HFBoards

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

All purpose 'Does fighting belong in the NHL?' thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-06-2011, 10:41 PM
  #151
Bill McNeal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,646
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
We had a talented team last year. We have a talented team this year. My complaint is that JM wasted many opportunities.

That's the difference between you and I. I see talent. You see a marginal team (even though you mentioned outsiders). I blame Martin. You blame a lack of good luck.

Luck can only get you so far. An outstanding coach can get you a Stanley Cup. Martin is good........far from outstanding.
Well at least you're an optimist. I can't begrudge you that.

Bill McNeal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2011, 11:12 PM
  #152
Roke
Registered User
 
Roke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post

Simple concept.

Motivating each and every INDIVIDUAL player based upon what works best for them instills confidence in that player to go above and beyond what they normally do which will allow that player to perform at a level that will lead to momentum swings.

Works every time a coach is able to do this.
Alright, I think at least in part we're having a vocabulary problem rather than a conceptual problem here. This is good because it means we're on the same page in some respects. Though still not agreeable in others.

You wrote about motivation (or other coaching techniques) leading to momentum swings, but from what was written I feel as if you're really talking about coaching resulting in a higher level of performance. This could be due to said motivation, coaching communication, and even tactics. Put the whole coaching thing in one bundle here really.

When momentum is talked about in the context of sport, I tend to read it in the traditional narrative sense: something that attempts to explain otherwise random swings back-and-forth between team performance not unlike a pendulum, though things causes it to swing to one team as opposed to the other.

I don't think good coaching results in swings of momentum (otherwise unexplained change in performance). That would mean that coaches are performing actions which, while they have a positive effect, are only temporary... momentum will swing back at some point. I think coaching has longer-lasting effects than mere momentum swings, and while some strategies can only really be used in short-term (double-shifting Mike Cammalleri for example) by and large motivation/tactics/other coaching methods.

Basically what i'm saying is if you change the "momentum swings" (which would be temporary) part to "a higher level of performance" I would be in agreement. Coaching can do that (though the size of the effect... I don't know).

Quote:


But.......all we have to do is look back at Boston when Thornton was inserted into the lineup and he went on mission to inflict pain on the Canucks. You could instantly see the momentum swing that lasted for the rest of the Series.

Of course, I dont expect the no fighting/lets surrender crowd to acknowledge the impact Thornton had on the Series.
I actually didn't watch the finals... watching Boston is not something I like to do in my leisure time. They don't play hockey in a manner I find aesthetically pleasing, and I dislike everything about the organization except for Peter Chirraelli's ability to make great trades with Brian Burke. It simply wasn't worth my time.

All I have is having read about the series, looked at the basic statistics, looked at the shot/puck-possession data, and the scoring chance counts tracked as part of a group of bloggers tracking scoring chances for NHL games it came down to a difference in goaltending. The teams were close in generating shots and scoring chances had a slight edge to Vancouver. Maybe Thornton did somehow cause Thomas to play at Hasekian levels and Luongo to turn into Andre Racicot. In any case, finding patterns in a sample of a mere 7 games seems wrought with problems to me.

Roke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2011, 11:25 PM
  #153
Kimota
Three Bananas
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 22,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
I don't think fighting should be banned because of these deaths, I think fighting should have stricter sanctions(not banning) because I think it has a really insignificant purpose in the grand scheme of things on the ice.

Again, until you can show that hockey is premised on fighting then maybe I'll consider what you are trying to say, but right now it's a stupid argument.
Yea but ban fighting for what because it's not nice, because it causes concussions and drive people to suicide? Well then do the same with ALL sort of fightings.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 04:47 AM
  #154
SherbrookeW
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 298
vCash: 500
Obviously, Todd is absolutely right, and bravo to him for having the courage to say so. Hockey is the only sport in the world, including sports every bit as "rugged" and collision-based, like rugby and American football, where fighting isn't met by instant expulsion.Fighting is ugly , stupid, pointless and degrades the game's real virtues. People who have a pitiful need to watch it should move on to professional wrestling and leave a beautiful sport to those who appreciate it. It's pitiful nonsense to say that the sport needs fighting; international hockey manages just fine without it -- at an incomparably higher level of play.

SherbrookeW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 05:23 AM
  #155
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
No rational excuse for fighting. It's unnecessary and has absolutely nothing to do with the sport of hockey.

Game would lose nothing if fighting led to immediate suspension, and the gains would b numerous...

Suspend + fine anyone who fights, put money directly into a fund for programs related to substance abuse for players... Everyone wins, only the goons who can't actually play hockey( and don't belong in the best hockey league in the world) would "suffer" ( and of course, they'd actually benefit by not being subjected to the lifestyle of a hockey enforcer)
What would these numerous gains be? I strongly disagree about fighting having no place in the game, it's not only goons and enforcers who fight, if it means so little and accomplishes nothing, why do they do it? The fact that they do fight for whatever reason is enough for me, coupled with the fact that the overwhelming majority of those involved in the game disagree with your line of thinking is something I value more than posters on the internet, or media personalities who can't even skate.

If there was a player poll asking whether or not they believe blindside hits, hits from behind or other serious attempts to injure need to be removed from the league, the poll would be 100% in favor, unlike the poll done regarding fighting, which was 98% in favor of keeping it, that would indicate that the players find these other infractions much more serious/wrong than fighting itself.

The facts remain that the overwhelming majority of concussions in the NHL are not from the results of fighting. They need to work at getting out the dirty plays before anything else.

There are more dire concerns at the moment even if I agreed with you that fighting has no value, which I don't.

The recent game changes have left players more vulnerable than ever, I think the league has to take a look at some of these rules and weigh whether or not the increased speed and flow is worth the alarming concussion results.

Heres some of the things I would consider:

1. Make any hits on a player 1/2 a second after the puck is no longer on his stick punishable.

2. Keep the current blindside/head shot rules and continue to tweak them as much as possible.

3. Educate the players in a way that will make them respect one another so that vicious hits aren't the norm.

4. Remove kevlar from should pads.

5. Remove all stanchions that are between players benches, remove seamless glass ect. Mandatory rink improvements designed for player safety.

6. Enforce any stick swinging attempts at players whether or not they cause severe injury with severe suspensions. No such thing as a 1 game suspension, if something is deemed suspendable, 1 game is a joke, double each consecutive suspension.

7. Clearly define what is and what will result in a suspension with clearly defined guidelines (number of games ect, rather than a case by case basis to remove special treatment).

8. Experiment with the instigator rule in the AHL, if successful adopt same rules in the NHL on a 2 year interim basis, to enable players to police themselves somewhat

9. Cut the roster spots by 1, to deter gm's from wasting a roster spot on strict goons/enforcers.

10. Closely monitor those with numerous fights, treatment programs, better drug addiction awareness programs.

11. Strongly encourage those with depression/concussions to seek help, remove the macho stigma attached to those who may be suffering.

12. Remove the trapezoid and allow goalies to play the puck like they did previous rule change, to limit the vulnerable positions dman now find themselves in.

13. Allow Brian Burke's bear hugging into the boards rule to guide player into boards rather than smack him into the boards from 2 feet away, instead of penalizing players for obstruction for putting a hand on a player in this position.

14. Allow dman to clear the crease more effectively, but no crosschecks to the head, they would tie in with rule number 6, stick swinging.

15. More stringent drug testing.

Rules of this nature are more likely to reduce concussions/severe injury than removing the fisticuffs altogether.


Last edited by habsjunkie2*: 09-07-2011 at 05:37 AM.
habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 05:42 AM
  #156
Toasterman
Registered User
 
Toasterman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 723
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
I think you're 100 % wrong about most of them saying they hate fighting. It would be much closer to 0% than 100%.

Carry on.
Right. 0%? That's some dream world you're living in.

Carry on.

Toasterman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 05:46 AM
  #157
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toasterman View Post
Right. 0%? That's some dream world you're living in.

Carry on.
Comprehension my friend, I said closer to 0% than 100%. George Laraque never liked fighting, but he was also under the impression he could play hockey. I take his view with a grain of salt. Most guys like Tie Domi looked forward to their match ups each day.

Name me the list of enforcers that nears 100% that don't like fighting, bet you don't come close, in fact, you'd be lucky to name a handful.

It's great to make unsubstantiated claims as fact, but now I'm asking you to provide proof of what you claim.

Balls in your court now.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 08:04 AM
  #158
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 26,698
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsterix View Post
Yes, really. If I didn't think so, I wouldn't write it. Hard to believe isn't it?

And yes, I do love that aspect of the game. Guilty as charged! And we've been through that. Because you don't believe that it has an effect on the game doesn't mean it doesn't.
There is nothing that proves fighting holds an effect on the game, and there's little examples, if any, that shows it either. So why should I believe it does?
You're a fan of fighting, to the point of saying you LOVE it. Leave it at that. Don't try to argue it holds an important effect when there's nothing that proves it..

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 08:24 AM
  #159
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 26,698
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
Hey Kriss E. Helluva post with the hanging on to the prove something that has no statistics tracking it. Tell you what, when I get about a month of free time, I will go tthrough the entire archives of every game played last year. And just for you, I will watch every single minute of every game and compile that list for you. K? Just be patient.
Right. So before you do that, don't claim anything as if it's the absolute truth. Say it's just your opinion, and back it up with concrete arguments, not sarcastic, childish and immature comments. If you can't do such a simple thing, then don't make any claims.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 10:00 AM
  #160
Chris Nilan
Registered User
 
Chris Nilan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
We had a talented team last year. We have a talented team this year. My complaint is that JM wasted many opportunities.

That's the difference between you and I. I see talent. You see a marginal team (even though you mentioned outsiders). I blame Martin. You blame a lack of good luck.

Luck can only get you so far. An outstanding coach can get you a Stanley Cup. Martin is good........far from outstanding.



If you were following my reasoning, you must have missed a post or two. And I give you credit for making a cute post.

I have been a proponent of having two scoring lines with talented forwards, a hard nosed gritty checking line and a 4th line with 3 men who will fight.

Moen or White or any other 4th liner is a waste with Gomez and Gionta. You know that. I know that. Everyone knows that except Jacques Martin.
Hang on again! I definitely recall expressions of love and nostalgia for the days when Semenko allegedly (by God, of all the hockey myths there are, this is in the top ten most overrated and can only be a scratch behind "Montreal gets first pick of all Quebec-born players forever" but anyway, it's not my argument, its yours and the goon squad's) skated with Gretzky and Kurri and his ability to hug other players, pull their hair and hit them late with taped fists was the key to all the scoring that happened in lieu of talent, speed, elusiveness, skill, anticipation, coordination and determination.

Clearly, since JM cannot come up with an idea of his own and has no love of tough hockey (having coached the Ottawa Senators when they set the all-time single game penalty minute record and had team penalty minute totals far exceeding those of the Bruins and Flyers from the late 70s and early 80s, and the St. Louis Blues during their blood feud with Detroit, in the days when Todd Ewen was thumping Adam Oates and other Detroit talent) he was following the calls of those on this board and who call talk shows -- in the hope (and also the knowledge) that some NHL owner will pluck them from their mothers' basements (complete with sandals in winter, calf-length cargo shorts, oversize jersey, pot scrubber on chin and hat backwards) to be the next GM/coach/special fantasy league consultant -- by having Moen "ride shotgun" (as you all learned from watching Don Cherry) for Gomez and Gionta.

They are small, after all. That is a statistic. It is clear by inspection of the team photo and the roster chart. It is also the first and only insight offered by HNIC and TSN and THN for the reasons listed above, which makes it true and profound.


Last edited by Chris Nilan: 09-07-2011 at 10:03 AM. Reason: punctuation and grammar
Chris Nilan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 12:02 PM
  #161
Forsead
Registered User
 
Forsead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Québec City
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,342
vCash: 500
I think if he is given the right players Martin has nothing against toughness remember this...


and

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/story/2004/...rke030407.html

Go and search senators brawl you will find other examples in the Martin era.

I really don't know from where that myth started...

Forsead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 12:11 PM
  #162
neofury*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
I just wanted to say that the HabsHQ article asks Bonneau some questions about it and being a fighter and fellow hockey player he says there's nothing less dangerous about playing an 82 game season with 20-25 minutes of ice time a night on a line that goes up against other teams shutdown D like Chara. He confirms everything I said that the problem isn't fighting and that it's cheapshots.

Take it for what it's worth, he is a fighter in the AHL so obviously he's going to side with it.

neofury* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 12:15 PM
  #163
Forsead
Registered User
 
Forsead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Québec City
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,342
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by neofury View Post
I just wanted to say that the HabsHQ article asks Bonneau some questions about it and being a fighter and fellow hockey player he says there's nothing less dangerous about playing an 82 game season with 20-25 minutes of ice time a night on a line that goes up against other teams shutdown D like Chara. He confirms everything I said that the problem isn't fighting and that it's cheapshots.

Take it for what it's worth, he is a fighter in the AHL so obviously he's going to side with it.
Well honestly just with logical thinking it clear to me anyway. Just look at the numbers of fights and the numbers of injuries resulting of it.... not alot and often it's broken fingers, which isn't what can destroy a career. It's very rare to see players suffering from concussions after fighting in the NHL.

Forsead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 12:23 PM
  #164
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 9,021
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
What would these numerous gains be? I strongly disagree about fighting having no place in the game, it's not only goons and enforcers who fight, if it means so little and accomplishes nothing, why do they do it? The fact that they do fight for whatever reason is enough for me, coupled with the fact that the overwhelming majority of those involved in the game disagree with your line of thinking is something I value more than posters on the internet, or media personalities who can't even skate.

If there was a player poll asking whether or not they believe blindside hits, hits from behind or other serious attempts to injure need to be removed from the league, the poll would be 100% in favor, unlike the poll done regarding fighting, which was 98% in favor of keeping it, that would indicate that the players find these other infractions much more serious/wrong than fighting itself.

The facts remain that the overwhelming majority of concussions in the NHL are not from the results of fighting. They need to work at getting out the dirty plays before anything else.

There are more dire concerns at the moment even if I agreed with you that fighting has no value, which I don't.

The recent game changes have left players more vulnerable than ever, I think the league has to take a look at some of these rules and weigh whether or not the increased speed and flow is worth the alarming concussion results.

Heres some of the things I would consider:

1. Make any hits on a player 1/2 a second after the puck is no longer on his stick punishable.

2. Keep the current blindside/head shot rules and continue to tweak them as much as possible.

3. Educate the players in a way that will make them respect one another so that vicious hits aren't the norm.

4. Remove kevlar from should pads.

5. Remove all stanchions that are between players benches, remove seamless glass ect. Mandatory rink improvements designed for player safety.

6. Enforce any stick swinging attempts at players whether or not they cause severe injury with severe suspensions. No such thing as a 1 game suspension, if something is deemed suspendable, 1 game is a joke, double each consecutive suspension.

7. Clearly define what is and what will result in a suspension with clearly defined guidelines (number of games ect, rather than a case by case basis to remove special treatment).

8. Experiment with the instigator rule in the AHL, if successful adopt same rules in the NHL on a 2 year interim basis, to enable players to police themselves somewhat

9. Cut the roster spots by 1, to deter gm's from wasting a roster spot on strict goons/enforcers.

10. Closely monitor those with numerous fights, treatment programs, better drug addiction awareness programs.

11. Strongly encourage those with depression/concussions to seek help, remove the macho stigma attached to those who may be suffering.

12. Remove the trapezoid and allow goalies to play the puck like they did previous rule change, to limit the vulnerable positions dman now find themselves in.

13. Allow Brian Burke's bear hugging into the boards rule to guide player into boards rather than smack him into the boards from 2 feet away, instead of penalizing players for obstruction for putting a hand on a player in this position.

14. Allow dman to clear the crease more effectively, but no crosschecks to the head, they would tie in with rule number 6, stick swinging.

15. More stringent drug testing.

Rules of this nature are more likely to reduce concussions/severe injury than removing the fisticuffs altogether.
fighting is not necessary to the sport of hockey.

The FACT that it is played at a high level in countries all over the world AND at the Olympics proves that beyond any reasonable doubt.

every year dozens of players suffer concussions directly as a result of a fight, an act that is unnecessary.

none of the suggestions you made could have as direct impact on reducing the number of PREVENTABLE concussions...

if no one is getting their face punched in/head slammed into the ice from fights, then you eliminate all of those concussions.

pretty straight forward, and again, no rational argument against it.

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 01:14 PM
  #165
neofury*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe84 View Post
You just once again proved my point: those who defend fighting in hockey too often use the whole "hockey is a dangerous sport" argument to defend their cause. That is just plain false to me. Hockey, like all sports, has a certain degree of danger associated to it. That said, all of the other hazards of hockey are inherent to the practice of the sport: without them, you wouldn't be able to play. Without hands, you can't play hockey. And hockey players don't use their hands to punch people. They use them to shoot, deke, pass, etc.

Fighting's one and only purpose is to hurt your oponent. I don't agree with anyone that says that ANY other aspects of clean hockey is to hurt your oponent, including body checking. Yes, nowadays some player do it to send their victim to the ER. But that is not clean hockey.

Fighting and hockey are incompatible. The surface is solid and dangerous. Players often take off their helmets, risking severe brain damage when they get taken down to the ice. Athletes are not classified in categories, meaning one fighter might be a LOT more skilled than the other, risking very bad injuries. They fight without gloves to mitigate some of the damage. It's a stupid and useless risk to take.

Those who say that fights help prevent cheap shots are day dreaming. It's been said times and times again: some of the WORST cheap shots in hockey's history occured before the instigator rule. What this sport needs is some damn rules enforcement. This is getting silly. You want to stop cheap shots? Just get heavy penalties to those who do them. Even if he's a superstar. Vigilante justice has been eradicated from our society for hundreds of years. Why does it still somehow belong in hockey?
No offense but just because I use that as part of an argument (i.e. one thing and not really anything I said specifically) doesn't negate any of my other valid points on the matter. I never said "hockey needs fighting" I just said that if hockey is going to have cheapshot's and the NHL won't properly suspend people and officials won't give them penalties... well yes, then fighting obviously will have its place. It has nothing to do with "hockey is a dangerous sport". Other sports are dangerous too, guess what the difference is? Other sports do take cheap shotting and head shots very seriously and give out suspensions and penalties as they come. NHL doesn't do that. So me saying this doesn't even come close to proving your point really. If the NHL isn't going to protect its players somebody has to, that doesn't mean "hockey needs fighting" that means "hockey needs to change a few things first before they can abolish fighting"

Fighting's one and only purpose isn't to hurt an opponent and if you actually believe that I can see why your stance on fighting is what it is.

And also if fighting and hockey are incompatible why is it that for close to a century it has been the case and has been perfectly compatible and downright necessary especially in the latter years of cheap shotting? If it's so incompatible why is it the only non-martial arts sport that allows it?

Also regarding fighting classes people choose to fight and it's pretty rare you'll have a guy like Gionta fighting Chara So I think that point is a bit of an exaggeration. Plus how often do we see these KO head hits the ground fights? Like I said it's just as dangerous as playing 20-25 minutes a game at high speeds going up against defenceman like Zdeno Chara etc. The risk is theirs to take unlike being blindsided in the face by Matt Cooke. Again though I'm not saying the NHL shouldn't abolish fighting all I'm saying is that officials calling the game properly and the NHL being strict on cheap shotting needs to come first, which is 100% valid as if you take away the fighting then nobody can protect you from the cheap shots. Again though not saying cheap shots won't happen with a fight on your team, just saying it keeps people more honest and frankly getting rid of cheap shots is where it all needs to start. You're putting the players in more danger by not allowing fighters to protect them while the NHL runs the league like a circus and allows things like what happened to Savard or Pacioretty to continue happening with little to no punishment as a result. Not saying fighting is needed but it's certainly not the most important thing for the NHL to be focusing on at the moment. Proper officiating and stricter punishment for cheap shots is what needs to be focused on. Just because three guys died recently in a fluke doesn't make fighting the root cause. Anyone saying it is isn't using logic, it's a coincidence thus far. It's the exception and not the rule. The last 40 damn years are the rule.

I'm not saying fighting eliminates cheap shots but rather if you do eliminate fighting without first making stricter penalties and have the refs actually call the game as they see it, then there will be more cheap shots in general. Fighting doesn't stop all cheap shots, things happen in the heat of the moment. It does reduce them, there's no scientific way to prove it really but it does. Even the players themselves say fighters keep them honest. I think they know better than you or I right?

I agree with the rest of your final paragraph and again I have to say I'm not really for or against them getting rid of fighting I just want them to do it properly. Just because the media fills peoples heads up with a bunch of BS because of Belak etc doesn't make it the case. All it does is show who on this forum thinks for themselves and who on this forum buys into any media agenda they're force fed. I'm not saying fighting shouldn't be abolished but I think this is a damn near ******** catalyst for that given that Crosby's career might be over due to a cheap shot, Savard's career is, Pacioretty could have been, these are all promising young or strong veteran players. The goons that died didn't die on the ice and it hasn't even been close to conclusively proven that fighting, brain damage, etc had ANYTHING to do with that. It's 100% speculation based on an anomaly not based on the fact that for 40 years plus nothing like this ever happened.

And yet the lot of you want to focus on fighting, one of the last things that reduces cheap shots because lord knows the NHL isn't competent enough to start handing out stricter penalties or suspensions and the refs don't know their ass from their elbow. Go watch a Soccer game, go watch football, baseball etc. Once in a while a ref/ump ****s up and it's considered the end of the world because it's far more rare. In hockey an offside isn't called or a penalty is missed, we're so used to it that it's just part of the game. This is piss poor officiating in general.

I really want people like Crosby to play to their full potential and live full careers and fighting has nothing to do with near most any players career ending injury, cheap shots do. Even the guys who died it can't even be linked to brain damage or fighting these are just assumptions by the lot of people in this thread who have an agenda against fighting in the NHL. I don't care if people have their agenda against fighting but at least use some common sense and a bit of logic and don't start connecting dots that don't even exist. The three deaths were a tragedy a bad coincidence and nothing more. Next thing you know we'll be hearing people linking some of the KHL deaths to this drivel speculation. It's absolutely ridiculous and I don't get how people can take themselves seriously basing their entire argument against fighting on these three guys who didn't die on the ice, have no conclusive evidence to support that being an enforcer had to do with it, but because a coincidence happens that is an exception to the rule we're supposed to eat up this bs? Come on now. If you want fighting gone and you have an agenda against fighting say it and bring facts to the table, but don't try to tell me the whole three deaths argument as it's absolutely preposterous.

neofury* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 01:52 PM
  #166
SouthernHab
Not a Fanboy
 
SouthernHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 12,898
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Right. So before you do that, don't claim anything as if it's the absolute truth. Say it's just your opinion, and back it up with concrete arguments, not sarcastic, childish and immature comments. If you can't do such a simple thing, then don't make any claims.



I like you. I really do.

Never have I offered an absolute regarding fighting in hockey. Thus, my repeated acknowledgement that fighting being beneficial toward changing momentum is not a measurable aspect of hockey.

It is YOU guys who are demanding that I come up with a study.

There are very few absolutes in life, and even fewer absolutes in hockey....even when you have statistics. Thanks for making me smile.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Forsead View Post
I think if he is given the right players Martin has nothing against toughness remember this...


and

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/story/2004/...rke030407.html

Go and search senators brawl you will find other examples in the Martin era.

I really don't know from where that myth started...
People change their beliefs over time. Hell, there are things that I supported in the past that I am opposed to now.

Martin had every opportunity to pull up fighters from the AHL. He could have pulled up Bonneau (I know not an NHL contract) Henry, Conboy and Schultz for the next game against the Bruins after Pacioretty enduring a strong hockey play from Chara.

But he didnt. I think that the present JM is a lot different that the old JM.


Last edited by Crimson Skorpion: 09-07-2011 at 02:04 PM. Reason: Merged
SouthernHab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 02:04 PM
  #167
Forsead
Registered User
 
Forsead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Québec City
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,342
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
People change their beliefs over time. Hell, there are things that I supported in the past that I am opposed to now.

Martin had every opportunity to pull up fighters from the AHL. He could have pulled up Bonneau (I know not an NHL contract) Henry, Conboy and Schultz for the next game against the Bruins after Pacioretty enduring a strong hockey play from Chara.

But he didnt. I think that the present JM is a lot different that the old JM.
That's where our opinion is not the same, I honestly think that if he was given real effective tough guys (Neil, Thornton, O'brien etc...) he would have no problem using them (see Moen and White), but he will never put a guy before another just because of toughness and say what you want but the guys you named are worst hockey players than anyone on the roster we had at the times. Martin want to have the best possible team in term of hockey talent with what he has in the organization to win hockey games. If thoses players are tough guys well it's just better and he will use them without any problems IMO.

Forsead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 02:10 PM
  #168
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
fighting is not necessary to the sport of hockey.

The FACT that it is played at a high level in countries all over the world AND at the Olympics proves that beyond any reasonable doubt.

every year dozens of players suffer concussions directly as a result of a fight, an act that is unnecessary.

none of the suggestions you made could have as direct impact on reducing the number of PREVENTABLE concussions...

if no one is getting their face punched in/head slammed into the ice from fights, then you eliminate all of those concussions.

pretty straight forward, and again, no rational argument against it.
Well you're wrong, it's ok. So are many others on these forums in regards to this topic. Everything I suggested would prevent concussions, fighting is on the low rung of causes. Dirty hitting is the single largest cause, they are preventable. Fighting is really, really, really low on the list.

The Olympic argument again, the tournament with all the best players in the world playing for 2 weeks, sorry but the Olympic tournament isn't even remotely comparable to the NHL.

There are all sorts of reasons why fighting exists, the players agree, the gm's agree, the coaches agree, all the reasons suggested are ignored and disregarded without reason around these parts.

It will never, ever be removed, in fact, it's impossible, the NHL isn't even considering it. There are much more worrisome things to deal with, fighting isn't one of them.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 02:13 PM
  #169
macavoy
Registered User
 
macavoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Houston, Tx
Country: United States
Posts: 7,818
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forsead View Post
I think if he is given the right players Martin has nothing against toughness remember this...


and
Man that was entertaining, not so much because of the fights, the fights actually sucked but what was entertaining for me was the way they kept going after to get revenge for their teammates. Even lowly Jason Spezza lol.

That is the kind of stuff that builds team chemistry.

macavoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 02:14 PM
  #170
Stradale
Registered User
 
Stradale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by macavoy View Post
Man that was entertaining, not so much because of the fights, the fights actually sucked but what was entertaining for me was the way they kept going after to get revenge for their teammates. Even lowly Jason Spezza lol.

That is the kind of stuff that builds team chemistry.
Do you have studies that can prove that?

Stradale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 03:01 PM
  #171
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stradale View Post
Do you have studies that can prove that?
I don't, but I'm sure there are equally as many that disprove it. In order to change the game as we know it and remove a long standing tradition that fighting is of no value, against the players themselves who are for it, I believe the onus is on them, so far they haven't made a case.

Statements like it has no effects on intimidation, or it doesn't prevent injuries, just because injuries still happen, until they show why they are right, fighting will continue.

The pro fighting crowd doesn't have to prove a thing, we don't want to change the game, they do, so they should provide definitive proof of why the NHL should adopt these rules that prevent fighting, so far, I haven't seen any.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 03:51 PM
  #172
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 26,698
vCash: 500
I knew this board's quality really sank low, but damn, never thought it'd get that bad.

Now people can make claims, have no arguments to back it up with and then make it seem as requesting proof is simply too much to ask.

They can't prove it. They know they can't prove it. So they resort to pathetic sarcastic posts.

I believe it's an all time low around here.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 03:59 PM
  #173
ECWHSWI
Spartan mic'
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,321
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
I don't, but I'm sure there are equally as many that disprove it. In order to change the game as we know it and remove a long standing tradition that fighting is of no value, against the players themselves who are for it, I believe the onus is on them, so far they haven't made a case.

Statements like it has no effects on intimidation, or it doesn't prevent injuries, just because injuries still happen, until they show why they are right, fighting will continue.

The pro fighting crowd doesn't have to prove a thing, we don't want to change the game, they do, so they should provide definitive proof of why the NHL should adopt these rules that prevent fighting, so far, I haven't seen any.
so I guess you're against the changes that were made not long ago, like the SO, getting rid of the "red line", having less obstruction from the D, goalie equipment, etc ?

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 04:16 PM
  #174
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
I knew this board's quality really sank low, but damn, never thought it'd get that bad.

Now people can make claims, have no arguments to back it up with and then make it seem as requesting proof is simply too much to ask.

They can't prove it. They know they can't prove it. So they resort to pathetic sarcastic posts.

I believe it's an all time low around here.
What is it we have to prove. Fighting is already part of the game, has been forever, the proof is up to you to provide.

The all time low crap. OMGZ i'm convinced that fighting must be banned now after someone commits suicide for something outside of hockey, that's an all time low. Promote your agenda elsewhere.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2011, 04:21 PM
  #175
Joe Cole
Registered User
 
Joe Cole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,209
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTL-rules View Post

The fact is that most of us who are opposed to fighting have been for a while now and been out spoking about it. I won't change my mind next week or, if god forbids, the day the habs become a team full of goons.

The fact might be that you just don't like people who are opposed to your view point, no matter when...
Hold on to your assumptions for a moment, mister. Are you a mind reader? Did I mention what my beliefs were?

No?

But your agenda is clear. Smear anyone who does not agree with YOU.

If you read what I said without jumping to conclusions you would understand that what I said was Todd was bandwagon jumping. Taking a hot issue and making a case about it. To me, that is just populist and easy.

The fact that you want to stuff your opinion down my throat without even reading what I said says a lot about you.

Good night!

Joe Cole 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 11:11 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.