LOL?
Not sure what you're LOLing about.
I think a forward getting in and hitting on the forecheck is a different and easier skill than a defenseman doing open ice hitting.
Maltby could hit well, don't think he is as good as Kronwall, but agree with you Captain Bob at least what I think you are getting at. They specialize in two different kinds of hits. But don't pretend Maltby didn't have headliners either here are some big ones
We have witnessed in the last 3-4 years that pure fighters/goons have been fased out of the game.
We witness much less fighting than some years ago.
So do we want to fase out hitting?
Phasing out hitting isn't the goal to anybody.
I hate to sound like a broken record, but the NHL is facing a major issue. Brain injuries will continue to become more understood, and as such, the ramifications of playing a game that is scrambling so many noggins will be fully fleshed out. One of the underlying decisions here for the NHL and NHLPA is what level of risk players are taking when they step on the ice. Are we going to accept over a dozen concussions per year? Or change the rules?
I know some people would prefer to change nothing, but that's a pretty tall order to ask of our entertainers on the ice. It's one thing to fight through pain and adversity, it's another to ask them to risk injury that could impact the 40 years of life they have outside of hockey.
In the end, rule tweaks and stricter suspensions will train the next generation of NHL players to be more conscious of head hits. The current rules and current players are figuring out how to redefine the game on the fly, and naturally there are growing pains associated with this transition. Fear not, hockey will continue to be a fast and physical sport. The NHL backing Kronwall's hits is fair evidence they want to keep a nice check in the game.
And for God's sake, don't drop to your knees and cover your head like it was an old school bomb drill.
This seems to be a big part of your argument but honestly I can't remember him doing that. Show us an example.
Secondly, I'd still love to hear exactly what Kronwall has to gain from engaging in a fight. It's pretty clear that if he does, he's going to lose, and probably get a broken nose out of it. Is that good for team morale? Doubtful. Obviously it's going to turn a potential powerplay (assuming that he got attacked) into 5 min of ES with him sitting out. Sounds like 2 net disadvantages to me, or at best he draws an instigator so it goes from a disadvantage to neutral in that respect. And if your claim is correct, getting his face pounded will convince him to stop throwing those big hits. Considering how good he is at it and their potential for swinging games in our favor, clearly that's another disadvantage.
So what good will fighting bring for Kronwall or the team? I mean besides the respect of certain fans who live strictly by the "Man Code", which I'm sure he couldn't care less about?
I hate to sound like a broken record, but the NHL is facing a major issue. Brain injuries will continue to become more understood, and as such, the ramifications of playing a game that is scrambling so many noggins will be fully fleshed out. One of the underlying decisions here for the NHL and NHLPA is what level of risk players are taking when they step on the ice. Are we going to accept over a dozen concussions per year? Or change the rules?
I know some people would prefer to change nothing, but that's a pretty tall order to ask of our entertainers on the ice. It's one thing to fight through pain and adversity, it's another to ask them to risk injury that could impact the 40 years of life they have outside of hockey.
In the end, rule tweaks and stricter suspensions will train the next generation of NHL players to be more conscious of head hits. The current rules and current players are figuring out how to redefine the game on the fly, and naturally there are growing pains associated with this transition. Fear not, hockey will continue to be a fast and physical sport. The NHL backing Kronwall's hits is fair evidence they want to keep a nice check in the game.
There are 2 different cases here:
1. Players' safety
I agree with you that the players have to be protected.
2. There are a very few posters that think Kronwall (any player) has to fight after a clean hit.
It seems to me that the majority of the fans do not think Kronwall (or any player) has to fight after a clean hit. And it seems to me that the players also think that Kronwall does not have to fight. There was one Flyers player challenging Kronwall, Kronwall did not want to fight and they continued to play. Had they thought the hit was illegal/dirty, they would have jumped Kronwall no matter what.
But I have seen some player delivering cheap hits (Ovechkin) and then hiding/running away. Ovechkin should get his clock cleaned. Not Kronwall, his hits are fine.
Kronwall used to lift his feet. Now he does not do it anymore. Maybe he should bend down so that he avoids the head.
This seems to be a big part of your argument but honestly I can't remember him doing that. Show us an example.
Secondly, I'd still love to hear exactly what Kronwall has to gain from engaging in a fight. It's pretty clear that if he does, he's going to lose, and probably get a broken nose out of it. Is that good for team morale? Doubtful. Obviously it's going to turn a potential powerplay (assuming that he got attacked) into 5 min of ES with him sitting out. Sounds like 2 net disadvantages to me, or at best he draws an instigator so it goes from a disadvantage to neutral in that respect. And if your claim is correct, getting his face pounded will convince him to stop throwing those big hits. Considering how good he is at it and their potential for swinging games in our favor, clearly that's another disadvantage.
So what good will fighting bring for Kronwall or the team? I mean besides the respect of certain fans who live strictly by the "Man Code", which I'm sure he couldn't care less about?
This code has changed/is about to be changed. It seems to me the most hockey people (fans, players, coaches) think that a player does not have to fight after a clean hit.
This code has changed/is about to be changed. It seems to me the most hockey people (fans, players, coaches) think that a player does not have to fight after a clean hit.
It wasn't always like this either. Back in the Howe's day, who had no problem fighting by the way, it was okay to resort to elbows, stick work and other forms of payback. In other words, if Gord felt he got an elbow to the head, he didn't think his only option was to fight.
When I started watching hockey, which was back when Mickey still played, it's like he describes. A clean hit was a hockey play and accepted. No one got their panties in a bunch over a check. This was right before the official goon era, when everyone had to have an enforcer. They weren't after the clean hits per se, but the hacks and whacks and intents to injure outside the rules. If the Red Army team had had an enforcer, someone would have kicked Bobby Clarke's ass for that stick work on Kharlamov's ankle. I'm not sure when the current interpretation of The Code morphed into "Hey, if you check my teammate, you know, like with a hip check or other hockey play, I'm going to punch you." A lot of coaches egg that kind of thing on. Though I will never be able to prove it, I think that was the culture, one of intimidation and retribution, that indeed helped create that mess between Bert-Moore-Naslund. Burke was the GM and Crawford was the coach. It's in their DNA. Of course, by today's rules, that hit Moore put on their team captain would have resulted in him getting a game misconduct and probably a suspension. By today's standards, Naslund would have missed a lot more time due to a concussion than what passed for an evaluation back then.
One thing that has shocked me a bit is viewing the old hits, back in the Scott Stevens era, and on up before the current standards. You can see the wobbly knees and players who have no idea where they are.... yet they get up and come back to play relatively quickly. It's kind of sickening to watch knowing what we now know about concussions and brain injuries.
Kronwall isn't cowardly or "clever", he's a fish out of water, it's a cultural issue. In Europe fighting is prohibited to an extent that kids don't learn it, they don't grow up with it. It's not part of what hockey is to them.
Some kids still want to do it of course because well some kids like to fight and some kids idolize the NHL way, but as a rule it wouldn't even enter the mindset of most European players. And Swedish culture in particular makes them in terms of tendencies a pretty timid, moderate people. I say tendencies because there's obviously exceptions, but an angry Swede is generally speaking less agitated than an Italian having a good day.
The problem with Kronwall is that nevertheless he has acquired the North American tendency of heavy hitting. In European leagues hits like Kronwall's always get called, the definition of "clean" in a European league is miles from the NHL's definition. Hitting is still closer to the European mindset than fighting. I think it was Selanne who once said that his ideal hockey is skilled, fast-paced with lots of big hits. Fighting didn't feature in that idea.
But of course in North America, there's a hockey code and a way things are done and Kronwall is flying in the face of it. It's kind of naive to expect that to go down well.
^^^I put in bold my favorite part. Made me chuckle this morning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMoreYouKnow
Some kids still want to do it of course because well some kids like to fight and some kids idolize the NHL way, but as a rule it wouldn't even enter the mindset of most European players. And Swedish culture in particular makes them in terms of tendencies a pretty timid, moderate people. I say tendencies because there's obviously exceptions, but an angry Swede is generally speaking less agitated than an Italian having a good day.
It wasn't always like this either. Back in the Howe's day, who had no problem fighting by the way, it was okay to resort to elbows, stick work and other forms of payback. In other words, if Gord felt he got an elbow to the head, he didn't think his only option was to fight.
When I started watching hockey, which was back when Mickey still played, it's like he describes. A clean hit was a hockey play and accepted. No one got their panties in a bunch over a check. This was right before the official goon era, when everyone had to have an enforcer. They weren't after the clean hits per se, but the hacks and whacks and intents to injure outside the rules. If the Red Army team had had an enforcer, someone would have kicked Bobby Clarke's ass for that stick work on Kharlamov's ankle. I'm not sure when the current interpretation of The Code morphed into "Hey, if you check my teammate, you know, like with a hip check or other hockey play, I'm going to punch you." A lot of coaches egg that kind of thing on. Though I will never be able to prove it, I think that was the culture, one of intimidation and retribution, that indeed helped create that mess between Bert-Moore-Naslund. Burke was the GM and Crawford was the coach. It's in their DNA. Of course, by today's rules, that hit Moore put on their team captain would have resulted in him getting a game misconduct and probably a suspension. By today's standards, Naslund would have missed a lot more time due to a concussion than what passed for an evaluation back then.
One thing that has shocked me a bit is viewing the old hits, back in the Scott Stevens era, and on up before the current standards. You can see the wobbly knees and players who have no idea where they are.... yet they get up and come back to play relatively quickly. It's kind of sickening to watch knowing what we now know about concussions and brain injuries.
The game and the rules change, they always have and always will.
I think it is interesting when Mickey talks about how it was in the "old" days.
I did not witness the Oilers/Gretzky era in the '80, but I have read several places that it all started with Gretzky and his enforcer.
Another reason is the protection of star players. Over the history of hockey, many enforcers have been signed simply to protect players like Gretzky, who was protected by Dave Semenko, Marty McSorley and others, and Brett Hull, who was protected by Kelly Chase and others.[30] The NHL averaged twice as many fights during Gretzky's prime with the Edmonton Oilers than it did during the 1970s.
In other words, if someone tried to get Grettzky (star players) off of their game by cheap shots (legal/illegal hits) or take them out, then they had to answer to the enforcer for their "cheap" shots.
Back to Kronwall. Kronwall is a star player in this league. He hits "cleanly/legally". He does not target/headhunt star players. He hits if he catches you with your head down. He choosed not to fight cause he does not do anything wrong.
I think we love his hits. (I personally love Datsyuk's game because he hits).
So I think we the fans want to keeping hitting in the game. We want to keep fighing in the game. And it seems to me the players want to keep both hitting and fighting in the game.
And I assume we all agree we want to find the rules so the players do not try to injure each others.
The thing about Kronwall hits is, hes really good at it. Anybody else and that ends in a 2 on 1 or a breakaway. The wings were really dominating leading up to the hit, and no wonder Kronwall wants to do everything he can to keep that puck in. Pretty much had the opposite effect though, and only woke the Flyers up. For what its worth, even a number of Flyers said it was a good hit. Including Voracek.
I wish you had taken your own word for when you said you would give up on this thread.
Like on the second page.
I like how it has to be all or nothing. Would I like it if our team was full of players who can skate and fight? Sure. Fights and highly emotional games are tons of fun, many fans became Wings fans after the '97 brawl.
It's kinda like when a tough guy has a full cage on because he got cut in a fight, should he just sit until he can fight again? Since obviously being tough with a cage on and unable to fight makes him a coward, right?
if Kronners can't or won't stand up to guy looking for retribution, he needs to tone down the hitting enough that he doesn't become a target every 3 or 4 games.
mod
and after a Zillion times of me asking the question "WHY should he engage anyone after a hit?" You still avoid answering the question.
He has absolutely no obligation to fight anyone, he hits within the rules and people don't like it....Tough S**T Bob. If you don't like watching the way he plays then stop watching the game and shut the hell up making dumb comments
and after a Zillion times of me asking the question "WHY should he engage anyone after a hit?" You still avoid answering the question.
He has absolutely no obligation to fight anyone, he hits within the rules and people don't like it....Tough S**T Bob. If you don't like watching the way he plays then stop watching the game and shut the hell up making dumb comments
actually he did. something about if you deliver big hits, the unwritten hockey code states that you should fight afterwards, otherwise you're a coward
Why does a guy have to get into a fight after a hit, but not a goal?
Yeah. Why?
Come on, dude.
When I score a goal on you, I am not smashing your head violently.
Violence begets violence, within the rules or not.
And since hockey is sport where fighting is still a small infraction (no ejections/suspensions like most sports) fighting is part of the game's conduct.
I like how it has to be all or nothing. Would I like it if our team was full of players who can skate and fight? Sure. Fights and highly emotional games are tons of fun, many fans became Wings fans after the '97 brawl.
It's kinda like when a tough guy has a full cage on because he got cut in a fight, should he just sit until he can fight again? Since obviously being tough with a cage on and unable to fight makes him a coward, right?
Nobody has suggested anything as preposterous as that.
Kronwall flies in the face of decades of hockey tradition. You can't even acknowledge the obvious, so how would you be expected to converse about this
Why does a guy have to get into a fight after a hit, but not a goal?
Especially when they disrespectfully rub it in by having their fans cheer, blow a loud obnoxious horn and take 2 minutes to high five everyone on the bench.
Kronwall flies in the face of decades of hockey tradition.
But it doesn't. Fugu made a nice post about that. Clean hits were always accepted. It's the dirty business and head hunting that fighting was there to discourage, not Kronwall's league accepted legal hits.
Nobody has suggested anything as preposterous as that. Kronwall flies in the face of decades of hockey tradition. You can't even acknowledge the obvious, so how would you be expected to converse about this
Someone has to be a trailblazer. Nicklas Kronwall plays hockey the way he believes it should be played and the way that makes him the most effective player he can be, and god bless him for that. I'd hate to see him deliberately subvert his game in the name of some vacuous standard of approval from certain self-important fans.
Someone has to be a trailblazer. Nicklas Kronwall plays hockey the way he believes it should be played and the way that makes him the most effective player he can be, and god bless him for that. I'd hate to see him deliberately subvert his game in the name of some vacuous standard of approval from certain self-important fans.
Yeah. He's a regular Gandhi on skates. He's a trailblazer in his non-violent response to people responding to his violence.
But it doesn't. Fugu made a nice post about that. Clean hits were always accepted. It's the dirty business and head hunting that fighting was there to discourage, not Kronwall's league accepted legal hits.
First of all, Kronwall's league accept hit? It was a dead-on head shot. The head was the principal point of contact. Kronwall made NO effort to hit anywhere but the head.
Second of all Fugu is dead wrong.
Fugu is repeating a myth that gets said over and over. But it's not true.
Hard hits...hits to the head, have always drawn attention.
Fighting was more common in just about every era than it is now. And many of those fights were in response to hitting.
I just interviewed a guy who played in the 70s and 80s. He's a lawyer now. His view? Wouldn't be as many headshots if fighting hadn't been largely ushered from the game.
Third of all, hitting has changed a great deal over the years. Guys didn't wait at the blueline and rush in and launch themselves like a missile at guys with their heads down.
THat's a fairly new element to the sport.
If you think the Boston Bruins or Philadelphia Flyers or Montreal Canadiens or Detroit Red Wings of the 1970s would allow a panzie like Kronwall to deliver a head shot like he did... you're dead wrong. With all those goons every team had?
