Tonight on RDI : a 2 hours debate on violence in hockey.
View Single Post
10-12-2011, 11:50 AM
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Originally Posted by
And you think that she won't push her agenda? She is against violence in sports. Here is the proof...
I didn't even know about this video and I immediately thought of that when reading his post.
Originally Posted by
Her agenda is related to the study of the brain, specifically concussions. Doesnt take a genius to be aware that violence leads to many of those incidents, and that people (like she says) dont realize how terrible a concussion is for the human body, thus people not caring about fights and violence. There is no positive to violence. It's negative by nature.
Yea she has her agenda i guess, everyone does. At least shell be (hopefully) be using more scientific arguments. if they let her
The problem isn't fighting the problem is cheap shots. You choose to fight most cases, you don't choose to be cheap shot. If you get concussed in a fight that's really a shame but at least it's something you chose to do.
Eliminate these from happening and fighting will be less common. They won't need enforcers if the NHL actually enforced their own rules and got rid of the instigator rule. I agree with people saying it's an over-simplified version of the issue at hand and frankly it's yet another way for the media and bandwagoner's to push their agenda against fighting.
The problem isn't fighting, the problem is cheap shots. If the NHL actually punished players accordingly cheap shots would be less frequent, fights would therefore be less frequent eliminating the need for a fighter, thus resulting in less staged fights if any, and then real fights would occur only when emotions boil over, between actual players not 6'4" 230lbs ogres who have no skill and are only on the ice for the purpose of fighting.
Again I must say it's another obvious example of media people and others in general using anything they can to push their agenda against fighting. No doubt the three unrelated deaths are routinely brought up in this discussion as well, which to be quite frank is pathetic.
Also saying there is no positive to violence is just silly. Tons of sports use violence as their bread and butter, Hockey, Rugby, Football, it's all about the crushing hits and all that. Stuff that is far more likely to give you a concussion than a less than 1 minute scrap where you have the refs tugging away at you and only get a few actual shots off each in most cases. Not saying you can't be concussed by it but the focus is misplaced. If it weren't for fighting who knows where the state of hockey popularity in the states would be like right now but I'd imagine it did help to grow the sport. We are the only sport outside of professional fighting that allows it and personally I don't see anything wrong with it. It's staged fighting I don't like, or forcing a guy to fight and then slapping him silly with an elbow pad while the officials to jack ****. If a person chooses to fight due to emotions boiling over and it's mutual I see no problem with it. It's better than pulling a Bertuzzi and keeping it bottled up and then just absolutely killing the guy with a cheap shot.
Last edited by neofury*: 10-12-2011 at
View Public Profile
Visit neofury*'s homepage!
Find More Posts by neofury*