It isn't about how it makes Sedin look because there isn't anything he could do for his own dignity after that other than dropping the mitts with Marchand himself
And what was excatly excuse of Sedin to not dropping gloves with Marchand ? Thats what Im telling all the time- players are supposed to fight their own battles.
Quote:
But I have to ask, how can you not see that having teammates that have your back makes you more comfortable? I can't understand how you don't see that logic. I know its been 65 years since Canada was in WWII but think of it that way, you certainly feel a lot more comfortable if someone has your back. The analogy works with hockey (although of course less serious than war). I guarantee you Gretzky felt a whole lot better knowing Semenko had his back regardless. Or McSorley. In fact how do I KNOW he felt comfortable with Marty? He requested that he came with him to L.A. in the trade. Pretty solid proof there don't you think?
I wouldn't feel safer, because I DON't want anyone fight for me. In my opinion its far more embarrasing than turtling. And yes, I have far more respect to Ulf Samuelsson, who was a cheap shot artist, and was under constant attack from goons, but was on his own, than to "protected" player.
Gretzky, sorry, means nothing for me. Scott Stevens means.
Quote:
I can also assure you that you'd feel safer on the ice if Chara was with you than if Phil Housley was. That's the importance of enforcers, if only for the reason for protection and peace of mind for the other players
Great. Peace of mind. I can't hold Ulf/Ott/whoever, so I'll let Probert/Chara do it. Agitator will be labeled as "coward", goon will be a hero, while I'll be simply "non fighter".
I wouldn't feel safer, because I DON't want anyone fight for me. In my opinion its far more embarrasing than turtling. And yes, I have far more respect to Ulf Samuelsson, who was a cheap shot artist, and was under constant attack from goons, but was on his own, than to "protected" player.
Gretzky, sorry, means nothing for me. Scott Stevens means.
You do realize the point of a game of hockey is to score more goals than the other team, right? You honestly think Ulf's cheapshotting is more respectable than coming to the aid of a teammate in order to win the game?
You do realize the point of a game of hockey is to score more goals than the other team, right? You honestly think Ulf's cheapshotting is more respectable than coming to the aid of a teammate in order to win the game?
And Ulf cheapshotting was on purpose to lose the game ? Or just on purpose of cheapshotting itself ?
For some weird reason he won more SCs than ski players like Sedin, or Oates, who never fought, just scored.
And Ulf cheapshotting was on purpose to lose the game ? Or just on purpose of cheapshotting itself ?
For some weird reason he won more SCs than ski players like Sedin, or Oates, who never fought, just scored.
Ulf cheapshotting had the unfortunate side effect of ending careers of players who were there to play a, key word here, GAME. Fighting and rough play are a part of hockey, always have been and always should be, ending the careers of what are essentially your work associates is not. To be entirely honest with you, I was completely with you until you decided to bring up Ulf as some sort of paragon of a hockey player. There is a difference between playing hard like Stevens and the sort of antics Ulf engaged in.
Ulf cheapshotting had the unfortunate side effect of ending careers of players who were there to play a, key word here, GAME. Fighting and rough play are a part of hockey, always have been and always should be, ending the careers of what are essentially your work associates is not. To be entirely honest with you, I was completely with you until you decided to bring up Ulf as some sort of paragon of a hockey player. There is a difference between playing hard like Stevens and the sort of antics Ulf engaged in.
Work associates? Really?? Not sure if you've ever played, but it just ain't that chummy out there...
The term enforcer is tough to define in present day hockey. The older Bruins teams always had an enforcer like, Jay Miller, Wensink, Byers, etc. They usually played some minutes but were there to keep the other team in line and they were usually a very good fighter. Enforcers who cant fight serve little purpose. Now earlier somebody brought up the name ULf in an enforcer thread. Ulf may have been the biggest embarassment and cheap shot artist to ever lace on skates. He may have have 70 fights but look at them and tell me if falling down and playing turtle is a fight. It is no small coincidence that the current dirtbag owner of the Penguins has been associated with so many gutless pukes. Lemieux played with Ulf., Kasparaitis and now he signs Cooke's checks. I enjoy watching somebody with the skill of Crosby but the karma is going to cost him eventually.
Enforcer = no talent hockey player who usually plays less than 5 minutes and doesn't bring anything to the table when his gloves or on (McGratton, Rob Ray, Colton Orr)
Grinder = player who clearly brings other assets to the game but will drop the gloves if needed (David Clarkson, Wayne Cashman, Kris Draper)
Agitator = player who is there to shadow/antagonize the top players on the other team but will fight (Ott, Esa tikkanen, darcy tucker, Claude Lemieux)
Rat = antagonist who either never fights or only fights light weights (Burrows, lapierre, Kirk Maltby)
Enforcers hinder the game more than helping. I love fighting but usually these guys only fight the other teams enforcers and rarely serve a big purpose.
I love grinders and agitators, if i were building a team I'd take more of these guys who could respond to something that happens unlike enforcers who are on the bench for 55 minutes a game.
Rats need to be removed from the game before hockey even thinks about removing fighting. Remove fighting and these rats multiply and have a field day. And i don't buy the notion that enforcers protect the rats. It's well documented Matthew Barnaby started out as a rat but Rob Ray told him "I'm not fighting to clean up your messes, if you're going to pull that stuff, fight your own battles", Barnaby progressed to becoming an agitator.
There really is a simple solution (well not that simple) there's plenty of ideas floating around to keep fighting in but get rid of enforcers via an ice time to penalty minute quota being required. Enforce something like that and get rid of the instigator rules. Put this type of rule in and get rid of the instigator rule. Enforcers are gone and rats taken care of.
If you aren't skilled/talented enough to play 10mins without embarrassing yourself you really have no place in the league. I like enforcers but only when they can actually play the game.
I wouldn't feel safer, because I DON't want anyone fight for me. In my opinion its far more embarrasing than turtling. And yes, I have far more respect to Ulf Samuelsson, who was a cheap shot artist, and was under constant attack from goons, but was on his own, than to "protected" player.
Gretzky, sorry, means nothing for me. Scott Stevens means.
gretzky, lemieux, bossy, yzerman, etc etc sure felt safer with an enforcer by their side. ulf samuelsson fought with a suit of armor and a visor and turtled most of the time. he didn't answer for anything and i'm not sure if any of his "fights" warranted a 5 minute penalty
gretzky, lemieux, bossy, yzerman, etc etc sure felt safer with an enforcer by their side. ulf samuelsson fought with a suit of armor and a visor and turtled most of the time. he didn't answer for anything and i'm not sure if any of his "fights" warranted a 5 minute penalty
- Gretzky and Bossy wre pansies and I thought that was consensus.
- Lemieux never had "enforcer".
- Yzerman had about 15 career fights. Fair enough.
As for Ulf, thats a lie. You hated him for being "dirty", and you want to think about him as for a coward, but he wasn't. He wore visor, so what ? Hockey is NOT the game of honor.
- Gretzky and Bossy wre pansies and I thought that was consensus.
- Lemieux never had "enforcer".
- Yzerman had about 15 career fights. Fair enough.
As for Ulf, thats a lie. You hated him for being "dirty", and you want to think about him as for a coward, but he wasn't. He wore visor, so what ? Hockey is NOT the game of honor.
gretzky and bossy may have been "pansies" because theyd get chewed out by their coach for fighting someone and risk breaking their hand or trading 5 minutes with a guy who doesn't have 1/100th the skill they did. lemieux played with kevin stevens, rick tocchet, and had jay caufield and francois leroux on his team. you may not want to believe it because your beloved ulfie was on the team but that team had enforcers.
ulf would run and hide behind the refs or simply turtled. he was not a fighter, he was a rat
Last edited by JumpOceanless: 04-19-2012 at 02:09 PM.
You're example has nothing to do with the "enforcer" role. It's one teammate stepping in for another. It happens a lot, not exactly like that, but it happens.
You then talk about liking the gusty, scrappy agitators. What agitator has guts? btw Chris Neil is not an agitator, Ott, ok maybe. Marchand, Avery, Ruutu, Downie and I'm sure I'm missing more. There is no guts when it comes to them. They don't answer the bell when it comes time. Agitators know they're protected by the instigator rule.
Your opinions are just that, not fact. I'd remove the dirty players before I'd remove the enforcer role. Also why do you insist on only the enforcers are on steroids?
I'll say Neil is totally an agitator.. maybe his largest role... under Maclean this year he also enforces and is selective on his fights and makes great choices to fight when it lifts his team. Plus he is often on the PP and plays a big role on the third line at ES... 13:30 through 4 playoff games and 12:47 in the reg season.
Straight up enforcers suck. Agitating enforcers who get 13 goals and 28 points and play 13:00 mins a night are uber-valuable... Not very many of them!
- Gretzky and Bossy wre pansies and I thought that was consensus.
- Lemieux never had "enforcer".
- Yzerman had about 15 career fights. Fair enough.
As for Ulf, thats a lie. You hated him for being "dirty", and you want to think about him as for a coward, but he wasn't. He wore visor, so what ? Hockey is NOT the game of honor.
Im with you. I also hate Bossy, Gretzky and Hull.
If you think Gretzky or Bossy were pansies you {MOD EDIT}. Bossy talked a lot but he took ridiculous punishment.. in the slot to score goals. His career ended earlier then it should have becuase he took punishment to score for years... he talked a lot but he went to the places you scored goals.. and paid the price. Gretzky was a freak... He brought McSorley with him to LA because he knew the score and he knew how important protection was... if Mario had maybe he would not have missed so many games. If you messed with Gretzky you got messed with.. simple as that... it was hard to do but at the time Gretzky's enforcers got it right... don't mess with our 150-200 point slim superstar... what other point of an enforcer is there EVER if thy don't protect the best player that ever lived whp was not a thick man at all?
Last edited by Homeland Security: 04-19-2012 at 12:03 PM.
I agree that they shouldn't be playing if there sole purpose is to just fight. Obviously there are some people on this forum that love hockey, but have never played league hockey. Enforcers are needed to protect the skilled players that couldn't fight there way out of a wet paper bag. It's always been like this.
I agree that they shouldn't be playing if there sole purpose is to just fight. Obviously there are some people on this forum that love hockey, but have never played league hockey. Enforcers are needed to protect the skilled players that couldn't fight there way out of a wet paper bag. It's always been like this.
1. If someone "couldn't fight his way out of paper bag", why someone, lets say Brad Marchand should NOT take oportunity on him ?
2. That was my OP point. I don't hate enforcers because they are "skilless". I just don't like idea of "protecting" someone.
3. Its not always been like this. In ancient times, there were no "endforcers", "rats", "skill players", "fighters", and "non-fighters". Not talking about some BS named "the code". Everyone was on his own, everyone was his own enforcer, his own rat, and his own skill player. Three in One. Gordie Howe, or Maurice Richard would agree.
Back in the 40's,50's and 60's There weren't guys that were 6-3 230lbs smashing into people at top speed either. 5-11 180lbs was a big guy back then. I get your point though. All I'm saying is that this isn't the 40's,50's or 60's and pro hockey now has gotten a lot bigger.
We now need to protect our 5-11 180lb players who's mouths or grittiness get them into trouble with theses giants that play today.
Interesting topic, and I don't care for goons either. That said, agitators are equally as annoying to me. Maybe it's my perception, but they are often dirtier than the goons.
what is this guy on? you don't like enforcers, but you like agitators?
i HATE the instigator rule with a passion because of this agitating and rat crap.
after every godamn whistle, if there is a player in front of him, marchand either pushes, hacks, whacks, or all of the mentioned and then hides behind the refs. is this the type of player you want on your team?
As a fan of minor league hockey, they can be a pain in the butt. However, they're needed because they usually also double as a grinder who mucks it up on the boards. I remember one for the Alaska Aces named Justin Johnson. People hated him because he was an enforcer, but I remember he was really good at mucking it up on the boards as well.
Point is, they usually have a skill set beyond just fighting, or at least the ones I have experience with.
I will tend to agree---especially if those enforcers have no other hockey skills. I'd want at least players who can check and penalty-kill in addition to fighting as my bottom-6 guys; those third and fourth lines are not exactly for scrubs anymore.
The day of the dedicated enforcer in the NHL has likely passed. Even the fighters must have hockey skills.
What do you call a guy like Clowe or Lucic or Chara who are essentially enforcers on the ice that can score, if you **** with any of their teammates you know you will end up taking a beating from one of them, what is your stance on those guys? Kick them out of the league as well?
What do you call a guy like Clowe or Lucic or Chara who are essentially enforcers on the ice that can score, if you **** with any of their teammates you know you will end up taking a beating from one of them, what is your stance on those guys? Kick them out of the league as well?
