View Single Post
03-12-2013, 06:26 PM
5 cups pls
billybudd's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 19,958
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by cam042686 View Post
I. Why did we see it develop as something tolerated in some levels of North American hockey and not in Europe? What makes the hockey fan in North America intrinsically different from those in Europe?
Those are two different questions.

The answer to question #1 would require a comparative analysis of the socioeconomic background, as well as the cultural norms in their respective cultures of players in 1880s, which nobody's about to do here. It might be that Irish immigrants to Canada were among the league's first players and had, within their own communities, developed a sense that grievances could only be settled in a just manner outside the proper, legal channels. But I'm not gonna do a research paper on this just now, sorry.

Question number 2 is a bogus question based on a false assumption on your part. The only high level pro team in the sport that is successful marketing itself as a bunch of brawlers is in the KHL, not in the NHL. Also, the only top-level bench clearing brawls I've seen in about a decade have been in either Russia or Finland.

II. Fighting is against the rules everywhere. Why then do we see entire web pages, videos, etc that embrace fighting and yet we don’t see the same for say boarding, slashing, spearing, etc – which like fighting are also against the rules?
For the same reason Zuffa can fill an arena with an MMA match, but nobody would buy tickets to a suckerpunching contest. Human beings like face to face "fair" violent confrontations. It's evolutionary. We get an adrenaline rush watching battle. A bigger one participating in it. It's how we determine power on the most basic, lizard-brained level. If we didn't work like this, we never would have mastered our environment and would have died out back in the caves.

III. I am not going to question your morality, ethics, etc. but tell me – what is it about fighting that you find attractive? I really don’t get. The last NHL game I went to live was in the late 90’s and Tie Domi punched a Chicago player in the head during a fight and the Black Hawk dropped – he was out cold. MLG grew very quiet and Domi looked scared. I walked out – I didn’t want to be in the company of people who found such activities enjoyable. That tells you a bit about who I am and how I think and what my values are. I have never been back and until the NHL throws players out for fighting I won’t be back – nor will I watch it on TV. But that is me – my personal choice and values. But again – what is exciting or attractive about fist fighting in hockey?
This tells me only that you're perfectly happy to put your head in the sand. There's a lot of violence in hockey. If you found violence morally repugnant, you wouldn't watch hockey period until it was ALL removed.

Far more players have had their lives changed from "legal" checks than have ever had that happen from fighting. But you're not objecting to violence in hockey. You're objecting to "fighting." Fighting is violence without any pretenses. So you're saying that violence is okay with you as long as you can pretend it's not violence.

This is like only eating meat made from animals that were raised in luxury and calling it "humane," then decrying anybody who has any old ham sandwich. If you're eating meat at all, the animal died violently, squealing and writhing in pain as its life was snuffed out. Different people accept this, ignore this, reject meat for this reason. Rejecting meat could be seen as the conscionable choice. Ignoring the violence involved in the slaughter of livestock and eating it anyway, while looking down on the group that admits it's brutal, is an exercise in denial, not an exercise of conscience, but you would like to pretend otherwise, which is a seriously deluded place to put yourself.

IV. To add to the last question – would you stand and cheer say two men you saw fighting on the street? If not why not if you would do so in a hockey rink?
No, because that's not in a controlled environment. Escalation is an unknown and there's little to stop it from spilling over from spectator to participant. There's bodily risk to the viewer so he or she needs to put that priority ahead of all others.

However, below all that, a lot of people would want to. Alcohol lowers social inhibitions and the muddies the self-preservation instinct. If you've never seen people cheer two strangers fighting in public, my guess is you've also never been outside an after-hours club.

Last edited by billybudd: 03-12-2013 at 06:39 PM.
billybudd is offline   Reply With Quote