Horrible Globe and Mail Article

[Justin]

I think a general rule that newspapers should follow is hockey stays in the sports section written by the sports writers. The Globe and Mail has released another editorial - they do this every few months - condemning fighting in hockey. This time they're decrying the fact that Colton Orr still plays, suggesting that the team should protect him and end his career. Yes, they go as far as to suggest it should not be up to the player when he wants to end his own career (but only if he's a fighter). There's so many things wrong with this, I can't even begin to start. Here ya go:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/editorials/after-252-fights-should-the-leafs-protect-colton-orr/article7880568/

 

[Kin]

I think, at the very least, the very real dangers we're learning about the long term effect of head injuries do raise the question of teams encouraging fighting by employing guys like Orr. We're seeing in the NFL that teams may have legal responsibilities here, to say nothing of moral ones.

 

[Justin]

I think, at the very least, the very real dangers we're learning about the long term effect of head injuries do raise the question of teams encouraging fighting by employing guys like Orr. We're seeing in the NFL that teams may have legal responsibilities here, to say nothing of moral ones.

The players are aware of the risks as well, and they can decide when to keep playing and when to retire. For "Canada's national newspaper" to suggest that the decision to retire should be taken out of the player's hands (but only if you fight) is wrong on so many levels. It's disgusting, really.

 

[Kin]

The players are aware of the risks as well, and they can decide when to keep playing and when to retire. For "Canada's national newspaper" to suggest that the decision to retire should be taken out of the player's hands is wrong on so many levels. It's disgusting, really.

Except as a practical reality when a hockey player retires is almost never left up to them. Unless they're Nik Lidstrom or Mario Lemieux their careers end when teams no longer want to employ them, not when they choose to stop. I don't read this editorial as calling for anything other than teams to stop employing players like Orr because of the damage they can be doing to themselves and others.

 

[Justin]

The players are aware of the risks as well, and they can decide when to keep playing and when to retire. For "Canada's national newspaper" to suggest that the decision to retire should be taken out of the player's hands is wrong on so many levels. It's disgusting, really.

Except as a practical reality when a hockey player retires is almost never left up to them. Unless they're Nik Lidstrom or Mario Lemieux their careers end when teams no longer want to employ them, not when they choose to stop. I don't read this editorial as calling for anything other than teams to stop employing players like Orr because of the damage they can be doing to themselves and others.

When a player retires it's up to him. If a team no longer wants to employ him, he can go play in a different league if he wanted to. Ultimately the decision to stop playing, whether in the NHL or another league, is up to the player. The meat-heads at the Globe and Mail decided to embarrass themselves by suggesting that the decision to stop playing should be taken out of fighters' hands. Like what are they even saying? After 100 fights your career is over? 150 fights? I guess they think boxing and mma should be shut down completely as well. Morons.

 

[Kin]

Like I said, you can't just ignore the realities of the long term effects of concussions and other head injuries. Likewise, you can't dismiss that teams have responsibilities because of them.

 

[riff raff]

The NHL is no doubt watching the law suits that the NFL is currently facing from former players (or their next-of-kin) concerning the effect of concussions from playing.

It would seem those players wanted the league to step in (at least after-the-fact) or done something about the potential dangers. How those law suits are decided could have a serious impact on other leagues with concussion issues.

 

[hockeyfan1]

Speaking of fighting...

According to hockeyfights.com, there have been 95 fights in the first 152 games of this season for an average of 0.63 fights per game.

If the current rate of fighting continues, there will be 450 fights in 720 games.

Projected over a customary 1,230-game season, that would give the league a total of 769 fights, which would put it more than 200 fights ahead of the figure from last season. It would also represent the most fisticuffs since 2003-04 when there were a total of 789 fights, or 0.64 per game.

Source: THN