Fighting in NHL

[Hampreacher]

After the Parros-Orr incident in last nights game the question came up is it time to ban fighting in the NHL? Given this is the third concussion directly from fighting in the last week app. Given that if Scott would have landed a blow to Kessels head he could have recieved a concussion. Players are bigger stronger and that leads to concussions.  I say that a fighting major in an NHL game means an automatic ejection from that game. That if a player like a Kessel is challenged if they are none aggressive the third man in rule not apply.  What do you think?

 

[louisstamos]

After the Parros-Orr incident in last nights game the question came up is it time to ban fighting in the NHL? Given this is the third concussion directly from fighting in the last week app. Given that if Scott would have landed a blow to Kessels head he could have recieved a concussion. Players are bigger stronger and that leads to concussions.  I say that a fighting major in an NHL game means an automatic ejection from that game. That if a player like a Kessel is challenged if they are none aggressive the third man in rule not apply.  What do you think?

I'm with you.  I mean, you'll never "ban" fighting in any competitive league.  Our league has an automatic 5 game suspension for any fight - but fights still happen every now and then.

I think a good starting point is any fight that takes place is an automatic game misconduct.  If a fight happens in the 3rd period, you could also be suspended for an additional game.  Yes - this means rats can take cheap shots at star players without the fear of getting pounded.  Let the league deal with those incidents, and hopefully they start enforcing stiffer penalties for intentional intent to injure.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Yzerman, Rutherford, and Shero all spoke out in support of getting fighting out of the game and Yzerman suggested the same thing:

"Yes, I believe a player should get a game misconduct for fighting," Yzerman told The Dreger Report. "We penalize and suspend players for making contact with the head while checking, in an effort to reduce head injuries, yet we still allow fighting.

http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/darren_dreger/?id=433262

 

[hap_leaf]

It is so tiring to continually have the "its time to talk about it" messages from the media whenever they think its a great time to renew the discussions.  Its no better to talk abut gun violence, for example, the day after a mass shooting than the day before it happened.  If its worth talking about and worth doing anything about it, just do it.  Like today, not the day after some event to help sell it.
As for those league execs, Dreger went and asked them - they didn't just speak out as he would like you to think.  Although I think Scotty Bowman may have made a tweet without provocation.

As for fighting, I'd prefer to watch fights.  If its removed from the game, I will watch just as much.  I cannot predict how players will deal with their emotions on the ice without the ability to pummel each other.  Equally, just the possibility that a larger guy on your team is willing and capable (policing).  But I do enjoy the raw emotion of the game and that should always stay intact.

 

[jdh1]

I have a issue with the media types who are always bringing up about the wrongs of fighting in hockey.

They don't have a problem (airing for profit) the caged fighting with participants that do extensive physical damage to each other...Are there no concussions in that blood sport?

 

[bustaheims]

I'm all for getting rid of fighting. It doesn't add anything to the actual hockey being played - in fact, the fact that there are guys like Scott, Orr, Boll, etc in the league who have little to no actual hockey skills takes away from it. I do understand that flat out getting rid of it is going to take time and probably isn't something that can be done in one shot, so, at the very least, the league needs to get staged fights and such out of the league. I say, any time there's a fight that happens shortly after a faceoff or after a whistle or whenever that isn't at all connected to the play on the ice at the time should result in an automatic game misconduct for both participants (or, in cases where one player clearly went after the other, just that guy). A 2nd such penalty results in a 5 game suspension. A 3rd gets 20, the 4th gets 50, and so on. That should be the first step, and should help to at least eliminate the goons that are becoming far too prevalent in NHL today.

 

[TML fan]

Only two things will get fighting removed from the NHL. Enough people have had enough and stop watching, or somebody dies.

If you don't like it, stop watching. When revenues take a bit, the league will take notice. Right now they believe enough people love it to not change it, and they're right.

 

[CaptainObvious]

Yzerman, Rutherford, and Shero all spoke out in support of getting fighting out of the game and Yzerman suggested the same thing:

It's time for those gentlemen to hand in their man card.

 

[moon111]

Mandatory face cages.  Protect the face/head not just from fights.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

I have a issue with the media types who are always bringing up about the wrongs of fighting in hockey.

They don't have a problem (airing for profit) the caged fighting with participants that do extensive physical damage to each other...Are there no concussions in that blood sport?

Because those guys train their entire lives to do that sport and are being supervised by referees trained to officiate those specific types of fights.

 

[Fanatic]

I have a issue with the media types who are always bringing up about the wrongs of fighting in hockey.

They don't have a problem (airing for profit) the caged fighting with participants that do extensive physical damage to each other...Are there no concussions in that blood sport?

I agree with Potvin29.

Ring is much softer than ice. Weight classes. Training for years to defend yourself. Refs trained to ref fights. A fighting commission. Weight classes. I am sure if I thought about it for a bit there would be more. There is no comparison. The bloodsport is staged hockey fights.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

I'm all for getting rid of fighting. It doesn't add anything to the actual hockey being played - in fact, the fact that there are guys like Scott, Orr, Boll, etc in the league who have little to no actual hockey skills takes away from it. I do understand that flat out getting rid of it is going to take time and probably isn't something that can be done in one shot, so, at the very least, the league needs to get staged fights and such out of the league. I say, any time there's a fight that happens shortly after a faceoff or after a whistle or whenever that isn't at all connected to the play on the ice at the time should result in an automatic game misconduct for both participants (or, in cases where one player clearly went after the other, just that guy). A 2nd such penalty results in a 5 game suspension. A 3rd gets 20, the 4th gets 50, and so on. That should be the first step, and should help to at least eliminate the goons that are becoming far too prevalent in NHL today.

Is there a way to make your rules a defined situation or is all based on how 'the referee' saw it? I can almost guarantee we'd have an issue with losing one of our players because the referee deemed it to fall into one of those categories. I get what you're trying to do, I just don't see how you make such a change without it being black and white!

 

[bustaheims]

Is there a way to make your rules a defined situation or is all based on how 'the referee' saw it? I can almost guarantee we'd have an issue with losing one of our players because the referee deemed it to fall into one of those categories. I get what you're trying to do, I just don't see how you make such a change without it being black and white!

Well, most of these situations are pretty clear. Guys talk, drop the gloves and go. Really, I just don't want teams to lose players in situations where guys like Scott go after guys like Kessel - that what I mean by one guy clearly going after the other. If a guy gets involved just for self defence, he shouldn't get the boot. Outside of that, kick 'em both out.

 

[Kin]

I have a issue with the media types who are always bringing up about the wrongs of fighting in hockey.

They don't have a problem (airing for profit) the caged fighting with participants that do extensive physical damage to each other...Are there no concussions in that blood sport?

Sorry, when you say media types....who are you talking about? The presidents of media companies? Because I don't hear them talk about fighting too often. Columnists? Because they don't decide what the networks that employ them air. Who do you think decries fighting in hockey and then makes a decision to broadcast cage fighting?

 

[Stickytape]

It is so tiring to continually have the "its time to talk about it" messages from the media whenever they think its a great time to renew the discussions.  Its no better to talk abut gun violence, for example, the day after a mass shooting than the day before it happened.  If its worth talking about and worth doing anything about it, just do it.  Like today, not the day after some event to help sell it.

^ so much this.

Only two things will get fighting removed from the NHL. Enough people have had enough and stop watching, or somebody dies.

If you don't like it, stop watching. When revenues take a bit, the league will take notice. Right now they believe enough people love it to not change it, and they're right.

I like to think that we can do better than black-and-white thinking.  It doesn't have to be a death on the ice to get people thinking about the cost-benefit analysis of fighting in pro-sports (including pro-sports that pretty much are just fighting).

Besides, these days the argument is being made that people are dying - as we learn more about the long-term effects of fighting on the brain, a pretty worrying trend of mental illness starts to appear - to the point where it may even lead to suicide.

I'm not an expert on the subject, but I can say that I wouldn't really miss it that much.  Sure, I'd get nostalgic about it, but I feel it's a small price to pay if there are more serious repercussions at stake than we initially realized, and that could be avoided by minimizing or eliminating fighting.

 

[Kessel Run]

I'm not a huge fan of banning fighting completely, as some of my favorite players are guys that can score, big hits, and few fights, guys like Wendel and Lucic etc. Hockey goons who have no skill and play 3 minutes a game I'm all for getting rid of.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

It is so tiring to continually have the "its time to talk about it" messages from the media whenever they think its a great time to renew the discussions.  Its no better to talk abut gun violence, for example, the day after a mass shooting than the day before it happened.  If its worth talking about and worth doing anything about it, just do it.  Like today, not the day after some event to help sell it.

Why is it considered bad to discuss something after an event which naturally generates discussion on the topic?  It's not like there hasn't been discussions about this prior to this incident happening.  It's been brought up countless times with no incident preceding it - many of the hockey people I follow on Twitter discussed it all off-season.

But I don't understand why it's seen as a negative - change is often precipitated by shocking events.

 

[Jalili]

I'm not a huge fan of banning fighting completely, as some of my favorite players are guys that can score, big hits, and few fights, guys like Wendel and Lucic etc. Hockey goons who have no skill and play 3 minutes a game I'm all for getting rid of.

That's where I stand as well. I don't like pre-arranged fighting, but I've always enjoyed fights when it's between two legitimate players.

One of my favourite hockey moments as a kid was watching Lecavalier and Iginla scrap in the Stanley Cup Finals. Nothing better than that.

 

[MetalRaven]

Get rid of fighting in hockey? How? Suspend players for doing it? Great, we'll have lots of players serving suspensions, and by we I mean every team in the NHL. Hockey is an emotional sport and as long as there are players, there will be dirty players ala: Avery, Tucker, Fleury (man I hate putting Tucker and Fleury beside that...whatever). When they do dirty things other players are going to get angry and a fight will happen. Dirty hits will exist with/without fighting. A dirty hit increases negative emotion. What do you do with it? Fight (not a suspension yet) or dirty hit back (probably a suspension)...Skate away? Thats not going to happen in the majority of cases in my opinion. Right now they fight, and sometimes people get hurt, that sucks and I hope Parros a very speedy recovery; the NHL needs more super 'staches. That being said both were willing participants and understood the possible consequences. They are adults.

    Fighting is not allowed in hockey as it is. Its a 5 minute penalty. Want to make a real statement? First gloves that hit the ice 5 min penalty. Review-able in order to eliminate the mutual aspect as inevitably one glove will hit first. (they waste enough time sorting things out anyway might as well get the camera involved)  Other player? He was defending himself. No penalty. Very few coaches will risk a 5 min major which should eliminate staged fighting. It won't eliminate the emotional fights but will still punish them from happening. Fighting will remain a better option then a retaliatory dirty hit, which I believe to be proper as dirty hits are more likely to injure.

tl:dr I believe human nature means we will always have fighting but proper officiating with the rules we have (some tweaking) can make it undesirable enough to make fighting a rare thing

 

[jdh1]

I have a issue with the media types who are always bringing up about the wrongs of fighting in hockey.

They don't have a problem (airing for profit) the caged fighting with participants that do extensive physical damage to each other...Are there no concussions in that blood sport?

Because those guys train their entire lives to do that sport and are being supervised by referees trained to officiate those specific types of fights.

So that makes it right?