Would YOU eliminate fighting from the game?

[Muston Atthews]

Never mind, I found the poll. Closed by Mod due to one sided results.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1543215

Lmao but he's fighting the good fight!... I mean talking the good talk?

 

[slozo]

Where's Slozo?

He was pretty sure he'd get his answer, when he bent and shaped the question. Come get your crow, fool.

I'm here.

What's your definition of crow? An idiot mod closed the poll super quick before it get any kind of substantial sample of voting . . . and I have no problem saying that the mod was a ***** for doing that. It was completely unfair, and from what I can tell, it's unprecedented move based on his own personal bias to close a poll with under 150 respondants in an extremely short amount of time giving one side over 90%.

But that's what the pro-fighting side has to resort to, in order to "win" and justify in their minds.

And I decided after that poll was most hastily closed to simply stop trying convince a bunch of idiots who can only repeat false logic, make baseless accusations, name call, and repeat old tired lines that have no basis in reality.

And when the NHL finally has to adopt stiffer penalties for fighting - much like I suggested, in fact, I can guarantee it - because of a death or very very serious injury or maybe it will take a dozen . . . I won't be on here bragging about you eating crow. It'll just be a sad, sad fact of life, that people don't change their mind until something very serious happens.

 

[Mike Martin]

I'm here.

What's your definition of crow? An idiot mod closed the poll super quick before it get any kind of substantial sample of voting . . . and I have no problem saying that the mod was a ***** for doing that. It was completely unfair, and from what I can tell, it's unprecedented move based on his own personal bias to close a poll with under 150 respondants in an extremely short amount of time giving one side over 90%.

But that's what the pro-fighting side has to resort to, in order to "win" and justify in their minds.

And I decided after that poll was most hastily closed to simply stop trying convince a bunch of idiots who can only repeat false logic, make baseless accusations, name call, and repeat old tired lines that have no basis in reality.

And when the NHL finally has to adopt stiffer penalties for fighting - much like I suggested, in fact, I can guarantee it - because of a death or very very serious injury or maybe it will take a dozen . . . I won't be on here bragging about you eating crow. It'll just be a sad, sad fact of life, that people don't change their mind until something very serious happens.

A dozen deaths on the ice? Geesh, you are a real drama queen.

 

[Holymakinaw]

NO!!! Why on earth would anyone want to eliminate one of the most exciting parts of the game?

What do we want.......to watch Senator hockey???

 

[ErnieLeafs]

I'm here.

What's your definition of crow? An idiot mod closed the poll super quick before it get any kind of substantial sample of voting . . . and I have no problem saying that the mod was a ***** for doing that. It was completely unfair, and from what I can tell, it's unprecedented move based on his own personal bias to close a poll with under 150 respondants in an extremely short amount of time giving one side over 90%.

But that's what the pro-fighting side has to resort to, in order to "win" and justify in their minds.

And I decided after that poll was most hastily closed to simply stop trying convince a bunch of idiots who can only repeat false logic, make baseless accusations, name call, and repeat old tired lines that have no basis in reality.

And when the NHL finally has to adopt stiffer penalties for fighting - much like I suggested, in fact, I can guarantee it - because of a death or very very serious injury or maybe it will take a dozen . . . I won't be on here bragging about you eating crow. It'll just be a sad, sad fact of life, that people don't change their mind until something very serious happens.

You actually believe that your poll was going to turn around, and become closer, or more representative of your views?!

You're wrong, and the only tired, brainless individual here, is one that can't see that, nor admit it. Hockey fans like fighting, in a solid majority. It's the way the game has been played all of our lives. It serves a purpose; always has, and always will, whether or not you're willing and able to admit it.

Crow, in this case, was for all of your ridiculous grandstanding, and chest pounding, about how you were so sure that your properly worded poll would change the outcome. You were going to show us! Well, sport, it didn't work out.

If you plan on insulting the vast majority of hockey fans, once again, feel more than free to send that ultra protectionist, overly liberal "soccer mom" diatribe to my inbox. I think you've spent enough time in this thread talking down to folks. You might as well direct your anger at me.

 

[cujoflutie]

I'm here.

What's your definition of crow? An idiot mod closed the poll super quick before it get any kind of substantial sample of voting . . . and I have no problem saying that the mod was a ***** for doing that. It was completely unfair, and from what I can tell, it's unprecedented move based on his own personal bias to close a poll with under 150 respondants in an extremely short amount of time giving one side over 90%.

But that's what the pro-fighting side has to resort to, in order to "win" and justify in their minds.

And I decided after that poll was most hastily closed to simply stop trying convince a bunch of idiots who can only repeat false logic, make baseless accusations, name call, and repeat old tired lines that have no basis in reality.

And when the NHL finally has to adopt stiffer penalties for fighting - much like I suggested, in fact, I can guarantee it - because of a death or very very serious injury or maybe it will take a dozen . . . I won't be on here bragging about you eating crow. It'll just be a sad, sad fact of life, that people don't change their mind until something very serious happens.

I dont think if the poll has since been re opened but 464 votes from an original six fan base is a fairly substantial sample size.


The pro fighting side is declaring victory based on having more than 4 times as many people in their corner. It's a fairly sound logic since it means far more people subscribe to their argument.
The anti fighting side is grasping at every straw they can and somehow declaring victory saying despite being in the vast minority, they are right because they say they are. It's easy to make arguments against fighting by bringing in negative events caused since the NHL has always had fighting so that the other side can not do the same.
Every pro argument has been dismissed by the other side simply as saying 'it's wrong'. such as the players having a similar view somehow out of peer pressure (players anonymously voting for fighting when they are really against it), Semenko and Mcsorely's roles in the Oilers dynasty being dismissed or the examples of rats being neutralized by fighting.

 

[slozo]

You actually believe that your poll was going to turn around, and become closer, or more representative of your views?!

You're wrong, and the only tired, brainless individual here, is one that can't see that, nor admit it. Hockey fans like fighting, in a solid majority. It's the way the game has been played all of our lives. It serves a purpose; always has, and always will, whether or not you're willing and able to admit it.

Crow, in this case, was for all of your ridiculous grandstanding, and chest pounding, about how you were so sure that your properly worded poll would change the outcome. You were going to show us! Well, sport, it didn't work out.

If you plan on insulting the vast majority of hockey fans, once again, feel more than free to send that ultra protectionist, overly liberal "soccer mom" diatribe to my inbox. I think you've spent enough time in this thread talking down to folks. You might as well direct your anger at me.

Yes, I believed that my poll SHOULD have had a much higher percentage than what showed up here, yes. By all available logic, it should. I'm not going to expect much from anyone in the way of seeing that logic, however, as I see hat cognitive dissonance rules the day.

If 17% of online-active fans want to ELIMINATE fighting . . . an impossibility in itself, but certainly it's a much more drastic call than simply MITIGATING fighting, as a one game ban would do . . . so if that 17% of us wanted elimination, it actually makes zero sense that a far lower percentage would be in favour of a one game ban - a move that effectively takes out goons, but keeps in the occasional fight. It'd be a 50% drop, maybe a bit more, but it certainly wouldn't ELIMINATE it.

But as I said, cognitive dissonance rules the day. The comment before me expounds on how the pro-fighters have all given solid, logic based arguments; the anti-fighters have simply shot them down with empty epithets and useless phrases. And yet the opposite is true, just look through the entire thread.

And since when does a thread HAVE to get shut down because of an overwhelming % win for one vote over another? Really? If the thread is uninteresting mods . . . it'll die on its own. Whatever happened to letting democracy run its course - without stopping it at a perceived 'best result possible'?

Just like this poll, which was close to 11% for quite some time, but it picked up tonnes of comments, and the percentage slowly climbed higher and higher . . .

Anyways, this is my final comment in this thread. I can see that only death and severe injury will teach those who have been too strongly ingrained with the idea that a hockey infraction is somehow "part of the game" that should be nurtured and loved . . . even though it is NOT HOCKEY. Actual hockey is hockey - not fighting, which stops the hockey.

 

[coupe93]

And since when does a thread HAVE to get shut down because of an overwhelming % win for one vote over another? Really? If the thread is uninteresting mods . . . it'll die on its own. Whatever happened to letting dictatorship run its course - without stopping it at a perceived 'best result possible'?

Fixed. I think democracy has run its course, no?

 

[pooleboy]

i remember when i played hockey every rep player came down to play houseleague and my houseleague was pretty competitve, it was full contact and there was fighting (not much at all, maybe 1 every now and then, maybe at the ened of the season) and it was exciting. My bro was a goalie and he played up a couple games with my team and loved it. After i was done hockey they went into a non-contact, fun league which involves equal play and safety for everyone.

the end result- was boring as ****, my dad hated going to see his games and didn't ever (he went to every single one of my games). This is more for checking, but fighting is the same thing. If players are worried for there safety there are plenty of other, not-so-well paying jobs they could take on but instead they decided to play hockey, it wasn't like the NHL forced them to play, they made the decision.

The problem doesn't lye within fighting these days imo, its being to ***** to stand up. Im going to take the Orpik-Thornton thing as an example (and i dont condone anything what Thornton did) but if Orpik just dropped the gloves, even "tripped" and just took 1-2 punches in the face that would have been the end of it.

Fighting is in the game to protect players. If there wasn't any fighting the so called "rats" could just run around and not worry about crushing anyone from behind because they wont have to worry about whats coming next. Fighting also changes the tempo of a game, can change the game just as much as a goal. The people who are making the decisions about fighting/checking in hockey (not just the NHL) obviously never played hockey or are just thinking about one variable to much: safety. Hockey is safe, there is a lot of equipment but injuries do happen in any sport. Concussions suck, but 30 years ago players didn't even know they had concussions. THe people making these decisions need to realize that if players dont want to get hurt, then just stay in there beds... dont leave the house, dont play sports because anything u do u could get hurt... and it isn't the NHL who is forcing these players to play and make millions each year.

edit: id rather see a team go after a guy by a fight rather then just go head hunting for a hit from behind or something...
imo if steve moore just dropped the gloves with bertuzzi then he would still be in the NHL, people gotta stand up every now and then, society is turning everyone into a bunch of *******.

 

[ErnieLeafs]

i remember when i played hockey every rep player came down to play houseleague and my houseleague was pretty competitve, it was full contact and there was fighting (not much at all, maybe 1 every now and then, maybe at the ened of the season) and it was exciting. My bro was a goalie and he played up a couple games with my team and loved it. After i was done hockey they went into a non-contact, fun league which involves equal play and safety for everyone.

the end result- was boring as ****, my dad hated going to see his games and didn't ever (he went to every single one of my games). This is more for checking, but fighting is the same thing. If players are worried for there safety there are plenty of other, not-so-well paying jobs they could take on but instead they decided to play hockey, it wasn't like the NHL forced them to play, they made the decision.

The problem doesn't lye within fighting these days imo, its being to ***** to stand up. Im going to take the Orpik-Thornton thing as an example (and i dont condone anything what Thornton did) but if Orpik just dropped the gloves, even "tripped" and just took 1-2 punches in the face that would have been the end of it.

Fighting is in the game to protect players. If there wasn't any fighting the so called "rats" could just run around and not worry about crushing anyone from behind because they wont have to worry about whats coming next. Fighting also changes the tempo of a game, can change the game just as much as a goal. The people who are making the decisions about fighting/checking in hockey (not just the NHL) obviously never played hockey or are just thinking about one variable to much: safety. Hockey is safe, there is a lot of equipment but injuries do happen in any sport. Concussions suck, but 30 years ago players didn't even know they had concussions. THe people making these decisions need to realize that if players dont want to get hurt, then just stay in there beds... dont leave the house, dont play sports because anything u do u could get hurt... and it isn't the NHL who is forcing these players to play and make millions each year.

edit: id rather see a team go after a guy by a fight rather then just go head hunting for a hit from behind or something...
imo if steve moore just dropped the gloves with bertuzzi then he would still be in the NHL, people gotta stand up every now and then, society is turning everyone into a bunch of *******.

Amen. If the gloves are dropped, that is completely prevented. I brought it up to Mirtle and he dodged it too, even though it's clear that the solution was simple.

 

[Faltorvo]

Let's make sure we have the wording right on what you call "a vast majority who favour its presence" means.

A huge majority here on this subject and on this website - getting tonnes of votes, so clearly it's a good sample of online presence fans - voted no to "Do you want fighting eliminated from the game".

The original question of this poll is terribly worded, no great offense intended - and probably for the reasons I had questioned you about (telling you to THINK about it). Most people who support the current status-quo of fighting in the NHL have given very little if any thought as to how it would actually be reduced. Practically, fighting can hardly be eliminated from any sport really . . . I am sure there is a one off somewhere even for sportsand pseudo-sports like table tennis, chess (definitely heard of fistfights, lol), and ballroom dancing. For the other compareables we used - NFL, NBA, MLB . . . fights DO happen occasionally, similar to how they would happen in hockey for a "natural" fight (ie the players get rough and start to jostle, push comes to shove, and some dummy starts throwing punches). Except in their respective cases, not only is the penalty for doing it an automatic game ejection and suspension of some length . . . the league does not condone it, instead, they actually sometimes put out a press release distancing themselves from this behaviour.

So to get back to my point, if the poll is worded,
"Do you favour increasing the penalty for a fight to an automatic ejection and game suspension (or more)?",
with a Yes or No answer . . .

It wouldn't be 83/17 as it is currently. It might be closer to 50/50, it might still be 60/40 though, tough to say. In fact, I would love for someone to put up a poll like this (I might even do it myself).

And if you asked the poll question,
"Do you favour increasing the penalty for a fight in the NHL?" - a broader, and perhaps less severe move away from the condoning of fighting . . . you'd be in the majority for Yes, is what I am guessing. At least close to it.

And we do know of polls done in Canada for all people - fans and non-fans - where the large majority favoured increasing the infractions for fighting/gettin git out of the game.

And as to your comment
"much like in the world outside of the game, most times, a fistfight ends up in two people taking time to cool down, and moving on afterwards" . . .

Not sure if you mean that's what happens BEFORE a fistfight happens, or afterward, but if you are saying that is what happens AFTER a fistfight . . . that is definitely not true. Not most of the time, and out of the dozens of fistfights I have seen and in some which I was sadly a participant . . . maybe only one or two out of those had that happen.

If it's BEFORE a fistfight happens, you really didn't make it very clear - and, you prove my point on penalising fighting more strenuously.

Your opening the door toward a slippery slope.

Even a 1 game susp will in time eliminate the enforcers. Seeing how the cap works and susp does not allow cap relief.

25 fights means 25 man games lost and what ever is remains in that game. The end of enforcers.

Opens you up for the "sucker" fight. Sucker a Chara,Lucic,Iggy,Perry or any other key player that's not afraid to scrap and pull them for that game and the next.

Could be used as a key game or playoff ploy.

 

[Faltorvo]

Yes, I believed that my poll SHOULD have had a much higher percentage than what showed up here, yes. By all available logic, it should. I'm not going to expect much from anyone in the way of seeing that logic, however, as I see hat cognitive dissonance rules the day.

If 17% of online-active fans want to ELIMINATE fighting . . . an impossibility in itself, but certainly it's a much more drastic call than simply MITIGATING fighting, as a one game ban would do . . . so if that 17% of us wanted elimination, it actually makes zero sense that a far lower percentage would be in favour of a one game ban - a move that effectively takes out goons, but keeps in the occasional fight. It'd be a 50% drop, maybe a bit more, but it certainly wouldn't ELIMINATE it.

But as I said, cognitive dissonance rules the day. The comment before me expounds on how the pro-fighters have all given solid, logic based arguments; the anti-fighters have simply shot them down with empty epithets and useless phrases. And yet the opposite is true, just look through the entire thread.

And since when does a thread HAVE to get shut down because of an overwhelming % win for one vote over another? Really? If the thread is uninteresting mods . . . it'll die on its own. Whatever happened to letting democracy run its course - without stopping it at a perceived 'best result possible'?

Just like this poll, which was close to 11% for quite some time, but it picked up tonnes of comments, and the percentage slowly climbed higher and higher . . .

Anyways, this is my final comment in this thread. I can see that only death and severe injury will teach those who have been too strongly ingrained with the idea that a hockey infraction is somehow "part of the game" that should be nurtured and loved . . . even though it is NOT HOCKEY. Actual hockey is hockey - not fighting, which stops the hockey.

Death won't change it.

There are and have been deaths in Downhill skiing, Auto racing, Bike racing, Boxing to name a few for many many years and nothing has changed enough to avoid these tragic accidents.

 

[Patience]

imo if steve moore just dropped the gloves with bertuzzi then he would still be in the NHL, people gotta stand up every now and then, society is turning everyone into a bunch of *******.

bullcrap, Steve Moore stood up and fought Matt Cooke earlier in that game. Apparently that wasn't good enough. The Canucks weren't satisfied until Moore was taken off the ice on a stretcher.

 

[Patience]

"Sucker" fights aren't an issue in pro football or basketball or soccer.

 

[bobg1]

absolutely not

 

[BillP]

Amen. If the gloves are dropped, that is completely prevented. I brought it up to Mirtle and he dodged it too, even though it's clear that the solution was simple.

Right so back to that example....orpik says yes to fight Thornton, in turn Thornton (chances are) obliterates him. Puts some blood on his jersey or perhaps knocks him out. So as the enforcer skates away and the opponent is laying on the ice trying to think of what city he's in, this is called justice or "the code"

This is purely hypothetical but please don't say completely prevented, if Shawn Thornton was punching you in the head as hard as he could and actually connected with one, do you think you could finish the game?

 

[gtforepro]

Thornton should be charged with assault, plain and simple. That was a criminal act.

Fighting should be a game misconduct with a mandatory review for supplemental discipline. This change is coming, so you mouth-breathers need to get used to it. If you can't appreciate hockey without fights, time to find a new sport.

 

[gtforepro]

Jesus Christ...I read some of these posts and just shake my head. Derek Boogaard and Wade Belak died for your amusement. How many other kids will suffer severe trauma trying to fill that Enforcer/Goon role because it's the only way they can stay in the game? How many kids will get needlessly hurt by the Enforcer/Goon types? How many kids will turn away from the game because of Enforcer/Goons? You guys make me sick. Go hang around at the same bar you went to in high school and yuck it up with your same high school buddies...or, grow the **** up and use your head.

 

[legendinblue]

Easy no, but I would push for eliminating 'staged' fights.

 

[Joey Hoser]

I hate to seem insensitive to the dangers, but honestly, if safety is your concern, you can't possibly support playing full-contact sports, especially at 30-40km/h with sharp blades on your feet. The whole thing is absurdly dangerous in the first place. Fighting doesn't need to be in the game just like we don't need to play hockey at all. Taking out fighting in the name of safety is like putting a helmet on when skydiving, and criticizing others for not sharing your concern is rather silly.

 

[hockeyfanz*]

Jesus Christ...I read some of these posts and just shake my head. Derek Boogaard and Wade Belak died for your amusement. How many other kids will suffer severe trauma trying to fill that Enforcer/Goon role because it's the only way they can stay in the game? How many kids will get needlessly hurt by the Enforcer/Goon types? How many kids will turn away from the game because of Enforcer/Goons? You guys make me sick. Go hang around at the same bar you went to in high school and yuck it up with your same high school buddies...or, grow the **** up and use your head.

People love violence. Its sad. Its a db society we live in. There is violence in all facets of life...kinda disgusting and is a very poor commentary on society really. Why should hockey fans be any different. Also when speaking of sports...its not usually the scientists/doctors and other highly educated members of society supporting this nonsense or even sports in general.

Think back to high school and who the jocks were. The guys who are wearing construction helmets and polyester suits with paper hats in adult life. Its a broad statement and paints everybody with the same brush.... I know...but its a generalization and we all know there is some truth to stereotypes.

I find it very difficult believing that hockey without goons would be detrimental to the sport..but listening to dinosaurs like Don Cherry and Brian Burke would have you believe different. I know that my opinion matters not..because I never played in JR. A or even JR. B....LOL.

 

[Patience]

It doesn't matter that I actually get a thrill from a hockey fight. It doesn't matter that I recognize that physical intimidation is a real hockey strategy used since the NHL formed. For legal reasons, fighting is going to be phased out. The NHL doesn't want the class action lawsuits that could be generated from this stuff. The NHL can only change its rules so much to maintain the necessary optics of enhancing player safety that they can point out in courtrooms. The next step will soon be the elimination of fighting.

I really get the sense that some are just addicted to the adrenaline rush of a fight because some of these arguments have been as emotional and illogical as the ones from the nicotine-addicted as government were finally getting the stench of cigarettes out of public spaces.

 

[pooleboy]

Jesus Christ...I read some of these posts and just shake my head. Derek Boogaard and Wade Belak died for your amusement. How many other kids will suffer severe trauma trying to fill that Enforcer/Goon role because it's the only way they can stay in the game? How many kids will get needlessly hurt by the Enforcer/Goon types? How many kids will turn away from the game because of Enforcer/Goons? You guys make me sick. Go hang around at the same bar you went to in high school and yuck it up with your same high school buddies...or, grow the **** up and use your head.

there are a lot of people in the world that would trade their lives to be an NHL enforcer living the dream and getting paid millions.

I dont have to much sympathy for NHL players who complain (although death is a tragedy RIP)

 

[pooleboy]

bullcrap, Steve Moore stood up and fought Matt Cooke earlier in that game. Apparently that wasn't good enough. The Canucks weren't satisfied until Moore was taken off the ice on a stretcher.

he ran there best player? Fight twice, answer the bell.... what Moore did was unacceptable too, that was a dirty hit on naslund... very vulnerable.

edit: if someone hit kessel like that id hope to god that he has to fight atleast once, and if the players feel it wasn't justice enough twice. answer the bell be a man. ffs society is turning everyone into a bunch of little ******* getting scared to hit each other in fear of being sewed, hurting someone. Stand the **** up, like this is getting ridiculous lmao

 

[socratic]

The problem doesn't lye within fighting these days imo, its being to ***** to stand up. Im going to take the Orpik-Thornton thing as an example (and i dont condone anything what Thornton did) but if Orpik just dropped the gloves, even "tripped" and just took 1-2 punches in the face that would have been the end of it.

Hypothetical for you:

Orpik agrees to fight Thornton. They drop the gloves, and with his first punch Orpik knock Thornton out.

Justice has now been served?



The dirty players can do whatever they want as long as they're willing to take the odd punch to the face, and the best fighters in the league can do whatever they want, and bonus: they also get to beat somebody up after every one of their dirty plays. It's a perfect system...