1970 nhl hockey? That's nuts. Why do they think there is an all star game anyways? No idea of the history of the game. I don't mind fighting in Hockey. I prefer a good hit to a brawl, but the game is so multidimensional and the physicallity of it all just lends itself to good entertainment. __________________ You said you didn't give a fuck about hockey And I never saw someone say that before You held my hand and we walked home the long way You were loosening my grip on Bobby Orr http://dune.wikia.com/wiki/Leto_Atreides_I

02-24-2009, 11:55 AM	#9 (permalink)
Gary Goodman Upright	The only race issue in hockey as I see it is the race for the puck! It seems ridiculous to suggest that fighting is a part of hockey due the majority of white players. I've played hockey for 35 years and I don't care what race any player is and can't think of any player who does. The "argument" is reaching for conclusions based on immaterial assumptions. Hockey is played on ice, with skates at a very fast pace. Full contact is legal upon an opposing player carrying the puck. There is no shot clock and no is play whistled dead until an infraction of the rules occurs. This means that the play can continue and develop at a very fast pace for an extended period of time. These are just some of the arguments for why fighting may occur in hockey. If there is to be a rule change to ban fighting, then so be it! But let's base that decision on facts. Not some inane quasi political non-issue. By the way, check the history of hockey. There are plenty of books and videos out there documenting pre-1970's hockey, fights and all. __________________ thumbsup: Hockey. Its all I need. chicks, booze and food notwithstanding.

02-24-2009, 01:27 PM	#10 (permalink)
jrwheel Upright Location: Western Canada	Carrying a stick while skating at 30 MPH with boards all around makes for a very entertaining and physical sport. I have played,taught,coached,parented and been a fan of hockey for almost 40 years. I can say first hand that this is a sport that allows a player to royaly "piss off" his oponent. slash, slam, 30 MPH elbow in the jaw.... all of these things cause uncontrollable retaliation. it just is virtualy impossible not to punch someone who just butt ended you in the ribs or elbowed you in the head. its a quick flury of swings and the odd one lands. it almost never gets out of hand. it is always broken up quickly. it is innevitable with the speed and strength and style of the game. all the things that make it the greatest game on earth make fighting in it OK in my book. and yes it deters some from taking liberties with smaller or more skilled players "keep your head up"!!!!!

02-24-2009, 01:56 PM	#11 (permalink)
silent_jay Her Jay Location: Ontario for now....	I forgot to post the link to this 'article' when I originally posted this topic, just realized that, here's the link, the comments are funny, the guy seems to think he has a 'multi-layered theory' about fighting or something, rather than what he has, some words he's pulling out of his ass and hoping people believe him. Yes the 'Jay' in the comments section is me, I wasn't going to bother engaging this guy in a discussion, but I couldn't help myself, people bashing Canada's game piss me off. Does Race Allow the NHL to Get Away with All That Fighting? \| Bleacher Report __________________ Absence makes the heart grow fonder

02-24-2009, 05:28 PM	#15 (permalink)
Dawolf13 Upright Location: Toronto	My question is, when does fighting in hockey not really occur? At the most important time of the season, in the play-offs, where coaches want their top-skilled players on the ice and the "checking line" is made up of hard working players, not the Domi/Laraque-type players. The "enforcers" dont do not really get the ice time in that part of the season. So which begs the question, why do NHLers, the most skilled players un the world of hockey, need to do it. As they say in any other sport, "let the scoreboard do the talking". Now I also want to point out that the article is ridiculous and false. I agree with you guys on that. Black hockey players will fight just as much as white players. Ice hockey is played in areas where the demographic is prodominately white, thats all. Also, this has nothing to do with the other major league sports (especially MLS, thats just stupid). I would also like to point out that fights also occur in baseball (or the clearing of benches if the people want to aviod suspension).

02-25-2009, 12:12 PM	#18 (permalink)
silent_jay Her Jay Location: Ontario for now....	I agree with the shortened season, and the play-offs ending earlier, but I'd like to up it a notch and drop a few teams so the quality of players who make it to the NHL goes back to where it once was. There are a lot of players in the league now who if this was pre expansion wouldn't have had a hope in hell of making it anywhere in the NHL. The talent has been so watered down in the last few years, I find myself watching games going "how the hell did he make it here?" There's no fighting in the Olympics, Canada Cup, World Championships because the IIHF and the IOC don't allow fighting in their tournaments, remember the World Jr. Championship back in 1987 when the Canadians and the Russians had their bench brawl? Both teams got DQ'd for that little dance. So that's why there is no fighting in the Olympics, Canada Cup, or the Worlds. As for the play-offs, the referee's always 'put the whistle away' a little more when the post season comes around, and let the guys away with almost murder most times, so they get the guy back with another cheap shot rather than a fight. __________________ Absence makes the heart grow fonder

02-25-2009, 07:14 PM	#20 (permalink)
silent_jay Her Jay Location: Ontario for now....	Of course they could fight at the Olympics if they wanted to, you could kick another player if you wanted to as well - but guess what? It's against the rules. Why doesn't fighting happen? It's against the rules. Coaches picking skilled players has nothing to do with it, it's against IIHF rules to fight in Olympic tournaments, or any IIHF tournament for that matter. Read the IIHF rules of fighting. The one on fighting is rule 528 – Fisticuffs or Roughing. __________________ Absence makes the heart grow fonder

02-25-2009, 07:26 PM	#21 (permalink)
QuasiMondo Wise-ass Latino Location: Pretoria (Tshwane), RSA	Reminds me of that old joke, "I went to see a fight and a hockey game broke out!" I think hockey gets away with fighting because casual fans attend the games with the expectation of seeing at least one fight break out. They'll leave disappointed if there isn't one. __________________ Cameron originally envisioned the Terminator as a small, unremarkable man, giving it the ability to blend in more easily. As a result, his first choice for the part was Lance Henriksen. O. J. Simpson was on the shortlist but Cameron did not think that such a nice guy could be a ruthless killer. -From the Collector's Edition DVD of The Terminator

02-25-2009, 08:26 PM	#22 (permalink)
MacGuyver You're going to have to trust me! Location: Massachusetts	This is absurd. Hockey fighting is under the gun because someone in a Canadian League died from hitting their head on the ice recently, so I've heard. If the NHL removes fighting, hockey in America will collapse, which would be a shame, since I feel like it's back on a real upswing. __________________ We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence then, is not an act, but a habit. ---Aristotle Deeds, not words, shall speak [for] me. ---John Fletcher

02-25-2009, 08:38 PM	#23 (permalink)
silent_jay Her Jay Location: Ontario for now....	You're right, his name was Donald Sanderson, he played for the Whitby Dunlops, it was tragic that he died, but as a former fighter in various leagues, you know the risks when you drop the gloves and remove your helmet to fight, or have your helmet removed by your opponent. I had my head whacked off the ice before, hurt like a bastard, got a little concussion from it, but otherwise I was fine, I knew it could happen again, yet I kept right on fighting and taking off my own helmet. They tried to change the rules so we couldn't take off our own helmets, all we did was take each others helmets off before the start of the fight, then we'd back up and square off and had at it. __________________ Absence makes the heart grow fonder

02-27-2009, 10:28 AM	#26 (permalink)
silent_jay Her Jay Location: Ontario for now....	For those interested, tonight on The Fifth Estate, 'The Code' Hockey's unwritten law of fighting and the men who live by it. I always get a kick out of 'the code' to be honest, people who have never done it for a job, make it seem like it's some secretive society or something, really it's just about respecting the person who's doing the same job you're doing but for the opposite team. Also I don't really know how much 'the code' means today, the kids in the league don't seem to have the same respect that people used to have, like that Cal Clutterbuck kid, from the Minnesota Wild who fights while he wears a visor, but he's too embarassed to wear it to the box so he takes it off AFTER the fight, that's just bullshit to me, lose the visor if you're going to fight, be a man, a la Jerome Iginla. Yes I know I sound like Don Cherry sometimes, but that's what happens when you grow up watching him and, agree with what he says on the subject of fighting. __________________ Absence makes the heart grow fonder Last edited by silent_jay; 02-27-2009 at 10:31 AM..

03-05-2009, 07:17 AM	#27 (permalink)
Gary Goodman Upright	Bring Back the Jets! Now you're talking.... __________________ thumbsup: Hockey. Its all I need. chicks, booze and food notwithstanding.

03-05-2009, 09:50 AM	#28 (permalink)
silent_jay Her Jay Location: Ontario for now....	I so wish the Jets would come back, the MTS Center in a nice arena, I was there for a Megadeth and Down concert a couple of years back, maybe small for an NHL team but they'd pack it every single game, so a barn really isn't an issue, the town would support the team, when I was living in Northern Manitoba the papers in Winnipeg would pick up on any little rumour that the Jetsa may come back, so they still love their Jets. __________________ Absence makes the heart grow fonder