| Author |
 Topic  |
|
phlyguy90
Rookie
USA
100 Posts |
 Posted - 10/09/2009 : 12:34:54
|
|
should fighting be taken out of the game?
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 10/09/2009 : 13:14:10
|
| no |
 |
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 10/09/2009 : 13:14:56
|
| How bout, no. |
|
|
|
fanoleaf
Rookie
143 Posts |
Posted - 10/09/2009 : 13:30:37
|
| Only when it is Semin doing the fighting |
|
|
|
Guest2559
( )
|
Posted - 10/09/2009 : 14:20:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by fanoleaf
Only when it is Semin doing the fighting
This. |
|
|
|
brentrock2
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
571 Posts |
Posted - 10/09/2009 : 15:10:46
|
I did a speech last year in front of the class and the topic was "Do you think fighting in hockey should be banned". Guess what everybody said. You guessed it NO.
HABS RULE!!
brentrock2 |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 10/09/2009 : 15:29:15
|
NEVER!!!
Nothing better than watching a moronic Philly fan getting pummelled by Tie Domi!!!.......oh, you meant with the players, uhhhh, no.
 |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 10/10/2009 : 05:48:43
|
By "taken out", I assume you mean they should levy much stiffer penalties on the players who fight, effectively reducing or basically eliminating fighting in hockey, correct? Obviously fighting is a penalised event, but it's condoned and supported within the culture of the NHL at the moment.
My answer then, is yes, fighting should be taken out of the game.
For almost every fighter (not all, but most) they take the place of a skilled guy who could score more goals.
The "policing their own" argument is ridiculous if the proper penalties and suspensions are levied towards illegal infractions.
Keep the fighting in the boxing ring.
What are your thoughts, oh peaceful Philly Guy? I think I can take a wild stab at what your response to the question might be . . . 
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 10/10/2009 : 08:27:06
|
Well said Slozo, I completely agree. As a reasonable fan of the sport, I know that there will always be some form of confrontation in the sport. There are fights in every sport in the world. When people compete, they will occassionally fight.
However, would hockey be worse with less fighting??? Nope, not at all. In fact, I can say with huge confidence that hockey would be a better sport. As Slozo said, guy like George Parros, George Laraque, Donald Brashear, and Derek Bogaard take spots from skill players that would excite a crowd as much with a beautiful move or a brilliant pass than Parros does with a fight.
And let's face it, as a fan of other combat sports like MMA and boxing, hockey fights are often complete garbage.
Fighting will never be completely removed, but rules designed to significantly reduce it would not hurt the sport and is fine with me.
Here's my suggestion. Make a rule that says that all players must wear full face shields and then add a rule that a player who's helmet is removed not through regular game play will be suspended for 3 games.
I wonder if a meatball like Brashear would still fight if he was punching a helmet and face sheild???? I also wonder how many fewer eye/face injuries would occur with the full face sheild??? |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 10/10/2009 : 12:04:12
|
| Beans, i'd say a rule like that, and the Brashear's, Laroques, Boogiemans, etc would be out of the game. I'm okay with that (them being out of the game) however i don't like forcing them out that way. I don't mind the odd fight and think it's needed at times. However, i'm just surprised these "goons" are still around? Are there not enough guys who have much more skill and can still throw some punches? I know coaches don't want their stars fighting and getting themselves injured but are there not enough guys like Lucic or even Burrish and guys like that who actually have a roll on their teams beyond thug? I'd love to see the actual "goons" gone from the game and leave it to players who can play the game and entertain the fans but maybe still the odd few who don't mind dropping the mitts when needed! |
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 10/10/2009 : 14:39:09
|
I think the "lets fight because you laid a clean check on my teamate" is not a legitimate reason. But then again when Laraque was in Pittsburg dont you think Crosby could skate with more confidence knowing that if a guy took a run at him the big man would take him down hard. How bout when a guy is consistantly throwing the checks with the leg out. I'd say there is a time and a place, just not a "for the hell of it" fighting situation.
A good time for a fight is when your team moral is down or to add energy to a game. Thats when a well place fight can change the momentum of the game, and its not always the enforcers doing the fighting. Its sometimes a captain or veteran player. One other thing, fighting rarely causes an injury. More often its the play before a fight that causes an injury. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 10/10/2009 : 19:45:27
|
Well, I have a very sour taste in mouth from watching yet another and another fight break out after a quiet chat or nods of head from two opposing players just before a faceoff . . . the puck drops, they go at it, and the crowd cheers.
Whoop de doo, the Leafs won a few fights . . . but the lost the game badly. What the heck is the point of these fights?!? If a player doesn't have enough skill to rev up his team with a hard body check, awesome play or a blazing rush, then he is nothing but a goon who shouldn't be there!
Alex - the Burrows, Backes and Lucic's of the world are around, but very few. And, in my perfect world, they shouldn't have to fight . . . I mean, from a purist hockey perspective, would you rather see Iginla score a beauty goal, or get in a fight which causes his team to go on the pk? This fighting thing is so juvenile and low . . . people get excited by the blood, the thrill of seeing someone get a beatdown . . . as the testerone in all men coarses through our veins as we all imagine being the guy on top landing blows and being the "man" afterward, the victor . . .
. . . it's a bloody mastubatory experience for people to act out their vicious fantasies through someone else. The game of hockey has nothing to do with physically besting someone through physically wrestling someone's jersey over their head so that they can beat some guy up! It's a stupid sideshow, and as seen in the playoffs every year, a pointless one that actually stops the flow of the game, prevents more skilled players from playing, and diminishes the overall hockey product.
I know some here will want to argue blue in the face about how fighting polices slimy players from doing dirty plays, and the arguments are so not based in reality that it should be obvious to anyone with eyes and a brain. If fighting exists at the present time, and is basically endorsed, then why do we still have lots of dirty plays? Obviously, it doesn't work . . . and the referees get a mandate, and they do their best to uphold it, and they just stand by and watch a fight, and afterwards, the players can take part in the next game. The fighters often shake hands and share beers afterward . . . it's just a show for the fans who like fighting, not hockey.
Where are all the HOCKEY fans? Because fighting . . . is. not. hockey.
It's goonery, which is not allowed in the rules of hockey.
So why do we continue to condone it?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 10/10/2009 : 22:58:50
|
Slozo.....
I'd prefer to watch hockey than a fight any day. However, i think there's a place for it and i believe it'll always be a part of the game. I do agree that i need not see the pre planned fight where two goons drop the gloves as the puck is dropped like you mentioned. There's no place for that.
I don't wanna sound like Don Cherry but i do believe that fighting is a necessary tool for guys to protect their teammates. You make a point about how it's in the game now and there's still dirty plays, yes, but again, without wanting to sound too much like Cherry, the instigator rule is a lot to do with that. The only time i have no problem with the instigator rule is when a CLEAN and LEGAL check is thrown (such as the one Phaneuf hit Okposo with) and a guy comes in to fight the guy who threw the hit. In that case, i say he deserves an extra 2, simply because the hit was clean!
If it were possible to take fighting out and there still be a reduction in cheapshots, etc, i'd be all for it!
I still say the "Burrows', Backes', and Lucic's" of the world are the ones who should be playing. No, i don't wanna see Iginla fight, although i do respect him for doing so when needed, but every team should have guys who can both scrap and play. I don't know all the other teams well but here in Van we have guys like Burrows, although he's nothing more than a lightweight, Kesler, Bieksa, O'brien and Bernier who will drop'em when needed. No, their not in the class of some of the others out there (like Lucic) but a guy like Bieksa would go with him if needed to answer the call. I have no need for Hordichuk, Laroque, Booegard, etc. The straight up goons have no place in the game imo.
|
|
|
|
Guest0997
( )
|
Posted - 10/10/2009 : 23:27:40
|
no the instigator rule should be taken out of the game
The nature of the game requires policing. All the pysical contact can and has always had the risk of getting out of hand in each and every game.
|
|
|
|
hanley6
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
674 Posts |
Posted - 10/11/2009 : 04:26:34
|
fighting is a huge part of the hockey will should never and will never be taken away
...And the LEAFS Win the CUP |
|
|
|
irvine
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1315 Posts |
Posted - 10/11/2009 : 20:36:55
|
Fighting in hockey is here to stay, hate it or love it.
There is a time for a fight on the ice. These times perhaps being, to stick up your teammates, to entice the fans, to perhaps even get deep under your oppositions skin. But I will agree, there is no need of a fight for the sake of a fight. A fight should NOT be planned. It needs to happen in the heat of the moment, genuine, then I don't mind seeing one take place.
Irvine |
|
|
|
polishexpress
PickupHockey Pro
525 Posts |
Posted - 10/11/2009 : 22:25:41
|
Hockey is the only sport that I can think of that does not have massive penalties (monetary and sporting) for on-field/on-ice altercations. The instigation rule stinks, has only made things worse. The only reason that policing is needed is that the rules are imperfect. If you would introduce rules that punish fighting, fights would still happen, but players would think twice when choosing to fight, and wouldn't stage them.
For example, if you were to eject a player for fighting, there would be no goonery. Fights would only happen when players would think that it was justified. I'd prefer that McIntyre, Laraque, et all wouldn't play. I'd rather pay money to watch a Sam Gagner player dangle. And as for star players needing protection, get enforcers that are big and can skate; look at Chara he is huge, yet is very successful in a role that does not require fighting. |
|
|
|
phlyguy90
Rookie
USA
100 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2009 : 09:15:16
|
| honestly slozo and beans, you two are ridiculous!! but i am certainly not suprised that the two pretentious hockey fans of all time, want to change the game even more so. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2009 : 12:43:11
|
Pretentious???
–adjective 1. full of pretense or pretension.
2. characterized by assumption of dignity or importance.
3. making an exaggerated outward show; ostentatious.
I am completely confused.................
I don't think that either Slozo or I said anything about taking fighting out of the game. I think we both said that changing rules to make the punishment for fighting more severe and therefore reducing it would not be a negative impact to the game.
Ultimately, there is fighting in every sport. Baseball, basketball, football, soccer, heck even table tennis. However, hockey is the only non-combat sport that does not punish fighting with an immediate ejection.
I have never watched a bad hockey game that became good after a fight. I have watched many good hockey games get ruined with fights. Does anyone remember Trevor Linden's 1000 points game???? I bet my life you did. Only you remember it for Bertuzzi attacking Steve Moore.
So if me wanting more skill players, more rivalries, more physical play and big hits for retribution and less fighting, well I guess I am pretentious.
I take that as a compliment. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2009 : 19:37:09
|
phlyguy....easy bro, no need for name calling or labelling someone particularly when it's not accurate. 
Everyone's entitled to their opinion and they were just giving theirs. I don't agree with it (Beans, yes i've seen many "bad games" become more entertaining after a fight or two) but it's their opinion.
|
|
|
|
CaliforniaSeal
Top Prospect
Canada
99 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2009 : 19:50:23
|
To me there are 2 types of fighting in the NHL.
1) Fights that happen in the heat of the game. Whether it be after a scrum or a player received an elbow or slash or a vicious check. The combatants were part of the action or on the ice during the action.
2) A premeditated fight (between sometimes as soon as the puck drops) between two tough players who see limited ice time and most likely had little or no action against each other.
The fights in example 2 should be taken out. The fights in example 1 are part of the game. The players need to police themselves an if they can't you would see some pretty dirty hockey.
No cup for Dino, what a shame |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2009 : 06:44:32
|
CaliforniaSeal - so, without fighting in the playoffs then, we must be witnessing some very dirty hockey?
Can you please explain the logic behind your statement? Because, it's the most common defence I hear - that fighting polices the game - but it defies any logic at all.
We have fighting now . . . and yet we seem to have lots of dirty plays.
In the playoffs, there is virtually no fighting because of stiffer penalties . . . and the amount of dirty plays actually falls off to some extent.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2009 : 08:15:24
|
Slozo.... not answering for CaliSeal but here's my take anyway
The 2 main reasons you see less dirty plays in the playoffs:
1. The games are so much more valuable, and players realize this. They know their actions can cost them a game and possibly a series
2. Most of the players who'd be considered "dirty" are not front line players. In the playoffs, these "dirty" players are not seeing as much ice. Might be the reason Pronger continues his "cheap" way and we notice it because he's a front line dman getting a ton of ice time! |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2009 : 09:42:27
|
Excellent Alex, and I mostly agree, except you left out one, big, glaring reason:
* the penalty for fighting in the playoffs means you miss a game *
This means that if someone gives, say, a bit of a borderline crosscheck on your star player, your third or fourth line guy will not be as apt to start a fight with another player, and even if he does, the other guy will certainly not want to.
Thus, a fight only happens in general when something big happens, something way over the boundaries of acceptable (and usually, when it isn't called or penalised properly). The games are too valuable to miss in the playoffs, and all the players playing in the playoffs are of value in terms of actual hockey plays, as opposed to just fighting.
Now, look at regular season . . . let's say, because of the length of the regular season versus playoffs, we would want to make the punishment for fighting similar to that of the playoffs. So if the playoffs could be anywhere from 4 to 28 games, let's take a median of 16 games, and aproximately transfer that ratio (1/16) to the regular season of 82 games - that's approximately 5 games.
If a player received a 5 games suspension for fighting (obviously an automatic ejection from that game), with the second offence meaning he missed the rest of the season . . . don't you think the level of hockey would be better? The goons would be weeded out right quick, fights would only happen under dramatic circumstances, and we'd see more third and fourth line scorers and playmakers.
And we'd see just as many "dirty plays" as before, because there is absolutely no correlation between no fighting/dirty plays.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2009 : 15:50:49
|
| Ok, let stiffen the rules to allow a game ejection 1st offense and a 1 game suspension for 2nd violation and extend the suspension based on the amount of violations. Withhold income based on suspensions. I just dont agree with removing it from the game altogether. You take away fighting I'll guarantee someone does a dangerous disrespectful play because there is no recourse. |
|
|
|
Guest4803
( )
|
Posted - 10/13/2009 : 16:39:14
|
| i cant believe this is even a topic... why dont you take away body checking while your at it |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2009 : 16:51:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by JOSHUACANADA
Ok, let stiffen the rules to allow a game ejection 1st offense and a 1 game suspension for 2nd violation and extend the suspension based on the amount of violations. Withhold income based on suspensions. I just dont agree with removing it from the game altogether. You take away fighting I'll guarantee someone does a dangerous disrespectful play because there is no recourse.
It's impossible to take it out completely. As I said above, fights break out in every other sport, they still will in hockey. It will just be lessened by having firm rules. Also, it will improve the quality of hockey as guys like Brashear will be replaced with some who can actually play. And, it will make hitting more important as it will be the only permitable way to physically impact the other team. |
|
|
|
Guest4803
( )
|
Posted - 10/13/2009 : 17:10:03
|
| you think that these guys made the nhl just because they were good at fighting? take a look at their junior stats these guys are good hockey players they just arent afraid to bruise up their knuckles, players hardly ever end up with major injuries from the tilts either its always the harmless looking hit along the boards that ends up causing someone a season. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2009 : 20:28:54
|
No, I think that those guys (goons) made the NHL because they were (at the very least( marginal NHLers who were big bruisers trained to fight. For the fighters of mid to lower quality, they are at best average skaters with well below average hockey skills . . . at the NHL level.
Don't compare the real goons to us - compare them to OHLers, AHLers. Compare them to the guys who don't quite make it, or who are on the cusp.
Think of tonight's game, Leafs/Avs. Consider that Rosehill and Orr, the two fighters for Toronto, played 6 and 7 minutes each, nearly half the amount of time as the next lowest minutes Leaf. Wouldn't it have been a better game with a penalty or two less if they hadn't played, probably one goal less for Colorado as a result, and maybe one more goal for the Leafs if a young kid with a bit of skill was in? I am postulating, but you get my point here, anyways.
Guest 4803 - yes, they just made the NHL because they were good at fighting, and they could skate fast enough to qualify. Sometimes barely, depending on their size and ferocity. Again, I am talking about real goons here.
Body checking is in the rules of hockey, fighting isn't. Look it up if you don't believe me.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2009 : 12:37:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4803
you think that these guys made the nhl just because they were good at fighting? take a look at their junior stats these guys are good hockey players they just arent afraid to bruise up their knuckles, players hardly ever end up with major injuries from the tilts either its always the harmless looking hit along the boards that ends up causing someone a season.
Not trying to single anyone out here, but I agree with some of what Beans and Slozo are getting at. Fighting has become too gratuitous, definately taking away from the skill that the game should be showcasing. The above reference has it's flaws, and like Slozo touched on, there are too many players that probably shouldn't be playing in the NHL due to their lack of legitimate skill, taking away a spot from a more deserving minor leaguer. An example;
Derek Boogaard;
174 games in Junior Hockey - 3 goals 18 assists - in the NHL
I watched him play in Edmonton last year, and had a great time 'yelling motivation' at him to keep up with the play, he was missing a good hockey game....
Sure he provides a 'presence', but for what? He maybe played a half dozen shifts for 4-5 minutes...
A whole season of that, and he tallied a whopping 3 assists...
A better skilled player, could have added 25 more team goals, through assists and goals, maybe helping with a few more wins, especially in those 1 goal games..
This isn't to say there isn't a need for some enforcement on teams, to keep the physical play honest, but the day of the designated hitter is getting tiresome.
In my opinion, fighting is indeed a necessity, due to the physical aspect of the game, it DOES help keep the dirty stuff down, but, not the way it is now, the nod at the faceoff and ensuing scuffle, detracts from why it should allowed, and propogates the WWE mentality that the NHL is becoming.
The older fans will remember when the scrappers had to be able to play, and for the most part they could, they took regular shifts and were a value to their team. Semenko had some skill, Tiger Williams had some skill, Semenko had a point a game season in Junior, Williams was a twice 100+ pointer in Junior, that's toughness with skill, not the genetic freaks that call themselves hockey players while acting like thugs...
Should fighting be taken out of the game? No...
Should the game get rid of the fighters...probably.
|
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2009 : 14:39:10
|
My argument is this. How exactly does hockey take away from the game? How does it take away skill? Okay, if you wanna say we could have 1 or 2 more "skill" guys rather than tough guys, so be it, but does a fight really take any skill out of the game? It's not like Ovechkin's on a breakaway and a fight breaks out and the whistle goes blowing our chance to see Ovie at his finest? Even the fights at the puck drop, which i seriously could care less about, don't really take anything away. The play is stopped, no?
The only way i see it "taking skill out of the game", is the one or two spots whereby a more skilled player could be playing. Let's face it though, really, how skilled are the guys that are missing those two spots? If they're half as good as some here would like us to believe, they ought to be cracking the third line of their team at the very least. |
|
|
|
Guest4803
( )
|
Posted - 10/14/2009 : 17:26:13
|
| if these Goons were such terrible hockey players they wouldnt be in the NHL, look at stortini the other night he scored 2 goals and is now being use as a big body presence on the oilers powerplay but to most hes just a fighter, you need a variety of players on your team you cant have all playmakers/goal scorers you need those guys that are going to go out and set the tempo...and some times that means dropping your gloves to get the team going. Hardly ever do you see someone get seriously injured in a fight, its usually the little guys who are sticking out their knees or leaving the feet to hit someone that are causing the damage, its not like the AHL is holding back a bunch of skilled guys that could replace these guys either...if they were that good they would already be playing in the NHL and wouldnt be in the minors, ask any of the greats and they would tell you that fighting and those enforcers are a part of hockey and that shouldnt be changed, gretzky probably would of had his career ended if it wasnt for the fact you would get the @%#@ kicked out of you if you were to even go near him. |
|
|
|
fat_elvis_rocked
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
902 Posts |
Posted - 10/14/2009 : 23:42:46
|
Dear Guest4803,
Thank you for helping make my point with your example. I like Stortini even though he's a marginal tough guy, but I wonder with all the 1 goal games the Oilers have lost in the last couple years, would a more skilled player in his spot have maybe made the difference and helped give the Oil another few wins, which is all they've been missing the playoffs by? Maybe a Robbie Schremp, or before this year, a Gilbert Brule, could have been given more time in Stortini's spot, and given an offensive boost to help push out those precious extra couple wins.
The problem as I see it, is for whatever reason, all the teams seem to need 1 or 2 of the 'heavyweights', and be realistic, aside from a Chara, or maybe a Laraque from a few years back, for the most part these behemoths WOULD NOT be in the NHL if they weren't there strictly as enforcers, they DO NOT have the skills to play a regular shift....period. To take it a step further, if they are too one dimensional, nobody fights them, they sit on the bench, wait for their 3 or 4 shifts a game, and look out of place trying to keep up when they do get out there. SILLINESS!!!
I hear you though,there is a need for a physical tempo to be set, but give me a Moreau, or a Morrow, or a Barnaby et. al., at least there is skill and toughness, involved with the physicality. Watching the Stortini's, Boogaard's and Parros' hump around trying to keep up, throw late hits and get all excited about the 3 goal year is just......boring.
A couple PS's...
Stortini won't get 10 goals all year if he plays on EVERY power play, and regarding nobody getting hurt in a hockey fight?, you may want to ask a Kypreos, or Fedoruk, they may beg to differ... |
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2009 : 14:59:00
|
A couple PS's...
Stortini won't get 10 goals all year if he plays on EVERY power play, and regarding nobody getting hurt in a hockey fight?, you may want to ask a Kypreos, or Fedoruk, they may beg to differ..
I think its been established that injuries do happen as a result of a fight, but the phrase was rarely happen as a result of a fight. Stortini wouldn't be on an AHL roster if fighting was taken completely out of a game. i do agree that the Majority of fights are for crap reasons and probably dont need to be in the game. But as I have said before there is a time and a place for fighting in the NHL. How do you say this fight is acceptable and this one is not. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2009 : 17:34:52
|
Above everything, today's NHL has goons only for goondom. (Nice word hey). Back in the day, the teams tough guy had to be able to do at least something else. PK, shoot, skate, something.
Take a look at some of the best "goons" of all time. I mean the toughest of the tough. They all had some kind of hockey skill outside of fighting. Bob Probert played in an All Star game and had 5 seasons of 39 or more points. He had 29 goals and 62 points in 88!
The goons today, the Boogaards, the Brashears, the Laraques. They do NOTHING other than fight. I am not talking about the Stortini's who works harder than an other Oiler and forechecks like a demon. I am not talking about the Fedoruk's who can skate and check and muck it up outside of fighting. Or the Tootoo's, or Cookes, or those average players that SOMETIMES fight. I am talking about the guy on the bench who plays 3 minutes a game and is not adding value to his team without fighting. And by the way, that fight generally adds zero value to their team. |
|
|
|
umteman
PickupHockey Pro
USA
662 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2009 : 19:12:06
|
"I wonder if a meatball like Brashear would still fight if he was punching a helmet and face sheild????"
How many times I have seen a football player throw a punch at another who still had on his helmet complete with face gaurd.
Did you hear about the retired proctologist? He spent 40 years saying "what's a place like this doing in a girl like you?" |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2009 : 19:26:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by umteman
"I wonder if a meatball like Brashear would still fight if he was punching a helmet and face sheild????"
How many times I have seen a football player throw a punch at another who still had on his helmet complete with face gaurd.
Did you hear about the retired proctologist? He spent 40 years saying "what's a place like this doing in a girl like you?"
Not nearly as often as you see a hockey fight. In fact, I have watched at least 2 football games a week for the past 5 weeks and not a single fight. Huge hits, exciting player, brilliant athletics, but no fights.
|
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 10/15/2009 : 22:38:56
|
| Beans....you must not have watched the Redskins/Giants game in week 1. Santana Moss and a NYG defender (either Corey Webster or Antonio Pierce i believe?) came to blows! Full out punches! The refs, didn't do their part, only gave Moss a penalty when both prob should have been ejected! |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 10/16/2009 : 00:06:17
|
So nice to actually agree with Beans fully, and completely.
quote:
goons today, the Boogaards, the Brashears, the Laraques. They do NOTHING other than fight. I am not talking about the Stortini's who works harder than an other Oiler and forechecks like a demon. I am not talking about the Fedoruk's who can skate and check and muck it up outside of fighting. Or the Tootoo's, or Cookes, or those average players that SOMETIMES fight. I am talking about the guy on the bench who plays 3 minutes a game and is not adding value to his team without fighting. And by the way, that fight generally adds zero value to their team.
Well said. I don't want to hear any argument defending fighting which mentions players that both Beans and I and others on this side of the argument respect and appreciate - no Krejci, no Backes, no Burrows, and definitely no Iginla. These guys are all hockey players who deserve to be in the NHL, obviously.
But if you ARE going to defend fighting, let's hear your well thought out argument, and tell me why Boogard, why Belak, why Colton Orr should be in the league? And while you're at it, when you bring up the policing argument, and explain how fighting somehow 'polices' dirty plays . . . send us the videos of all the clean plays these guys have made as well. You know, how they make clean checks, never jab a stick in the ribs, never high stick, never cross check from behind, never make a play to injure.
Bring it on! Let's hear your well-formed thoughts, Philly guy . . . you started the thread, you attacked Beans and I for our opposing views - let's hear your intelligent soliliquy on why fighting is great for hockey!
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Guest4250
( )
|
Posted - 10/16/2009 : 05:53:26
|
Bottom line is that fighters in hockey make for a lot more excitement. Remember back in hockey's hay days when fighting was more prominent and guys like Probert, McSorley, Tony Twist etc.. were running things? There was SO much more excitement and rivalries in the game. All of these rivalries and much of the excitement were spurned from the bad blood created between a couple of tough guys you knew would be squaring off any given night. eg:Who doesn't remember Probert-Crowder rivalry that made those Detroit NJ games SELL OUT EVERY NIGHT.
Perhaps if fights were allowed to continue in the way were in the late 80's and early 90's teams like the Coyotes wouldn't be facing such huge financial woes, and could actually count on having fans at games.
I've never heard of ANYONE refusing to go to a game because there's too much fighting. The fact that there are fights can only HELP bring fans to the rink, thereby ensuring the sports' success.
If you heard that Probert was coming back for one game to fight someone, would you not want to be at that game?
If you don't wanna watch two rugged men square off on the ice, go watch figure skating! ....oh wait... ;-)
S Powers. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 10/16/2009 : 08:19:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
But if you ARE going to defend fighting, let's hear your well thought out argument, and tell me why Boogard, why Belak, why Colton Orr should be in the league? And while you're at it, when you bring up the policing argument, and explain how fighting somehow 'polices' dirty plays . . . send us the videos of all the clean plays these guys have made as well. You know, how they make clean checks, never jab a stick in the ribs, never high stick, never cross check from behind, never make a play to injure.
Slozo.... i've stated i don't really have a problem with fighting and believe it should be part of the game. However, if you read above, i also stated early in this thread that i don't care for the Booegards, Laraques, etc. Maybe they really don't help police the dirty players? How is it possible to prove that other than to hear it from players, media, former players, coaches, etc? I guess taking fighting out of hockey would prove it one way or another, unfortunately for us here at pickuphockey, i'm not running the league (although i'd prob do a better job than the  who is?)?
Aside from the "policing" aspect, i guess i'm just a hockey purist. One who doesn't like to see drastic changes. I don't wanna see the nets get larger. I don't want ot in the playoffs to go 4 on 4, then 3 on 3, etc. I don't want major changes, simple as that. Fighting has been around since i began watching hockey at an early age and i'd hate to see it gone, simple as that. I do however prefer to see the guys fighting who play more than 3 mins and 6 shifts a game. I find it hard to beleive there's not more guys out there capable of playing 12-14 mins a game, contributing more than 5 goals and 11 points a year, maybe killing some penalties, and dropping the gloves when needed.
I will say this, it'd be interesting to see if ANY of the "goons" out there would be able to stick in the NHL if fighting were taken out completely...
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
fighting, or not? 
