HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Rink
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Rink For the not so ready for prime-time players, coaches, referees, and the people that have to live with them. Discuss experiences in local leagues, coaching tips, equipment, and training.

Why is there fighting in hockey?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-01-2010, 05:18 PM
  #26
stick9
Registered User
 
stick9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 9,941
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadaBacon View Post
There is a long history of the NHL that certain implies that "dirty and cheap" were infact a big part of the game, for many decades.
Lets move beyond that. If fighting wasn't able to prevent that stuff from happening then and it certainly isn't preventing it from happening now, why does it exist?

They want you to believe it's there so the players can police themselves and eliminate this type of play, when we clearly see that it doesn't. Your goon fighting my goon doesn't prevent me from doing anything. Unless your goon beats the tar out of me I'm just gonna keep on doing what I do. The instigator rule prevents that from happening.

See what I am saying?

stick9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2010, 05:20 PM
  #27
Renneys Revenge
 
Renneys Revenge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 33
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wildebeest View Post
You'd be a lot less likely to take a hack at somebody like Marian Gaborik as they fly past you knowing that if such actions drew the ire of Donald Brashear, you'd be forced to absorb several punches to the face.
Haha little off topic from the thread but the only people afraid of Brashear now are us Ranger fans. Afraid that he's taking up a roster spot for the rest of the season!!!

Overall good point though.

Renneys Revenge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2010, 05:21 PM
  #28
Badger36
Registered User
 
Badger36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 2,313
vCash: 500
Fighting has always been a part of hockey. Hockey is a very physical, very violent game. To take fighting out of hockey be to kill one of hockey's great traditions and IMO, would kill part of the soul and history of the game.

Badger36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2010, 05:22 PM
  #29
Steelhead16
Registered User
 
Steelhead16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Boise, ID
Country: United States
Posts: 1,557
vCash: 500
I think fighting in hockey has changed it's purpose as the game has changed.

Fighting used to be how the game and teams "policed" themselves. It's a fast paced game where the players have collisions and are armed with weapons. Back in the day one guy was responsible for policing the actions of 12 different guys on the ice. No way one guy could watch everything that was going on and players would take "liberties" with the opposition. The 15 guys on the bench could see everything that was going on and handled matters themselves to protect their teammates.

I think fighting now still exists in hockey because of the lack of respect that players have for one another. Fights after clean hits is a glaring example of this. Back in the day a clean hit was followed by hockey and someone trying to hit someone else cleanly. Now every whistle in front of the net is followed by a scrum. With the extra referee now the cheap shots are seen more frequently and penalized before the players get to police it themselves.

The instigator rule is called so little now that it really could just go away. 10 game suspensions solved the bench clearing problem. And line brawls rarely have more than 1 or 2 fights going on anymore. Mostly just 6 guys dancing watching 2 guys fight. I've always been a fan of fighting but I don't know if I am anymore. It just isn't for the right reasons anymore.

Steelhead16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2010, 05:33 PM
  #30
rinkrat22
Registered User
 
rinkrat22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 577
vCash: 500
part of what some of you dont understand is the role of the instigator, the player not the rule. Just as the flyers of the 70's showed everyone what a team full of fighters could do to another team. Coaches also realized what a player that would pester the stars of a team can do. When a player follows around the star, leading goal scorer, running his mouth, or using his stick in a way other than how it was intended it takes said goal scorer off his game. Young guys think Sean Avery, old guys think Esa Tikkenen. Now in the game we have to have players to protect the stars... The goon shows up to protect his star played. If the big guys arent out there creating space for the little guys no one has any fun. Fans included.

"there was a player in the 80's Named Neil Sheey who played for Calgary back in the day. He was a defenseman that would agitate Gretzky to no end. not so much with his stick but in other subtle ways. he would follow Gretzky around the ice and not let him get to the open ice where he liked to operate. It was a different type of instigator but it worked, and help to develop the Battle of Alberta into what it is these days."...Ross Berstein in the book "The Code"

rinkrat22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2010, 10:21 PM
  #31
Hockeyfan68
Registered User
 
Hockeyfan68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Lewiston, ME USA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,418
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steelhead16 View Post
I think fighting in hockey has changed it's purpose as the game has changed.

Fighting used to be how the game and teams "policed" themselves. It's a fast paced game where the players have collisions and are armed with weapons. Back in the day one guy was responsible for policing the actions of 12 different guys on the ice. No way one guy could watch everything that was going on and players would take "liberties" with the opposition. The 15 guys on the bench could see everything that was going on and handled matters themselves to protect their teammates.

I think fighting now still exists in hockey because of the lack of respect that players have for one another. Fights after clean hits is a glaring example of this. Back in the day a clean hit was followed by hockey and someone trying to hit someone else cleanly. Now every whistle in front of the net is followed by a scrum. With the extra referee now the cheap shots are seen more frequently and penalized before the players get to police it themselves.

The instigator rule is called so little now that it really could just go away. 10 game suspensions solved the bench clearing problem. And line brawls rarely have more than 1 or 2 fights going on anymore. Mostly just 6 guys dancing watching 2 guys fight. I've always been a fan of fighting but I don't know if I am anymore. It just isn't for the right reasons anymore.
The main thing that bothers me about the instigator rule are plays where a star player is hit in the head or slashed in the hands on purpose to try and injure them and a guy on the star player's team cannot step in and deal out some justice for it.

We see it time and again and because it could not be dealt with physicality like men you get retalliation type cheap hits that injure other players sometimes 2 months after the original cheapshot when the two teams play again.

Some amount to suspensions like the now infamous Bertuzzi cheapshot which was a response to an incident earlier in the season because nobody could deal with it when it happened originally.

I would like to reiterate that I do not like the staged fighting we see now and it needs to go. The quickest way to get rid of it is to eliminate the instigator rule.

Spontaneous fighting is the fighting that belongs in hockey.

I actually saw one last year which was Andrew Ference and Sidney Crosby .... they were fighting for a puck and started shoving and the gloves came off. It might have been the year before last but whatever.

The instigator type player or PEST player cannot be as effective today as they once were since the NHL refs actually call interference and slashing penalties now.

This should not even be up for discussion because the league finally calls penalties instead of letting them obstruct and interfere with star players.

Hockeyfan68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2010, 10:33 PM
  #32
CanadaBacon
 
CanadaBacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hamilton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,570
vCash: 500
What teams allow the other team to hit their "star" player in the head and slash him on purpose and just let it go? I dont think too many teams find that an extra 2 minutes is more important then their "star" players healthy.

CanadaBacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2010, 10:39 PM
  #33
rinkrat22
Registered User
 
rinkrat22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 577
vCash: 500
I would also like to add that Steve Moore answered the bell for the hit he put on Marcus Naslund earlier in the game that the "bertuzzi" incident took place. He fought Matt Cooke that night who was at that time the Canucks enforcer. That wasnt enough for bertuzzi, he is the one that was out of line that night. He ended moore's career that night.

rinkrat22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2010, 10:42 PM
  #34
nystromshairstylist
Puck Control Master
 
nystromshairstylist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Deking past you
Country: Barbados
Posts: 719
vCash: 500
In reading this thread, it seems to me that its like the argument about Las Vegas and Times Square changing and being cleaned up for a "new era," and the Old Guard resisting that change...

But, if the NHL is going to become more family friendly, it is going to have to ultimately remove fighting from the game. My 6 and 9 year olds cover their eyes when a fight starts, even on TV, and I can just imagine what fans can hear who are sitting close enough to the action.

As a pro-hockey fan, I sit on the fence on this issue, as there are other items I think the NHL MUST fix - and soon - if the league is going to grow its fan base beyond the die-hards following it now.

Personally, I'd like to see that happen, as anything that slows the game down, whether its too small rinks, lack of interference calls, etc., are bad news.

nystromshairstylist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2010, 10:42 PM
  #35
Hockeyfan68
Registered User
 
Hockeyfan68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Lewiston, ME USA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,418
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rinkrat22 View Post
I would also like to add that Steve Moore answered the bell for the hit he put on Marcus Naslund earlier in the game that the "bertuzzi" incident took place. He fought Matt Cooke that night who was at that time the Canucks enforcer. That wasnt enough for bertuzzi, he is the one that was out of line that night. He ended moore's career that night.
I'll give you that one .... I don't like Bertuzzi at all. I thought the Naslund hit was in a previous game and not that game. My mistake.

Hockeyfan68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 11:55 AM
  #36
rinkrat22
Registered User
 
rinkrat22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 577
vCash: 500
the naslund hit was actually 2 games previous. the game between was to close for anything to happen and I believe Colin Campbell was actually at that game. so the bad feelings just festered for a couple of weeks. My point was more that moore did fight matt cooke earlier in the game. he lost but not as badly as the canucks would have liked. justice was served. Bertuzzi didn't agree. he should of gotten a suspension that matched the injury to moore imo. I do however believe tha fighting has its place in the game. I dont care for the staged fights but when 2 guys go at it in the heat of the moment I think its great, or when someone steps up for their team mate, much like Avery did a couple of weeks ago against Philly when Carcillo? went after Gaborik. thats why we need fighting in hockey.

rinkrat22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 02:30 PM
  #37
stick9
Registered User
 
stick9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 9,941
vCash: 500
Great read by Bob McKeinze at TSN.ca

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=308652

stick9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2010, 02:56 PM
  #38
rinkrat22
Registered User
 
rinkrat22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 577
vCash: 500
"I suppose I'm old fashioned but for me the appropriate response to the Stuart hit would have come from a menu that includes the following: a) Kopitar gets up and exacts revenge by scoring a goal against Boston; b) If Kopitar was really incensed by the hit, he drops the gloves himself with Stuart (don't laugh, the point is the game had more honor when players fought their own battles); c) the Kings take Stuart's number and the first time he's in a position to get hit, he gets creamed; d) the Kings begin laying more hits and physical abuse on Boston's best offensive players Marc Savard and Patrice Bergeron, and believe me Wayne Simmonds would be excellent at this; e) all of the above."


Thats what should be going on, not these stupid fights. Brian Burke said it best, "if you got your clock cleaned because you had your head down the guys on your own bench would give you the business, not start a fight because of it."

rinkrat22 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 04:52 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.