Fighting in Hockey

I'm gonna play devil's advocate.

Football's a contact sport and although there's some pushing and shoving after some plays, there virtually are no fights.

The majority of fights are orchestrated by the two goons involved. They have nothing to do with the game.

Now that players are bigger, stronger and faster, do we really want to see a player killed as a result of a fight? And if someone is, do you charge him with manslaughter?

Hockey is intrinsically a great spectator sport. If fighting disappeared, would anyone notice or care?

And Peca's point was we're talking about blows to the head. That's categorically different than separated shoulder because of a Phaneuf check.

To get rid of it at the NHL level, you'd have to start at the Junior level.

 

I think hockey makes a mockery of itself by letting fights go on with two guys dancing around and the referees standing and watching until someone falls down. For the first couple of seconds it's mildly entertaining and then it becomes just plain stupid.

I know all the reasons hockey traditionalists use, but they sound so ridiculous trying to defend something that will get you not just ejected, but suspended for multiple games in any other sport. You take a swing at someone in a basketball game or a baseball game and you're watching on TV for the next five games. But in hockey it's OK.

I agree the vicious hits and pre-meditated attacks are a bigger problem than fighting, and I guess you could make the argument that hockey players police themselves by fighting just like pitchers police a baseball game with a good brush-back. But there's a line between a brush-back pitch and throwing at someone's head, just like there's a line between a clean hit and one that's clearly not. I think the fighting is separate and it's an image problem, and for that reason alone, the NHL should ban it. For years, I hadn't watched much hockey, and then this season I got back into it and I love how wide open it is now. The NHL doesn't need fighting to be entertaining.

 

You want fighting gone?

Make them wear cages.

This shit ain't that complicated.

Now, can we talk about mandating an Olympic ice sheet?

 

A great definition of irony: Ned Dowd, a slick 32-goal scorer in the NAHL who admittedly couldn't fight worth a lick, in the role of Ogie Ogilthorpe, "the worst goon in hockey today."

Keeping with the NAHL and its predecessor league, the EHL, there is no enforcer playing today in the NHL who wouldn't have been quickly cut down to size by the likes of John Brophy or Ted McCaskill during their heydays in the '60s. A guy I know who played in the EHL told me he didn't think Chris Simon's chop was all that big of a deal compared to a lot of the stuff that happened on a fairly regular basis back then.

 

I wouldn't say the majority of fights are orchestrated. There are definitely a few, but I wouldn't go as far as saying most of them are. There is a point to most fights, whether it's evening a score, sparking some momentum, even acting as a safety valve in an increasingly chippy game. Generally the big fight blows off the steam and they get back to playing hockey afterwards. Of course there is also the odd fight where you get the young guy trying to prove himself to his teammates and the rest of the league – that in itself helps to develop that trust or reputation of someone to watchout for as an enforcer.

I think there would be a large part of the population that would notice if fighting disappeared. Like I said earlier the chance that stick work and other cheap shots would increase is great. Even just as an Oilers fan this year I noticed it missing. Even the guys who used to drop the gloves as a secondary option to Laraque (Smith, Moreau, Torres, etc.) were either hurt or refused to fight.

My point about it being a contact sport is, it seems every other month there is a new crusade about injury prevention in hockey – be it visors, rock hard equipment, players leaving their feet, the hipcheck, the hit to the head, fighting, checking from behind, races on icings, etc. For me it's just getting to a point of frustration on the growing list of campaigns, much of it spurred on by an increasingly sensitive media. I hate to say it.

If someone dies in a hockey fight? A) It hasn't happened in NHL history, B) unless it's a sucker punch or something dirty, I don't think you can. It would be like charging a boxer or UFC fighter for killing someone in the ring. They are both willing combatants. I know if it happened outside the rink they would be charged in a heartbeat, but much of what takes place in the hockey rink would land you behind bars in a hurry. I know there are conflicting opinons on this, this is just my 2 cents

 

Full shields?

Nope, I agree that they should grandfather in half-visors but full shields? No way. It would increase the stick work.

Olympic sized ice? Why?

There's nothing to indicate that it would open up the game. It would make it softer than some people think it is already. Speed in and of itself isn't exciting but speed in tight quarters is.

 

Couldn't agree with you more on that one JR – someone quick mark the date and time. I have always felt the need for bigger ice was one of the biggest falacies protrayed by those so-called insiders. European hockey is played on the big sheets of ice and they are able to trap it down to a stand still. It is completely non-aggressive hockey, because of the big surface teams are afraid of making a mistake that will result in a break, so they back it off and basically play the trap and take all of the speed out of the game. The Olympics are not a great barometre of practical implimentations of the game. It looks great when it's Canada and Russia going balls out, but I can't remember Germany versus anyone being that exciting. Unfortunately because of the diluted state of the NHL you will end up with more Germanys than Canadas.
One reason the NHL is able to generate so much speed is because of it's tight quarters, everything is closer and speed is absolutely necessary, you don't have forever and a day to get around the defenceman.

 

Bull.

We agree on a lot of things. Like, you know, Toronto is the Centre of Canada and stuff like that.

 

I'm trying to remember without having to dig for it, but Campbell or a player called fighting a "release valve," and I think that's why it has to be a part of hockey despite not being a part of football and other high-contact games. These guys go out and swirl around the ice non-stop, poking and clawing and grabbing and bumping. At some point, there has to be a release, or someone gets too frustrated and takes a swing with a stick. Fighting, if anything, regulates the goonery in hockey. As for the person who said that no other sport features the tactic of putting someone out there for the sole purpose of going after a star player, it could be argued that that's all football is. You blitz so that you can get to the quarterback. You hit wide receivers as hard as you can across the middle so they are slowed up or don't do it again. Hell, that's the whole point of pitching inside in baseball, which has been long-accepted as a tactic.

 

Wow.

Almost 25 years ago I wrote a school term paper on this very subject.

And the arguments for and against are still identical. Nothing has changed. This is the same stuff, just some of the player's names have changed.

Another 25 years from now, it probably still won't have changed.

 

I actually wrote a paper on it in college too. go figure. Except mine was only about 6 or 7 years ago.

 

Great minds think alike, Beef.