View Single Post
10-12-2011, 12:18 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 3,094
vCash: 500
The whole idea that removing the instigator will make things so much better is a myth.

So a lower line player, not a fighter, runs a star from behind and takes him out of the game. Maybe an enforcer, in his 2 to 4 minutes on the ice, is on at the same time and gets to start a fight with the guy, who promptly turtles and goes down while the enforcer whacks his hands on his helmet. The more likely scenario is that as soon as the enforcer hits the ice, the other team responds in like, and two designated goons go at it; or a someone else jumps the player, who will fight or turtle depending on who he is tangling with.

And there is the assumption that starting fights will only be "used for good" if the instigator is gone. BS. What will happen is guys will be picking fights with star players just to get them out of the game, or to intimidate them. Posters here eloquently state that a fight can turn momentum, so without the instigator, we can look forward to fights being a normal tactic for loser teams that can't compete on talent.

I read a good article that made the point that is in the past the NHL operated with smaller rosters and basically 3 lines and advocated going back to that. There wouldn't be the room to carry one dimensional players who are clinging to the $500,000 to $700,000 salaries by doing anything they can. That will put more respect in the game.

KarlSen is offline   Reply With Quote