Mike boone against fighting

[Corncob]

I love a good hockey brawl, get mad when other teams 'gooning' up against 'our' players, fantasise about someone in a Habs jersey pounding Lucic, etc. Standard.

You have to be pretty dense or intellectually dishonest however not to understand that there is a somewhat tenuous justification for a sport that is not ostensibly about fighting (and where fighting is against the rules) nonetheless allows, glorifies and encourages this with participants that everyone knows are only employed because of their willingness to fight and who therefore have to fight each other on a regular basis if only to justify their own existence.

And it should make everyone uncomfortable that their entertainment is being provided at the expense of other peoples health, especially now that the impact on the brain is so much better understood.

So I don't know what the answer is. I love watching brawls and people getting pasted into the boards, but sometimes things happen that make me feel somewhat guilty for enjoying that.

What I do know is that the trends are pretty obvious and all you people who call yourself 'pro-fighting' are going to need to get some better arguments than 'other things cause injury too' and 'go watch soccer, what are you a girl or something?'

 

[hockeyfan2k11]

Lebron, Jordan, Magic, Bird, Carter, Dawson, Mariano Rivera, Gwynn, etc... didn't need a goon protecting them for them to become legends. Why should 99 be different?

Is this a serious question?

 

[Monctonscout]

Fighting takes a lot of dirtiness out of the game. We seen that with increase in dirty head shots, stick swinging incidents of last 10-20 years. Fighting installs the fear factor in some while allowing others other means to release their on-ice frustrations. It's coming back

In the old days this used to apply but not really any more.

In the old days if a Kaleta was running at your best players, the John Ferguson(or insert other enforcer/tough player) would grab ahold of him and pound him and it would stop. Nowadays there is so much money involved that guys like that get paid to be antagonists and then get an enforcer(Scott) to protect them. Fear of getting beat up won't stop an Ott or Kaletta, plus they have a bodyguard. We saw it with Boston and Marchand, Ottawa with Neil, both teams protect those players and allow them to play a very chippy/dirty game.

 

[Corncob]

Colton Orr hit Pacioretty from behind in the first period.
It didn't look nasty, but it did injure Pacioretty.

The thing is.... it was an illegal hit. It was blindside, and late.

If the NHL had the balls to penalize this sort of hit, then idiots like Orr wouldn't be in the game, and fighting might have more of true purpose.

It was borderline interference. Hitting someone from the blindside is not and never has been against any rule.

 

[MTL-rules]

Fighting is a necessity in hockey. It's a deterrent. Without it, players would running wild making vicious hits on stars without any threat of retaliation. The only thing the league should look into are the staged fights where they drop the gloves at faceoffs.

Show me the data and studies that prove this... don't look for them, because they don't exist. It's simply not true, it's just a fallacious belief put forward to try to justify something completely unnecessary to the game of hockey. (Just like the deterrent effect of the death penality)

As for the notion that fighting "is part of the game", why do they stop the play while 2 players fights and then give both penalities ? Fighting is not hitting, there is no type of fist fighting that is part of the play, none.

As someone said earlier, it's just a matter of time before we get rid of this and the people who love fighting will change their mind just like helmets, goalie masks and soon to be visors before.

 

[idk]

Is this a serious question?

Yes it is.

I'll admit that Gwynn, Carter and Riviera are a bit of a stretch, but Bird and Magic (and to a lesser extent Jordan and Lebron) are very good examples. The NBA of the 70's & 80's was not the NBA you know today. Fights were common (not as common as NHL fights mind you, but common) and probably more dangerous (since it's harder to put power in a punch on skates than it is on foot). Guys like Bill Laimbeer were employed for much the same reason NHL teams employ guys like Orr and Parros. To beat up on the other guys.

The NBA started to change in the late 70's. A number of incidents in 1977 lead to the changes. During a Lakers-Bucs game Kareem Abdul-Jabbar got into an altercation with Kent Benson. Benson elbowed Jabbar in the stomach, and Jabbar responded by thumping Benson soundly with a blind shot, breaking Benson's jaw and his own hand. Then a few months later during a Lakers-Rockets game Jabbar and teammate Kermit Washington got into an altercation with Kevin Kunnert. Eventually it wound up with Jabbar grabbing Kunnert from behind leaving him open to repeated shots from Washington.

Enter Rudy Tomjanovich. A young, five time all-star who had a reputation as a peace maker - a guy who broke up these scuffles. He runs in. Washington sees him and does not recognize him - just sees a wrong coloured jersey on it's way in. Turns around a cracks him one. The bone structure of his face detaches from his skull, and his jaw and nose are broken. Blood and spinal fluid are leaking into his brain cavity. And he has a concussion. The doctor who did the repair work likened to to scotch taping together a broken egg shell.

That's the point at which the NBA decided to clean up its act. It took a long time, and fighting is still not totally gone. But it is a different game. To say it's silly to think that Bird, Johnson and Jordan didn't have to stick up for themselves, protect themselves and what not just shows that you don't know that much about the history of the NBA.

However if you must go down that route - Howe didn't need anyone to stick up for him. Neither did Richard or Hull. While you can find examples littered throughout the history of the NHL the enforcer we know and love today truly came into existence in Edmonton in the 1980's - when the Oilers hired Semenko to protect #99. Perhaps it is a role whose time has come and gone.

 

[LyricalLyricist]

Nothing wrong with fighting but not a fan of staged fighters or enforcers.

All due respect to what these guys do but if Orr isn't around, he doesn't mix it up with Subban and Parros doesn't need to fight Orr. The scrum would end fairly quickly. Enforcers usually fight enforcers and correct me if I'm wrong but Orr is an aggressive guy. We've seen him charge people or knock out our top 6 player. Yet, he continues, because it is his job. Parros won't deter him. Well....maybe a bit but not that much. We all know it.

Fighting is fine but enforcers? meh. Still, I liked how Parros played the game itself last night and he's not the only enforcer who can. There are more talented players out there for sure but his size was an asset to us just the same. Still, as long as 1 enforcer is in the league, other teams will employ them too. It's just how it goes. If Orr, Scott, Thornton, etc... didn't exist, I doubt Parros would either. Even if he has a bit of hockey skill.

 

[hototogisu]

The best hockey we witness yearly is playoff hockey (last year's 1st round not withstanding which was a gong show anyways) and every 4 years of Olympic hockey.

What's the commonality here? There is NO FIGHTING.

Anyone to say that hockey is a part of the game, well it's not part of the best hockey we witness.

Maybe the fact that the stakes in those games are raised considerably is what lends to it being the "best hockey", not the fact that there's no fighting?

I mean, it stands to reason Olympic hockey is going to be more exciting than a regular old hockey game in December, fighting or no fighting.

 

[Henkka]

Fighting is a necessity in hockey. It's a deterrent. Without it, players would running wild making vicious hits on stars without any threat of retaliation. The only thing the league should look into are the staged fights where they drop the gloves at faceoffs.

Red Wings have played without goons for a decade now and it hasn't caused any more injuries to our superstars than for teams having goons.

 

[Burke the Legend]

I love a good hockey brawl, get mad when other teams 'gooning' up against 'our' players, fantasise about someone in a Habs jersey pounding Lucic, etc. Standard.

You have to be pretty dense or intellectually dishonest however not to understand that there is a somewhat tenuous justification for a sport that is not ostensibly about fighting (and where fighting is against the rules) nonetheless allows, glorifies and encourages this with participants that everyone knows are only employed because of their willingness to fight and who therefore have to fight each other on a regular basis if only to justify their own existence.

And it should make everyone uncomfortable that their entertainment is being provided at the expense of other peoples health, especially now that the impact on the brain is so much better understood.

So I don't know what the answer is. I love watching brawls and people getting pasted into the boards, but sometimes things happen that make me feel somewhat guilty for enjoying that.

What I do know is that the trends are pretty obvious and all you people who call yourself 'pro-fighting' are going to need to get some better arguments than 'other things cause injury too' and 'go watch soccer, what are you a girl or something?'

Do you not play hockey? Fights happen at all levels not just pro, even beer league. It's just an outlet for a very aggressive and intense game. It's not a big deal just a couple of exhausted guys grappling each other and throwing weak punches for a minute.

 

[417]

I'm not personally for or against fighting...

But I do think that it's just a matter of time before it's out of the game and I don't think the quality of the game will suffer one bit. In fact, I think it'll probably be better.

I know i'm probably going to get the standard line from the 'hockey purists'

"if you don't like fighting go watch _____(insert non-contact sport or physical activity)"

 

[Gary320]

Do I think hockey has it's place in the game? Eh not anymore. I think it could be fine without it.

However, my biggest worry is that cheap shots will be at a all-time high, with no fights.

 

[Corncob]

Do you not play hockey? Fights happen at all levels not just pro, even beer league. It's just an outlet for a very aggressive and intense game.

Not really sure which, if any, of my points that is in reply to.

 

[Miller Time]

I like fighting
I like hockey

There is no need whatsoever for the two to be together... Different sports entirely.

NHL "fighting" isn't a part of hockey, it's a part of the entertainment business that is the NHL.

Completely unnecessary to the game... But obviously a very much enjoyed part of the spectacle.

People would enjoy fighting in any sport.... Our collective appreciation of violence shouldn't be mistaken for anything more than that.

Someone will eventually die as a result, then the lawyers & politicians will get involved, shame that it will have to come to that.

 

[Agnostic]

I'm not personally for or against fighting...

But I do think that it's just a matter of time before it's out of the game and I don't think the quality of the game will suffer one bit. In fact, I think it'll probably be better.

I know i'm probably going to get the standard line from the 'hockey purists'

"if you don't like fighting go watch _____(insert non-contact sport or physical activity)"

i disagree. Fans love fighting, its in the hockey DNA. UFC, MMA, all on the rise in popularity. Gladiator sports are putting eyes on the advertisers message and that trumps everything, including health concerns , insurance costs, and matters of morality.

 

[Gary320]

i disagree. Fans love fighting, its in the hockey DNA. UFC, MMA, all on the rise in popularity. Gladiator sports are putting eyes on the advertisers message and that trumps everything, including health concerns , insurance costs, and matters of morality.

100%

Went to a NYR/Habs game two years ago. There was a fight during the game, NYR player won. The fans went crazy, the fight got a louder reaction than any NYR goal.

Take it out of the game, fans will be pissed.

Will the game on the ice suffer? No. But $$$ might.

 

[Kriss E]

Take fighting out and the Kaleta's of the league will run wild.

Sticks incidents will rise too.

Are you suggesting Kaleta or Ott aren't running wild?

If yesterday showed anything, it's that fighting changes absolutely nothing.
Parros-Moen-Prust-Tinordi, heck we didn't even lose one fight, we brought it to the leafs.
Still, they crosschecked, hit from behind, blindsided, talked smacked, went after our skilled players, and won the game.

But yes, fighting is so important..

What a dumb reasoning. You like fighting, great, you're allowed to, just like people were allowed to find putting a helmet was dumb. But don't try to argue that fighting makes the game safer. That is beyond Pejorative Slured.

 

[Miller Time]

100%

Went to a NYR/Habs game two years ago. There was a fight during the game, NYR player won. The fans went crazy, the fight got a louder reaction than any NYR goal.

Take it out of the game, fans will be pissed.

Will the game on the ice suffer? No. But $$$ might.

Bingo

Part of the business, not part of the game...

Hard to see why that's even contentious to anyone?

 

[417]

i disagree. Fans love fighting, its in the hockey DNA. UFC, MMA, all on the rise in popularity. Gladiator sports are putting eyes on the advertisers message and that trumps everything, including health concerns , insurance costs, and matters of morality.

Yes I know...people in general love violence. Just like when you're at a bar and a fight breaks out, people stop doing whatever they're doing to watch. It's an ugly part of many people's conscious unfortunately.

But I don't think it's necessary in the game of hockey nor do I think it would be missed.

it's a matter of time that it will be out of the game or at the very least, heavily sanctionned.

 

[HCH]

I am talking about team sports ...

Football even in its violence doesn't allow fighting. It's toughest and most violent of all pro sports. But if you fight, you are gone.

The hockey establishment is full of neanderthals.

Yes it is but you have to love all of the chest thumping that you see on these boards. I don't know if they are trying to compensate for their own inadequacies or what, but the arguments get loud very quickly.

I like your idea. Throw players out of the game for fighting. It would get rid of the gratuitous fights. If two players really wanted to fight they would need a good reason to do so.

Last night Parros and Moen would have been out of the game (and Parros would not have been injured). Colton Orr and Fraser would have been out for the Leafs. Prust would have still been in the game but Fraser wouldn't have been around to fight.

No one would have prevented them from fighting but they would have to pay bigger consequences. What is wrong with that, especially for an activity that is against the rules of hockey for anyone who cares to read the rule book.

 

[No fan fiction]

Take fighting out and the Kaleta's of the league will run wild.

Sticks incidents will rise too.

Myth. Myth. Myth.

Did you see the huge effect Orr jumping Kaleta had?
Did you see the huge deterrence of Neil, et al in protecting Karlsson?
Need I mention Aaron Rome concussing N. Horton or any of the times Marc Savard and Patrice Bergeron were flattened while Lucic, McQuaid, Thornton, et al were around?

Officiating and suspensions make those things go away. Goons actually increase the likelihood. Read the book with the interviews done by Bill Berg's wife.

 

[HCH]

i disagree. Fans love fighting, its in the hockey DNA. UFC, MMA, all on the rise in popularity. Gladiator sports are putting eyes on the advertisers message and that trumps everything, including health concerns , insurance costs, and matters of morality.

You mean some fans like fighting in hockey and some like skill.

So your defense of fighting in hockey is because the popularity of UFC is on the rise? That's an interesting argument. Do you really go the games to see if there will be a fight or do you go to watch the guys like Crosby, Malkin, Toews and Kane.

It seems to me that if fighting was the driving force behind hockey's popularity, then John Scott and Colton Orr would be the highest paid players in the league and the four players I just mentioned would be sidebars to the main event

The most popular sport in the world is soccer and basketball is right up there, too. If you want to drag other sports into the analogy, drag them all in.

 

[Monctonscout]

Yes it is but you have to love all of the chest thumping that you see on these boards. I don't know if they are trying to compensate for their own inadequacies or what, but the arguments get loud very quickly.

I like your idea. Throw players out of the game for fighting. It would get rid of the gratuitous fights. If two players really wanted to fight they would need a good reason to do so.

Last night Parros and Moen would have been out of the game (and Parros would not have been injured). Colton Orr and Fraser would have been out for the Leafs. Prust would have still been in the game but Fraser wouldn't have been around to fight.

No one would have prevented them from fighting but they would have to pay bigger consequences. What is wrong with that, especially for an activity that is against the rules of hockey for anyone who cares to read the rule book.

In junior they have a 2 fight rule, then you're out of the game.

It's tough because if it's a 1 fight rule and you play against a chippy/tough team then are you going to dress TWO enforcers in case the first one gets tossed?

There are good arguments on both sides, but with the information coming out on brain injuries, it's getting harder and harder to defend fighting in hockey. Knocking somebody woozy isn't just a few hours of discomfort it might lead to life long problems.

In the old days players would alter their game through fear of getting beat up, nowadays guys like Marchand Ott Kaletta Neil do their thing regardless of the threat of getting pummelled.

 

[Galchenioretty]

100%

Went to a NYR/Habs game two years ago. There was a fight during the game, NYR player won. The fans went crazy, the fight got a louder reaction than any NYR goal.

Take it out of the game, fans will be pissed.

Will the game on the ice suffer? No. But $$$ might.

How many people shell out hundreds of dollars to go watch a hockey game with the expectation of watching a fight? I mean, it's a nice sweetener for some but people who want to watch fights watch fighting sports. Hockey fights generally are pretty boring, short, quick wrestling matches with a majority of punches to the helmet and a take down.

People would probably whine at first but it's hard to imagine a lot of paying customers giving up watching NHL hockey over it, even if they say they would. People whine about all kinds of changes, a lot of people were going to stop watching if the NHL adopted the shootout.

I'm not even necessarily making an argument AGAINST fighting in the league, just that I don't believe the bottom line will be impacted too much. It's pretty inevitable with everything we're learning about concussions and what headshots are doing to these guys after the fact that fighting will be out of the NHL, whether we like it or not IMO. TBH it's harder for me to enjoy fights or big hits than it was just from some of the things I've learned about the effects of head trauma in sports.

 

[TUCKER 06]

http://www.hockeyinsideout.com/boone/about-last-night-123
How did u fall in love with hockey in the first place if u dont like hockey fights

Uhmm...the actual HOCKEY part of the sport.

As a kid we didn't enforce during road hockey games and we didn't fight in little league.. we just played hockey.