HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Hockey without fighting.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-07-2013, 12:30 PM
  #351
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 20,989
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shizno View Post
HEY LOOK I CAN CHERRY PICK AN INCIDENT TO SUPPORT MY CASE TO!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roAkL8_LpCs

Without that fight, and that sssh, Penguins probably don't come back and win that game, perhaps the series. OR THE CUP!
Sigh...that's the point I was making, we can all cherry pick incidents that serve whatever argument were making

what does that tell me? That fighting really doesn't have an affect, or as much of an affect as we all think.

MANY things affect the outcomes of games...

You realize that the MAJORITY of NHL games do not have a SINGLE fight in them? Right?

417 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 12:30 PM
  #352
DrunkElkCZ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Brno, Czech Rep.
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 618
vCash: 500
Hockey without fighting in NA? "Fans" in some arenas would have nothing to cheer about... (while eating a hot dog)

DrunkElkCZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 12:30 PM
  #353
misha1976
Registered User
 
misha1976's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Delhi, India
Posts: 147
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon View Post
For anyone who is claiming that fighting is "integral" to hockey, let me ask this:

Can a game of NHL hockey be played and completed without a fight?

If the answer to that question is yes, it's hard to call it an integral part of the game.

This isn't even necessarily an argument in favor of removing fighting, just that some people really need to dial back the rhetoric about its importance.
It is integral to the NHL style of hockey as it's played right now. It's by definition integral as it's a regularly occurring element of the 60 minutes that are played. I'm not trying to be pedantic. My argument isn't that a game of NHL hockey cannot be played without a fight. Of course it could and of course it sometimes is. But the ritualized violence and threat of violence that underlies the game as it's played now makes for a particular type of game that I enjoy watching.

The minute it starts interfering and holding back the other more skilled parts of the game, like it did in the 70s, I'd have a problem with it. I don;t think it does that. What I see is a good mix of skill with sports tribalism. I like it.

And as others have said before, what concerns me more are undisciplined, reckless and sometimes even criminal hits. Not the odd consensual fight.

misha1976 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 12:32 PM
  #354
danyhabsfan
Registered User
 
danyhabsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacob8hockey View Post
Nope, fighting with gloves on would actually be worse, it rips the skin and leads to bleeding. Fight with your fists, thats how it should be done.

I know but a bloody face is better than an injury to your brain...

danyhabsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 12:39 PM
  #355
mygameworn
Registered User
 
mygameworn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 1,970
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to mygameworn
What is wrong with people? If you don't like fight that's fine, but don't use head injuries as your excuse to complain about it. Fighting is up this season and there were only 2 concussions as a result.

If your concerned with the well-being of players and want to complain about head injuries, get rid of the dirty players in the league that have caused far more damage than any fight. Those players have ZERO respect for the game and serve little to no purpose.

Also please stop with the staged fight nonsense, there is no such thing. All fights serve a purpose, we may not understand and people don't or can't accept it, but to the players, they accept it.

mygameworn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 12:43 PM
  #356
JackStraw
Moving much too slow
 
JackStraw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 2,462
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheppy View Post
You can die from a ton of things. Look at the Swiss league hit the other night, could have snapped his neck. You run the risk for 60+ minutes a night of catching a skate somewhere in the head/neck area.

There are risks everywhere.
Yeah, you can die from choking on a chicken bone I guess. But the guy I responded to suggested that the idea of someone dying as a result of a hockey fight was ridiculous. Which it clearly is not. If he said the possibility of someone dying as a result of getting cut with a skate blade was ridiculous, he would have been wrong there too.

JackStraw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 12:47 PM
  #357
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 16,274
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by misha1976 View Post
It is integral to the NHL style of hockey as it's played right now. It's by definition integral as it's a regularly occurring element of the 60 minutes that are played. I'm not trying to be pedantic. My argument isn't that a game of NHL hockey cannot be played without a fight. Of course it could and of course it sometimes is. But the ritualized violence and threat of violence that underlies the game as it's played now makes for a particular type of game that I enjoy watching.
Going into any playoff game, you know going in that there's about a 98% chance that you will not see a single fight. Are the games less intense? Are they less worth watching?

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 12:51 PM
  #358
Epsilon
#TeamRaccoon
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 39,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shizno View Post
HEY LOOK I CAN CHERRY PICK AN INCIDENT TO SUPPORT MY CASE TO!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roAkL8_LpCs

Without that fight, and that sssh, Penguins probably don't come back and win that game, perhaps the series. OR THE CUP!
Holy correlation-causation leap, batman!

Epsilon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 12:56 PM
  #359
Eisen
Registered User
 
Eisen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Eugene
Country: United States
Posts: 7,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZARTONK View Post
If fighting is removed, what's to stop a team from getting a bunch of Matt Cooks and have them run around with intent to injure the other teams star players?

The ability to make stupid hits with no retribution possible will lead to countless career ending injuries.

Not to mention, do you really think removing fighting from the game is like flipping a switch? It's would be impossible to straight up remove it in one shot.
The refs and Shanahan? Suspensions are a joke these days. I want to see half year suspensions for deliberate head shots and so on.

Eisen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 12:59 PM
  #360
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Going into any playoff game, you know going in that there's about a 98% chance that you will not see a single fight. Are the games less intense? Are they less worth watching?
unless its a first round flyers pens game.

Whats the chance of scoring a short handed goal in the playoffs ? is this part of the game so inconsequential that we can propose to dispose of it ?

Basing whether something is part of the game on frequency is lunacy. Because something happens less frequently does not make it less "part of the game". hat tricks are rare and very much a part of the game.

I've never seen anyone lament the lack of fights in close games, and the players can choose when to fight. if they chose not to fight, I support them. But that's not what the anti fighting crowd, they are advocating that the players should not be able to fight even if they want to. How anyone can get behind that position is a complete mystery to me.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 01:12 PM
  #361
PatriceBergeronFan
Dismayed B's Fan
 
PatriceBergeronFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,469
vCash: 500
.... would be lame.

PatriceBergeronFan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 01:20 PM
  #362
Langdon Alger*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon View Post
For anyone who is claiming that fighting is "integral" to hockey, let me ask this:

Can a game of NHL hockey be played and completed without a fight?

If the answer to that question is yes, it's hard to call it an integral part of the game.

This isn't even necessarily an argument in favor of removing fighting, just that some people really need to dial back the rhetoric about its importance.
I'm not going to debate the truth of this, because that's more or less inarguable - however, I will point out that the same would've been true had you replaced the term "fight" with "body check" in your post.

That's interesting to me. Hockey is played with no hitting as well as no fighting, and both could be removed completely without changing the game much at all; in fact, if the goal is to remove as many concussions and sub-concussive impacts as possible, then removing hitting would make more sense, since that's what causes the overwhelming majority of brain injuries in hockey. Still, next to nobody talks about taking body checking out of the game, and the handful who do are looked upon as whackjobs. Why is that?

Langdon Alger* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 01:22 PM
  #363
Fat Jughead
Registered User
 
Fat Jughead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Milbury
Country: United States
Posts: 1,998
vCash: 500
I could do without a scrap like what happened last night. End result aside, there was just no reason for that fight to even happen. I really could not care less that he got knocked out. Everybody who fights accepts that risk, and it happens.

The game wasn't getting out of control. There was no previous beef between the 2 players (that I know of); so it was just a useless ploy to try and get the teammates going. You can do the exact same thing by going out there and putting in a good physical shift. Now if he had to have a fight after a shift like that, then there's a good reason to fight. Sometimes you have to take a guy off the ice just to get em to calm down before he goes overboard.

Guys who can't play hockey have no business in the game. If you're talking about getting rid of pure goons who can't even play, then I'm on board. But you can't get rid of fighting altogether. It's a relief valve of sorts for a lot of garbage that takes place out there. Left unchecked, negative emotions build up and games will get out of control fast. You need to have these small blowouts, to avoid having the epic blowouts.

Hockey is nothing like other sports who don't allow fighting, so the comparison is stupid. We have a unique blend of a skill sport mixed with a contact sport. The sheer speed of it doesn't really allow for the best thought out decisions all the time. Couple that with some pretty dangerous equipment that we're allowed to wear/utilize and you have a pretty volatile formula for fun

Stuff can happen out there in the blink of an eye, and lines get frequently crossed. You can't ask a hockey player to be all: "well, he probably didn't mean to do that. I'll just turn the other cheek and trust that he'll sort himself out." See how stupid that sounds... You need to be able to say: "hey, watch your ****ing stick (whatever the case may be), or I'm gonna kick your ass"; and then be able to back up the warning.

The refs don't catch a lot of stuff, so you need to be able to look after yourself and your teammates out there. At the end of the day, if you're not responsible for you and yours, then who the hell is?

The cliche answer is: it's about accountability. The refs can't always be there to settle everything. Take fighting out, and then see how things get settled I promise some of you really won't like it.

Fat Jughead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 01:25 PM
  #364
Epsilon
#TeamRaccoon
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 39,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Langdon Alger View Post
I'm not going to debate the truth of this, because that's more or less inarguable - however, I will point out that the same would've been true had you replaced the term "fight" with "body check" in your post.

That's interesting to me. Hockey is played with no hitting as well as no fighting, and both could be removed completely without changing the game much at all; in fact, if the goal is to remove as many concussions and sub-concussive impacts as possible, removing hitting would make more sense, since that's what causes the vast, vast majority of brain injuries in hockey. Still, next to nobody talks about taking body checking out of the game, and the handful who do are looked upon as whackjobs. Why is that?
From a theoretical point of view, that's probably true (theoretically, for a hockey game to end with a winner there is a minimal need of one shot on goal, and nothing else). From a practical point of view, how often does a game end without a single body check? It's not really a reasonable comparison because basically no NHL hockey game is played without many shots, body checks, passes, etc. whereas games are played frequently without a single fight.

Fighting exists in the same sphere as other actions that may occur in the game of hockey but frequently do not, such as penalty shots (for something that isn't against the rules), or elbows to the head (for something that is). None of these things is "integral" to the game because none of them are something which occurs with regularity over virtually any contested game of hockey.

Epsilon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 01:30 PM
  #365
BruinsBtn
Registered User
 
BruinsBtn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,669
vCash: 500
On 99.99% of days policemen don't fire their guns, therefore guns aren't an integral part of policing and should be eliminated.

Anyone want to poke holes in the that argument?

BruinsBtn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 01:30 PM
  #366
John Stamos
The Peoples Champ
 
John Stamos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,187
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by compile View Post
I guess no one here watches Olympic hockey nor NHL playoff games.

Shame it's pretty damn entertaining.
yes, because the olympics are a very close comparable to a regular season NHL game.

For that matter, the playoffs are a completely different animal as well

John Stamos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 01:32 PM
  #367
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon View Post
From a theoretical point of view, that's probably true (theoretically, for a hockey game to end with a winner there is a minimal need of one shot on goal, and nothing else). From a practical point of view, how often does a game end without a single body check? It's not really a reasonable comparison because basically no NHL hockey game is played without many shots, body checks, passes, etc. whereas games are played frequently without a single fight.

Fighting exists in the same sphere as other actions that may occur in the game of hockey but frequently do not, such as penalty shots (for something that isn't against the rules), or elbows to the head (for something that is). None of these things is "integral" to the game because none of them are something which occurs with regularity over virtually any contested game of hockey.
so for something to be integral to the game, your definition is that it has to have greater than 50% probablity to happen in any game ? Are penalty shots integral ? Are shutouts ? a gordie howe ?

focusing exclusively on any particular game is woefully misplaced. the question is, in the aggregate is the likelihood of something happening a reasonable expectation. There is a long storied history of fighting in the game. how people can deny this because it contrasts with their idealized vision of the game requires a level of delusion I prefer not to enable.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 01:33 PM
  #368
Epsilon
#TeamRaccoon
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 39,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruinsBtn View Post
On 99.99% of days policemen don't fire their guns, therefore guns aren't an integral part of policing and should be eliminated.

Anyone want to poke holes in the that argument?
That's an absolutely awful analogy.

Epsilon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 01:33 PM
  #369
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon View Post
That's an absolutely awful analogy.
care to explain why ?

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 01:33 PM
  #370
Cursed Lemon
Registered Bruiser
 
Cursed Lemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 5,308
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Cursed Lemon
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackStraw View Post
That's not ridiculous at all. Someone (with helmet off) takes a big shot to the head and falls backward. Hits his head on the ice and...

The only player to ever die from an injury suffered in an NHL game (Bill Masterson) died from hitting his head on the ice. It could certainly happen again, as a result of a fight.
Count me the number of fights in recorded hockey history.

Count me the number of serious injuries.

Cursed Lemon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 01:35 PM
  #371
Holocene
Registered User
 
Holocene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Toms River, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,421
vCash: 500
Too much testosterone up in here. Telling other people to watch another sport if they don't like fighting. Yeah because fighting is the sole entertainment in hockey. 60 minutes of guys punching each other right?

Holocene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 01:36 PM
  #372
CornKicker
Still burning Lowood
 
CornKicker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,574
vCash: 694
we already have hockey with out fighting, its called womens hockey and no one watches it.

CornKicker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 01:37 PM
  #373
BruinsBtn
Registered User
 
BruinsBtn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon View Post
That's an absolutely awful analogy.
About the response I expected from the geniuses in this thread.

BruinsBtn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 01:38 PM
  #374
Cursed Lemon
Registered Bruiser
 
Cursed Lemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Nashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 5,308
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Cursed Lemon
Quote:
Originally Posted by Affinity View Post
Too much testosterone up in here. Telling other people to watch another sport if they don't like fighting. Yeah because fighting is the sole entertainment in hockey. 60 minutes of guys punching each other right?
That argument works in reverse, as well.

Cursed Lemon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 01:40 PM
  #375
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Affinity View Post
Too much testosterone up in here. Telling other people to watch another sport if they don't like fighting. Yeah because fighting is the sole entertainment in hockey. 60 minutes of guys punching each other right?
ive been told on multiple occasions that if I like fights so much, I should watch MMA. if thats your cup of tea, good for you but I have zero interest in seeing guys pound each other for the sole purpose of pounding each other.

I'm not a vampire, I dont need to see fights to entertain me. I suspect that many pro-fight people have the same opinion and I further admit that there are likely vampire fans ( although I think their numbers are horrifically inflated if you listen to the anti-fight crowd). I've seen many great games without fights. but if it comes to the players position that they reserve the right to drop them vs the anti-fighting proposents who insist the players should not be allowed to fight under any circumstance, I side with the former.

I dont know if this decision is influenced by my testosterone levels.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:21 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.