| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| 1 Crosby fan |
Posted - 03/24/2007 : 12:37:01
what would happen?(i saw this on sportsnet) |
| 18 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Guest2668 |
Posted - 03/26/2007 : 06:07:08
I would tend to agree with "andyhack", but be a little more lenient. The local JrA league in NS still has fighting, but also enforces penalties for it. Two fights in a game, you get a game misconduct, more then 4 fights in 6 games and you serve a 2 game suspension. It does not curb the fighting, but may at least make people fight for good reasons.
To note "ultimatetitman" point, it happens and people will take advantage of it. I watched it one night in JrA during the final run for a tight play-off spot. 6 regulars on the 3rd & 4th lines were healthy scratches and "goons" were on the bench. By the end of the first period, those goons were out with game misconducts for fighting as well as 3/4 of the 1st and 2nd lines of the other team. Guess who walked over who on the scoreboard. Morally right, ethically right, likely not. By the rules legal, absolutely.
That was not quite NHL hockey, but hey guess what, coaches in tight races may start thinking of playing that way also, especially if it meant playing in the post-season. |
| Saku Steen |
Posted - 03/26/2007 : 03:46:53
Good topic,
I voted for superstars a target. They will be because if no one can protect them goons are going to try to hurt the superstars. It might not even be a goon, it could be a small guy that was scared to fight. If there were no fighting that guy would give a cheap shot on a superstar because he no longer has to worry about getting the snot out of him. |
| oil fan97 |
Posted - 03/25/2007 : 19:33:21
If anybody gets into a fight and gets injured it is there fault particially for taking the fight.
Oilers Rule!!! |
| andyhack |
Posted - 03/25/2007 : 19:01:19
Ultimatetitman (good name by the way),
I get what you're saying and I think it is a good point. But, on the other hand, it takes two to tango so one way for Team B to deal with the situation you mention would be for the Team B guys just not to fight. And if they can't help but fight, well, then they will know the consequences.
But your point raises again that if the league were to do something like a game misconduct/1 game suspension for fighting, it would be very important for there to also be very strict penalties for all the dirty stuff/stickwork etc that teams might have their goons try to do to instigate fights.
Anyway, everyone, you're talking to a guy who once even fought with his older brother in a hockey game. I understand how fighting can occur in such a fast paced aggressive game, believe me. And as a fan, sure, sometimes like the other night, I get caught up in it and kind of enjoy it. BUT, a part of me, probably the better part, has not lost sight of some basic rights and wrongs in the world. It seems to me that fighting in a sport, a game, something that when you come right down to it is basically a meaningless distraction in all of our lives, falls more in the "wrong" category than in the "right" category. And all I am really saying is that five/ten minutes in the box just doesn't seem like enough for that wrong.
If you think what I suggested is too much, fine, how about a 20 or 30 minute penalty then?
One final point. I've felt this way about the penalties for fighting for some time. What I am suggesting here is not in any way related to the recent injuries, and in fact is not really related to the injury issue in general.
|
| ultimatetitman |
Posted - 03/25/2007 : 14:00:48
quote:
Originally posted by andyhack
Personally I favour a game misconduct and a 1 game suspension just in case the fight occurs late in the game. In any case, the fact that you can have a fight and only have to sit in the box for five or ten minutes just doesn't compute with me.
Here's what's going to happen if you give an automatic game misconduct and a 1 game suspension for fighting.
Suppose there is a home and home series at a crucial time of the season. The visiting team (Team A) is going to call up a couple of goons with every intention of getting them to fight the home team's (Team B) more physical players. The fights occur, the players are ejected/suspended, and the next game goes to the other arena. Now Team A can dress a more physically talented team because a) Team B's fighters aren't playing, and b) they get last change. Team A can run Team B's stars all night knowing that there is very little Team B can do about it.
This is going to lead to injuries, from the fighting, or from running the stars, and it's eventually going to lead to the stars protecting themselves the only way they can, with their sticks. With divisional teams playing each other 8 times, this would get very ugly.
As silly as it sounds, the only way to keep fighting down is to keep the fighters in the game. |
| SlowShot |
Posted - 03/24/2007 : 21:26:36
The americans that do watch hockey manily love to see the fights and if we took it out half of the american population would stop watching. Mabey 5% of Canada would stop watching it. Just because we love the game but still it would be like a todd bertuzzi or chris simon retaliation for every cheap hit. So people who say that we should take fighting out should all move to SAN FRANCISCO
Go LEAFS |
| andyhack |
Posted - 03/24/2007 : 20:40:49
I know I'm not taking the popular route here, but that's fine.
And, again, I am not saying "Lets get rid of fighting all together". But I do think we should penalize it AND the stick infractions and other crap a lot more than we do.
There are larger issues going on here that we should be considering. And I think the lacrosse league which Canucks Man is playing in is missing the boat on these larger issues too. Fighting is basically not right. You have to start with that I believe. In my opinion all other comments about its role in hockey, etc are secondary. Not to be totally ignored, but secondary. |
| bablaboushka |
Posted - 03/24/2007 : 20:19:22
Listen, when guys get into fights, they accept the risk of injury. Either that, or they did something to piss the other team off. I don't know why this is even being discussed, fighting will always be part of hockey no matter how much people fuss over a few injuries.
The one thing that may be a little unnecessary in the game is "trained fighters". Those that train in the summer to become stronger fighters, and who focus more on that part of the game than on their fundamental skills. The ones who play every 3rd or 4th game for 5 minutes just to fight someone. I think that defeats the whole premise of fighting, which is players policing themselves. I'm only 18 but the way I understand fighting's involvement in hockey was to keep players in check. If you do something to piss us off (cheap shot, injure top player, etc.) we will fight you back. Most of the fights today are planned fights (we've all seen/heard Georges Laraque before a fight WISHING LUCK TO HIS OPPONENT) with no emotion and no real purpose. It's become a "my dad is stronger than your dad" mentality, and I think it insults the whole reason fighting was established in the first place. |
| Canucks Man |
Posted - 03/24/2007 : 20:09:43
quote:
Originally posted by andyhack
I don't think we have to look at this as an all or nothing issue though. I've touched on this in other posts but, forgetting we are bloodthirsty hockey fans for a second, haven't we at least advanced to a stage of, well, lets just call it basic humanity, where it is understood that if you fight in a game, you are at the very least out for the rest of that game?
Personally I favour a game misconduct and a 1 game suspension just in case the fight occurs late in the game. In any case, the fact that you can have a fight and only have to sit in the box for five or ten minutes just doesn't compute with me.
I dont agree with you at all. Im 16 and allowed to fight in my Intermiedate lacrosse league(First year Sr.) and we only get 5 min unless last 10 min.
CANUCKS RULE!!! |
| I HATE CROSBY |
Posted - 03/24/2007 : 20:04:20
quote:
Originally posted by andyhack
I don't think we have to look at this as an all or nothing issue though. I've touched on this in other posts but, forgetting we are bloodthirsty hockey fans for a second, haven't we at least advanced to a stage of, well, lets just call it basic humanity, where it is understood that if you fight in a game, you are at the very least out for the rest of that game?
Personally I favour a game misconduct and a 1 game suspension just in case the fight occurs late in the game. In any case, the fact that you can have a fight and only have to sit in the box for five or ten minutes just doesn't compute with me.
Why don't you move down to San Fransisco and hang out with the gang from full house.
I HATE CROSBY |
| Canucks Man |
Posted - 03/24/2007 : 19:57:19
It would be flat out terrible if fighting was taken out of hockey it is a major part of the game, almost everybody is in for a good fight. It can bring energy, it can swing momentum it can do all sorts of things, sure guys get hurt but did anyone els see the Fedoryk interview? He even said that fighting shouldnt be taken out, and he's been injured bad twice this year.
Also 1CF the sportsnet poll said more "Stick Work" like slashing and hits to the head like the Simon one, not "Stick handeling"
CANUCKS RULE!!! |
| andyhack |
Posted - 03/24/2007 : 19:44:59
I don't think we have to look at this as an all or nothing issue though. I've touched on this in other posts but, forgetting we are bloodthirsty hockey fans for a second, haven't we at least advanced to a stage of, well, lets just call it basic humanity, where it is understood that if you fight in a game, you are at the very least out for the rest of that game?
Personally I favour a game misconduct and a 1 game suspension just in case the fight occurs late in the game. In any case, the fact that you can have a fight and only have to sit in the box for five or ten minutes just doesn't compute with me. |
| leigh |
Posted - 03/24/2007 : 16:27:58
It has been a part of the professional game forever and should remain a part of the game. I do believe that too many liberties will be taken if fighting is taken out. And on top of that they should take out the instigator rule as well. Fighters know their jobs and they know the risks. For that matter, all pro hockey players know the risks. I don't recall which network it was that reported this poll, but 300+ NHL players were asked if they think fighting should be removed and absolutely NONE of them felt it should be taken out. How many rule changes do we have to endure????!!!!
Personally I'm glad that my rec hockey league does not allow fighting. I have to work in the morning. But when your job is to make millions entertaining sports fans you better damn well give them what they want. Guaranteed standing room only when there is a fight happening! If we have to keep that rediculous shoot out cause fans want it then we should keep fighting too.  |
| oil fan97 |
Posted - 03/24/2007 : 16:25:53
If fighting was taken out of the game more superstars will be targeted
|
| 1 Crosby fan |
Posted - 03/24/2007 : 15:53:12
quote:
Originally posted by I HATE CROSBY
Not only would Cherry retire.....I'd retire from watching. So would a lot of people.....Why would you take it out? I was watching OTR and they said someone was gonna die in a fight. You could die doing a lot of things in hockey....You could get smoked in the face by a puck, you could slip, go flying into the boards and break your neck...It's just as likely to die that way.......
They should ban boxing then......Why not ban Nascar too, ppl have died in that...For god's sake ban golf..A player hits a slice and smokes someone in the adjacent fairway, he could die!
There are risks in ANY sport, they know what they are getting involved in, and take that chance. I love a good tilt and wouldn't watch if there was no chance of a good scrap goin down.
PS...How would stopping fights make players better puckhandler's? I don't recall a guy dangling down the ice and then stopping to break into a fight!
I HATE CROSBY
except the part from hating Crosby you are smart
BTW how do you edit your sig |
| I HATE CROSBY |
Posted - 03/24/2007 : 15:49:57
Not only would Cherry retire.....I'd retire from watching. So would a lot of people.....Why would you take it out? I was watching OTR and they said someone was gonna die in a fight. You could die doing a lot of things in hockey....You could get smoked in the face by a puck, you could slip, go flying into the boards and break your neck...It's just as likely to die that way.......
They should ban boxing then......Why not ban Nascar too, ppl have died in that...For god's sake ban golf..A player hits a slice and smokes someone in the adjacent fairway, he could die!
There are risks in ANY sport, they know what they are getting involved in, and take that chance. I love a good tilt and wouldn't watch if there was no chance of a good scrap goin down.
PS...How would stopping fights make players better puckhandler's? I don't recall a guy dangling down the ice and then stopping to break into a fight!
I HATE CROSBY |
| PainTrain |
Posted - 03/24/2007 : 13:04:42
Fighting is one of the most exciting things in hockey, most fans want to see a fight. I say that is stupid. |
| Buddyno2000 |
Posted - 03/24/2007 : 12:52:29
The game might just get out off control it won’t be easy to protect the stars, and also more and more dirty hits.
Go leafs Go by the way |
|
|
