HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Boston Bruins
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Branch continues to ruin hockey in Canada

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-19-2012, 11:29 AM
  #26
Mr. Make-Believe
Moderator
Pass me another nail
 
Mr. Make-Believe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Erotic Fantasies
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,521
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morris Wanchuk View Post
In the NHL it evolved out, this is someone trying to legislate it out.

HUGE difference.
BIG time.

Laraque not being in this league anymore has nothing to do with the NHL limiting his number of fights in a season.

Mr. Make-Believe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 11:31 AM
  #27
CanadianBruinsFan
Registered User
 
CanadianBruinsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 611
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morris Wanchuk View Post
These kids have parents, no?

If you don't want your kid fighting, don't enroll them in junior hockey in Canada.

The continued lack of personal responsibility in sports pisses me off. Yes there are inherent risks about fighting, if you don't want to assume those risks don't fight.

And if you do and end up with neurological issues down the road, its YOUR problem because YOU or your guardian if you are under 18, CHOOSE to do it.
OK, but you can say the same about NFL players, NHL players, or any sport where concussions happen. I'm not saying it's right to sue or blame others for your problems, but the reality is, it happens. If people get damaged from participating under rules and behaviour that is deemed acceptable by the league, people can find ways to exploit that if they end up seriously injured. I'm just saying I think that's what Branch's thinking could be here, not that these families should be taking the O to court.

CanadianBruinsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 11:32 AM
  #28
PatriceBergeronFan
U.S. Army Hooah!
 
PatriceBergeronFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 14,380
vCash: 500
The whole "think of the children" line of thinking really annoys me for some reason.

Boys will be boys, let them do their thing. Who's to say it's the 11th fight of the season that destroys their brain forever, and not the 1st or 2nd? Maybe just get rid of fighting altogether? (sarcasm)

PatriceBergeronFan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 11:33 AM
  #29
Kate08
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Kate08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Medford MA
Country: United States
Posts: 18,005
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemis View Post
Well said. The OHL has also instituted mandatory suspensions for head shots. Surprise, surprise, head shots - and concussions - have decreased.

Ten fights is a compromise - it leaves fighting in the game, but also acknowledges that blows to the head have a cumulative effect.

I wonder if anyone complaining about this has a child (and yes, adolescents are not adults, medically speaking) playing in the OHL.
Fighting and hits to the head are completely different animals, and I absolutely DESPISE when they are linked.

Kate08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 11:35 AM
  #30
Morris Wanchuk
.......
 
Morris Wanchuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: War Memorial Arena
Country: United States
Posts: 15,124
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Morris Wanchuk
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianBruinsFan View Post
OK, but you can say the same about NFL players, NHL players, or any sport where concussions happen. I'm not saying it's right to sue or blame others for your problems, but the reality is, it happens. If people get damaged from participating under rules and behaviour that is deemed acceptable by the league, people can find ways to exploit that if they end up seriously injured. I'm just saying I think that's what Branch's thinking could be here, not that these families should be taking the O to court.
I against helmet laws, seat belt laws, or anything that takes responsibility away from the person and puts it in the hands on a nanny trying to say what is right for you.

BUT due to the stupidity of the court system, they have tried to legislate personal responsibility out of everything.

However, I just think the Barch guy has it out for fighting and will hide behind anything to get it out of the game. He should just go and join Fassel on the IIHF.

Question for the CHL fans, is the Memorial Cup governed by an independent body? Because the rules in the OHL and WHL seem to becoming increasingly different.

Morris Wanchuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 11:35 AM
  #31
Mr. Make-Believe
Moderator
Pass me another nail
 
Mr. Make-Believe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Erotic Fantasies
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,521
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morris Wanchuk View Post
These kids have parents, no?

If you don't want your kid fighting, don't enroll them in junior hockey in Canada.

The continued lack of personal responsibility in sports pisses me off. Yes there are inherent risks about fighting, if you don't want to assume those risks don't fight.

And if you do and end up with neurological issues down the road, its YOUR problem because YOU or your guardian if you are under 18, CHOOSE to do it.
And hitting in a bigger, faster ever-evolving hockey league is far more risky than fighting. Why aren't they legislating body-checks out of the game?

It's because it's not a real safety issue. Fighting in hockey is seen as evil and needless and something that the sport doesn't need to function. People like "us" aren't up in arms because we want to see more injured young men... But because we see the role fighting has in hockey, how integral it is, and how it can actually help PREVENT injuries from occurring.

Mr. Make-Believe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 11:38 AM
  #32
Mr. Make-Believe
Moderator
Pass me another nail
 
Mr. Make-Believe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Erotic Fantasies
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,521
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemis View Post
Well said. The OHL has also instituted mandatory suspensions for head shots. Surprise, surprise, head shots - and concussions - have decreased.

Ten fights is a compromise - it leaves fighting in the game, but also acknowledges that blows to the head have a cumulative effect.

I wonder if anyone complaining about this has a child (and yes, adolescents are not adults, medically speaking) playing in the OHL.
So when limiting fighting doesn't do anything to curb the amount of concussions in OHL, they should scrap this rule out of it's ineffectiveness?

Mr. Make-Believe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 11:50 AM
  #33
trenton1
Paille Good
 
trenton1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Loge 31 Row 10
Country: Belize
Posts: 7,158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morris Wanchuk View Post
In the NHL it evolved out, this is someone trying to legislate it out.

HUGE difference.
The evolution in the NHL was spurred by legislation, IMO. Check out things like the "last five minutes" rule.

trenton1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 11:54 AM
  #34
Morris Wanchuk
.......
 
Morris Wanchuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: War Memorial Arena
Country: United States
Posts: 15,124
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Morris Wanchuk
Quote:
Originally Posted by trenton1 View Post
The evolution in the NHL was spurred by legislation, IMO. Check out things like the "last five minutes" rule.
True but nothing this extreme... yet.

Morris Wanchuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 12:02 PM
  #35
Dojji*
Fight the Hate
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 16,821
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kate08 View Post
Fighting and hits to the head are completely different animals, and I absolutely DESPISE when they are linked.
For as long as a fist to the chops is considered good work in a hockey fight, fighting and hits to the head are linked

Dojji* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 12:18 PM
  #36
Kate08
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Kate08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Medford MA
Country: United States
Posts: 18,005
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dojji View Post
For as long as a fist to the chops is considered good work in a hockey fight, fighting and hits to the head are linked
The force of a punch, while able to inflict damage, is not even close to the level of force applied during a headshot.

Neither are good, but they are completely different problems to tackle. Never mind that someone engaged in a fight is engaged in that fight consentually, and victims of headshots as we have come to know them are often caught offguard with no ability to protect or brace themselves.

Kate08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 12:26 PM
  #37
patty59
***************
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,606
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Make-Believe View Post
And hitting in a bigger, faster ever-evolving hockey league is far more risky than fighting. Why aren't they legislating body-checks out of the game?

It's because it's not a real safety issue. Fighting in hockey is seen as evil and needless and something that the sport doesn't need to function. People like "us" aren't up in arms because we want to see more injured young men... But because we see the role fighting has in hockey, how integral it is, and how it can actually help PREVENT injuries from occurring.
Branch is trying to do that too. You can't even hit a player with their head down anymore. All that does is teach kids to have their head down all the time.

patty59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 12:42 PM
  #38
WBC8
Registered User
 
WBC8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Game time, baby
Country: United States
Posts: 38,759
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to WBC8
Quote:
Originally Posted by thegodfather View Post
For the people who are against this you need to realize something, the NHL has pretty much taken out the so called "GOON" and Branch is just following.

In today's NHL the GOON has to be able to play the game of hockey, lets use our Thornton as an example, maybe even Lucic.

Now lets go back a couple of years when Big George tried to get Lucic to fight him and it failed big time, with Lucic scoring a goal while BG was on the ice.

BG could not play the game of hockey and was strictly a GOON and did not help out Montreal in any way. Lucic who can do both helped his team.

What Branch and his people are doing here is getting rid of the GOON, the guy who can't play and only fight.

And I'm all for it. It will make the OHL a better league.
Disagree.

http://www.hockeyfights.com/quickhit...ers-sign-quick

Teams seemed to stock up on muscle in the days before and after the July 1st UFA day...

WBC8 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 12:44 PM
  #39
BruinDust
Registered User
 
BruinDust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,862
vCash: 500
This is only going to allow the rats and dirty players more free reign hurt other players, an use it as a tactical advantage when a player gets to the 9 game mark. Poor decision on Branch's part.

BruinDust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 12:46 PM
  #40
WBC8
Registered User
 
WBC8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Game time, baby
Country: United States
Posts: 38,759
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to WBC8
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Make-Believe View Post
BIG time.

Laraque not being in this league anymore has nothing to do with the NHL limiting his number of fights in a season.
Laraque was also 34 in his final season...people make it seem like the league kicked him out at 27 or something...

Guys like John Scott and Steve mcIntyre who were nowhere near the player Laraque was are still getting deals...

WBC8 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 12:49 PM
  #41
WBC8
Registered User
 
WBC8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Game time, baby
Country: United States
Posts: 38,759
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to WBC8
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianBruinsFan View Post
I think Branch's point is that giving free reign to fight as much as you want as a teenager, most of the guys that want to fight are going to fight all the time. Like when I used to go watch Mooseheads games as a kid, there seemed to be like 4 fights a game. Now, a lot less. I am pro-fighting, and anyone who plays the game knows it has its place, but I don't think it's really that big of a travesty to limit the number of fights within a season. These guys are not men, they're not kids, they're adolescents with an outside chance of making a living at hockey, but most likely will end up just a working stiff like the rest of us. Branch is also covering his own butt for down the line when a guy with 50 fights in 3 years can't tie his own shoes anymore and his parents try and sue his ass for "promoting fighting" whether that's an accurate statement or not.
Having 30 fights in 3 years will not harm his case one bit. You either have fighting or you don't...Putting a cap on it does nothing to limit future lawsuits .... but it does limit how you can police the ice vs the junior versions of Kaleta, Ott and Cooke.

WBC8 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 12:50 PM
  #42
Neely2005
Grey Cup Champions
 
Neely2005's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemis View Post
So each team has one guy who fights? So it's OK for that one guy to be pounded on a regular basis?

Let's be reasonable here. These rules are being put into place, bottom line, to protect children. Because medically, that's what they are. What they're doing is dangerous enough, without the added element of repeated and deliberate blows to the cranium.

If you have a lust for fighting in hockey, watch the NHL, AHL or ECHL. Those guys are professionals, are grownups, and can accept (or decline) the risks. The vast majority of junior players will never be professionals. If this new rule keeps just a small number of them healthy for the rest of their lives, it will be worth it. That's more important than satisfying the need of some fans who want blood.
I agree with you. I enjoy a fight in professional hockey between consenting adults but I see no need for having more than 10 fights a season in the OHL.

Not to mention the age difference, technically you could have a 14 year old boy & a 21 year old man fighting. Yes it's unlikely as most OHL players are between 15 & 20 but even still do you really want a 15 year old squaring off against a 20 year old?

The other thing to remember is that the OHL not only has to convince the 15 year old to play, they also have to convince his parents. As a parent I certainly wouldn't put my 15 year old into a league that I didn't think was safe.

I usually agree with you Patty but I think that you're very wrong on this one.

Neely2005 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 12:57 PM
  #43
Neely2005
Grey Cup Champions
 
Neely2005's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kate08 View Post
Fighting and hits to the head are completely different animals, and I absolutely DESPISE when they are linked.


Isn't the point of a hockey fight to hit your opponent in their head/face?

Neely2005 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 12:57 PM
  #44
Morris Wanchuk
.......
 
Morris Wanchuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: War Memorial Arena
Country: United States
Posts: 15,124
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Morris Wanchuk
I bet the WHL is excited about this.

Morris Wanchuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 01:02 PM
  #45
Kate08
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Kate08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Medford MA
Country: United States
Posts: 18,005
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely2005 View Post


Isn't the point of a hockey fight to hit your opponent in their head/face?
Don't be obtuse.

If you can't see the difference between a punch and an an open ice hit or a body check that targets the head, then I'm not quite sure what to tell you.

Kate08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 01:14 PM
  #46
CanadianBruinsFan
Registered User
 
CanadianBruinsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 611
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kate08 View Post
Don't be obtuse.

If you can't see the difference between a punch and an an open ice hit or a body check that targets the head, then I'm not quite sure what to tell you.
You're right that a single shoulder to the head and a single punch are quite different. But 1000 punches to the face over an OHL career can definitely do some damage. We've seen what repeated blows can do to a guy with last summer's unfortunate deaths. They were obviously older, but it's the same concept.

CanadianBruinsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 01:21 PM
  #47
Kate08
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Kate08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Medford MA
Country: United States
Posts: 18,005
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianBruinsFan View Post
You're right that a single shoulder to the head and a single punch are quite different. But 1000 punches to the face over an OHL career can definitely do some damage. We've seen what repeated blows can do to a guy with last summer's unfortunate deaths. They were obviously older, but it's the same concept.
No, it's not the same concept. You're conveniently leaving out the other factors that have been discussed in relation to those unfortunate circumstances.

Contact is contact. 1000 shoulders to the head, 1000 punches to the head. Both are part of what makes hockey hockey. Steps should be taken to protect players where possible, absolutely, but putting assinine perameters around how often players can fight is just foolish. Either it's ok or it's not.

For the people that want fighting out of the game, I would assume you'd be up in arms about this. It's essentially saying that a certain dosage of fighting is "ok".

Kate08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 01:22 PM
  #48
almostawake
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,426
vCash: 500
People are talking about it as if it's a life-time ban.

It's a two game suspension for crying out loud.

almostawake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 01:23 PM
  #49
SerenityRick
Registered User
 
SerenityRick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Moultonborough, NH
Country: United States
Posts: 14,498
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SerenityRick
I'm with patty on this one. There is absolutely no reason to regulate this.

SerenityRick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 01:46 PM
  #50
Neely08
Registered User
 
Neely08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: North of Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 18,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by almostawake View Post
People are talking about it as if it's a life-time ban.

It's a two game suspension for crying out loud.
I suppose that's the bright side. If after 10 fights you absolutely have to answer to something, 2 games is better than 5, I suppose. Could have been worse, or even more reactionary.

You knew there would be a reaction. Not saying it's the right one. But it's guys going for glory w/ the head shots that's really hurting the game. Far bigger issue, imo.

Neely08 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 02:14 PM.

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.