TSN: PJ Stock explores fighting and cheap shots
- Thread starter Dagoon44
- Start date
People who aren't ethnocentric and understand that there's plenty to be learned from other cultures? The elimination of the two-line pass largely came from seeing how the lack of the rule made for a more fluid, open game in European leagues. You'd be hard-pressed to find many people who think that change was a bad one.
What ridiculous, misogynistic, barbaric logic. This is professional sports in the 21st century, not lion fighting in Ancient Greece. I'd like to think we've developed as a society to the point that one doesn't have to resort to gooning around just to prove his "manliness." Ryan Callahan takes all sorts of ridiculous abuse every single game. He played last season with all sorts of ****ed up shoulder issues. He shouldn't have to defend himself against some meathead whose only contribution is thuggery just because he made a hard, yet clean hit on a player.
You are aware that there can be a middle ground, right? The world doesn't work in absolutes. I have no problem with two guys deciding to fight in the context of the game so long as they're doing so with a mutual understanding and respect. The McGrattan & McIlrath fight was a perfect example of this. The fight was a natural development within the game, and they both mutually agreed to drop the gloves rather than just attacking each other like savages. Then, once it was clear that McIlrath was tiring, McGrattan let up, gave him a pat on the back, and skated away. This is fine with me. What's not fine with me is the idea that McIlrath should be OBLIGATED to fight McGrattan just because McGrattan feels like it's time for Dylan to show off his manliness to the world.
The 2011 Rangers also led the league in Winter Classic victories, former members of the 2004 Stanley Cup winning Lightning, and players born in Minnesota. Using your logic, we could equally attribute the team's success to one of those things. According to hockeyfights.com, the teams currently leading in fights this season are the Maple Leafs, Flyers, Sabres, and Blue Jackets. Toronto is barely clinging to a playoff spot. The other three suck. Meanwhile, the Blackhawks, Ducks, and Sharks are in the bottom half of the league in fights. Yet they're three of the best teams in the NHL. How do you account for this exactly?
And this probably has a lot more to do with the fact that nobody on this team can score, our defensive coverage is inconsistent, and Hank isn't at his best. Or we could just chalk it up to fighting despite the fact that the Rangers are a respectable 11th in the NHL in that department, with Derek Dorsett tied for the league lead.
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
I say we go even further !
Two pistols, 10 paces, turn and fire !
NHL duels ! The 1800's had it right
Two pistols, 10 paces, turn and fire !
NHL duels ! The 1800's had it right
Please show me where I or anyone else here is arguing purely that fighting has no place in hockey. No. Stop trying to turn this into a black and white issue, because it isn't. The topic at hand here is regarding how much fighting actually "polices the game" and prevents injuries and cheapshots. Show me a poll where the players argue that. In fact, I'd like to think that the majority of players voting AGAINST removing the instigator implies that they don't think fighting helps police the game or prevent injuries.
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
I say we go even further !
Two pistols, 10 paces, turn and fire !
NHL duels ! The 1800's had it right
Anton Inbedkov: Shall we say pistols at dawn?
Boris Grushenko: Well, we can say it. I don't know what it means, but we can say it.
Or go Simpsons style and settle it in a scathing mambo.
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
Crushed.
The debate about outlawing fighting will go on for a long time -- but you just crushed the false narrative of how important it is.
Now, be prepared to be called a little fancyboy who probably wants to outlaw checking too.
I am not sure it's that. I just think many people don't know what value fighting adds to the game.
I don't think it's enough to say "that's how the game is played" or "they police themselves". I love a good heavyweight fight, yet by the same token I see friends of mine who are sports fans scoff at hockey because of the fighting aspect of the game, and I really don't have a logical answer as to why guys are allowed to fight each other bare knuckled in hockey.
I think the game is at the point now where the skill level is so high that you don't need it anymore. Back in the 60's, 70's, 80's it was part of the entertainment experience, and arguablypart of the reason some fans showed up.
It's not really an "anti violence" thing IMO, it's more about what is better for the game and growing the game.
Didn't we have this debate, ad nauseam, recently? If I recall it did not end well for those that previously lacked an understanding of fighting's rightful place and impact within the NHL.
Really? I've seen plenty of people attempt to tackle the whole "fighting has a rightful place and impact within the NHL" thing in this thread and so far the best we can come up with is:
1. PJ Stock totally believes it
2. Everyone who doesn't like fighting is a big vagina who should watch figure skating
3. The 2011-2012 Rangers fought a lot!!!!
Show me the evidence for it. If it's so convincingly obvious then it shouldn't take you very long to pile on the evidence given all the information and statistics the internet provides us with.
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,354
Ex Officer Friendly
Got Nothin To Say
The real reason fighting should be part of the game is to keep guys like Orpik and others from running around and taking cheap shots at opponents.
In the "old days", a player knew if he took a cheap shot at someone, he was going to have to answer for it. Player also knew that HE was going to have to defend himself and not turtle like a wuss. Too many times getting an ass kicking kept a cheap shot artist from continually doing it (unless his team had another goon that would do his fighting for him.)
Now, what stops an Orpik from laying a cheap shot on a guy? The refs and Shanny? A couple thousand bucks? Heck, the cheap shot artist's team might even end up with a power play because the victim's team retaliated! It's kind of like thinking the police are going to save you from criminals. By the time you call them, you're already a victim, or you're dead. Allow the victims to protect themselves, the criminals think twice before attacking people.
But then again, I'm sure the people who want fighting banned think the game is so much safer with full face shields, even though it enables players to carry sticks higher and higher each year.
In the "old days", a player knew if he took a cheap shot at someone, he was going to have to answer for it. Player also knew that HE was going to have to defend himself and not turtle like a wuss. Too many times getting an ass kicking kept a cheap shot artist from continually doing it (unless his team had another goon that would do his fighting for him.)
Now, what stops an Orpik from laying a cheap shot on a guy? The refs and Shanny? A couple thousand bucks? Heck, the cheap shot artist's team might even end up with a power play because the victim's team retaliated! It's kind of like thinking the police are going to save you from criminals. By the time you call them, you're already a victim, or you're dead. Allow the victims to protect themselves, the criminals think twice before attacking people.
But then again, I'm sure the people who want fighting banned think the game is so much safer with full face shields, even though it enables players to carry sticks higher and higher each year.
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
Ail
Based and Rangerspilled.
This whole issue isn't going to end well for people who fancy fighting eventually, so enjoy thinking you've won the battle and then inevitably losing the war.
We're also all still waiting for the pro-fighting crowd to prove there is any correlation whatsoever between fighting and preventing dangerous plays. I have a feeling we'll be waiting a long time.
The only thing ever offered is the opinions of players or former players telling us why they think it is good or ultilitarian, but never providing so much as a chart, graph or anything like it with real numbers.
Last edited:
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,354
Please. Enough with this evidence nonsense. You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true.
Though seriously, has anyone provided a reasonable explanation as to why Boston, who supposedly can police themselves, have had to have the league stand up for them more than any other NHL team in terms of total suspensions and games suspended? Or why in seven of the last eight seasons, the bottom 10 teams in terms of fighting majors have outperformed the top 10 teams in the standings seven times?
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,354
Ail
Based and Rangerspilled.
Good question, what does stop Orpik from throwing a cheapshot, or James Neal kneeing someone's head?
Answer: Nothing.
If fighting is preventative then why did it happen in the first place?
Or are you going to promise me now that because Thornton in turn did something dirty and dangerous (which he showed sincere remorse for, not "that'll teach Orpik!") that Orpik is now a changed man?
Maybe because Colin Campbell's son plays on the team?
Actually, I think it's because not only can they police themselves, they're extremely dirty and get other teams to lay nasty illegal hits on their guys.
And on the contrary, why does Pittsburgh seem to always get the low end of the suspension numbers when one of their guys commits an infraction?
Excuse my manners, as I'm still a quite tired from my company party last night and do not have the time nor the energy to reignite the entire debate, so I will have to refer you to my prior posts detailing the concept of fighting and its place in hockey.
To directly respond to your post, I agree that the reasons you cite (not very eloquent but the points remain) are largely foolish. Yes, PJ is an "analyst" but of course he has his biases. Yes, I question the intestinal fortitude of players that are emasculated in front of 18,200 people but to each their own. And yes, the 2011 squad did throw fists but they also excelled in many other facets of the game which had just as, if not more of, an impact on their performance.
For me, and I'd wager the 98% of NHL players that voted in favor of fighting would agree, toughness is a means towards developing an identity or "culture" within a team to help define their approach to success throughout each campaign (season). Toughness, and note that I do not necessary equate fighting to the more encompassing notion of toughness, is critical to building the moral fibre of the greater team if you will.
Sure, we can discuss the effects of fighting on cheapshots and the concept of players "policing themselves," which I do find to hold merit to some extent, and I'd agree with you that there is a middle ground somewhere between the extreme absolutes of "fighting eliminates cheapshots" and "fighting never eliminates cheapshots." At the end of the day cheapshots are tertiary to my main thesis of what fighting and on a deeper level, toughness, brings to a hockey club.
eco's bones
Registered User
Orpik is the same guy who sent Erik Cole head first into the boards breaking a vertebra in his neck. F
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRMz6A6r5fs
Whatever one thinks about fighting in general--sympathy for Orpik is misplaced. To me this was some ****ing karma. For that hit on Cole he got a 3 game suspension. That hit today puts him in the 10-15 game category. He turns down a lot of fights. It hasn't stopped his trying to lay people out whenever he can. It's part of 'his game' just as part of Thornton's game is to be an enforcer. Orpik has 14 fights over his career--one with Cole a couple years after that injury. Two of his other fights included kneeing majors and game misconducts. He won't fight anyone serious. He got nothing for Stepan. A lot of others he's got nothing for either. It's more or less the same kind of bull **** that the Pens used to excuse Cooke--he only got a minor or there wasn't a penalty so it was a good hit.
Ail
Based and Rangerspilled.
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,354
What evidence (form, amount) would satisfy you to the extent that you would agree that fighting can be a contributing factor to a succesful team?
Ad
Latest posts
-
Annoying TV commercials during Stanley Cup playoffs - US and Canada- Latest: KirkAlbuquerque
-
-
