1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Fighting in hockey

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Dick Whitman, Mar 4, 2011.

  1. Inky_Wretch

    Inky_Wretch Well-Known Member

    Forgive the casual fans's question ... but aren't hockey helmets not as protective (is that a word?) as football helmets? They seem flimsy compared to what I see in football, especially since they're protecting the head from hits against ice and not turf.
     
  2. Beef03

    Beef03 Active Member

    They are just as protective as football helmets. They are definitely designed differently, but the technology in them these days is light years from the Gretzky Jofa days. However, no helmet will completely eliminate concussions. Just not possible. Part of the problem -- and it's not as big as it was five or 10 years ago, is there are still a number of players who don't wear them as tight as they are supposed to be, the chin strap will be good and loose , thus doing little to hold the helmet in the right place. The other part comes to the hard plastics used in things like elbow pads and shoulder pads, that go beyond what is needed to protect a player and in effect can become a weapon themselves, especially when the speed of the game is factored in.
     
  3. Smash Williams

    Smash Williams Well-Known Member

    Helmets in both sports are designed to prevent skull fracture, not concussion.

    Hockey helmets were using the new, denser foam before football helmets were, IIRC. That foam is allegedly better for energy absorption.

    But the amateur physicist in me thinks helmets in both sports are really pretty useless for absorbing enough energy when the skull has the momentum (i.e., head vs. ice collisions and many head vs. boards). There's simply not enough foam in the world to absorb that much energy and not transfer it through to the brain unless you somehow install airbags. Helmets are more effective at absorbing impact from things like elbows to the back of the head, but that assumes the player's neck is braced so that it doesn't whip his head around.

    The biggest difference between football and hockey helmets is probably the lack of a face bar, which leads to a lot more direct shoulder-on-chin contact in hockey. I think that bar could be dangerous given players are always running face first into the boards or other players.

    The NHL has mandated foam linings on the outside of shoulder and elbow pads, which is a start. But a player's chin is always going to be unprotected and even a padded shoulder to the chin will whip your head around pretty good.
     
  4. thesnowman

    thesnowman Member

    Fighting is a piece of the puzzle but far from the only factor. For whatever reason (there are a million and one theories), players do not have the respect for each other they used to. Seems most of the old school thinkers believe it all started with the introduction of mandatory helmets. And most of of the younger crowd seem to believe it has to do with weak suspension fine rules and/or the instigator penalty. Personally I think it's a little from column A, a little from column B, and a little from the more protectionist society we seem to be sliding toward.

    IMO, double every suspension on the spot, get rid of the instigator penalty, and you'll cut the bullshit by 90%. But what the hell do I know? :)


    ----------
    http://saskawhat.wordpress.com
     
  5. Smash Williams

    Smash Williams Well-Known Member

    The NHL has never been willing to suspend its superstars unless they have histories of idiocy (hi Pronger!).

    They will never, ever suspend Crosby for slew footing. They never got Modano for diving. They won't get Kronwall for charging or elbowing. All three of those guys have deserved it, but they're either star players or darlings on star teams.

    (And to be fair to the NHL, it's not limited to them. The NBA and MLB are ridiculously reluctant to discipline the top-end players or teams. For all the NFL's issues, it's the one thing they do well. They don't care who you are).

    Also, the NHL is ridiculously reluctant to discipline players if the incident didn't cause any sort of media stir. The Clutterbuck hit was overshadowed by Gilles' idiocy, so nothing was made of it. Sestito blindsided a guy earlier this year but it got no play, so nothing came of it. Until they crack down on all players and in all incidents, they're not going to get the dangerous (and already illegal) hits out of the game.
     
  6. joeggernaut

    joeggernaut Member

    Fighting in hockey is very similar to a manager's ability to hold up a baseball game to argue a call. Neither of them actually needs to be a part of the game but both actions have taken place for so long that if the game lost it, things wouldn't feel right for diehard fans.
    I agree with everything else that is being said, and would like to add the Johnson-DiPietro goalie fight to the list of one-punch KO's this season.
     
  7. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    If fighting is "part of hockey,' why is there almost no fighting at the international level? Or in college?
     
  8. Stitch

    Stitch Active Member

    Rephrase to "part of North American pro hockey". I don't know if they ever tolerated fighting in Europe, but it's part of the culture of the game here.
     
  9. JR

    JR Well-Known Member

    I don't have really strong feelings about fighting in hockey although a big majority of the tilts don't have anything to do with the game itself but just a case of two guys "wanting to go" because that's their job.

    I don't think you an entirely eliminate fighting but hockey players are like any other athlete. They will push the boundaries of the rules until they get reigned in. The old "clutching and grabbing" has disappeared in the post lockout era. It took a while but players adjusted pretty well and now players coming through the junior ranks don't even know about the old rodeo style hockey (one of Brett Hull's greatest lines)

    There was a fellow killed in a fight a few years ago in a Mens' Senior League. Got into a fight, his helmet came off, he hit his head on the ice and that was it. He was about 22

    Also, it's funny how you hardly ever see fighting in the playoffs. Two reasons: too much at stake and the designated goons usually have their asses firmly planted at the end of the bench
     
  10. Boomer7

    Boomer7 Active Member

    This is the money quote. If fighting were so important to the game, if it really gave a team a boost, then teams would fight in the playoffs. They rarely do. I can take or leave hockey fights, but I think their importance is as overrated as anything in sports.
     
  11. Iron_chet

    Iron_chet Well-Known Member

    I tend to agree with the last couple posts here. It is ingrained in the hockey culture and promoted by buttheads like Don Cherry so he can slobber over some great kid from the Prairies who does things the right way.

    The game is evolving and while I personally enjoy watching any human fighting of any kind in any situation, I think it makes hockey look bush league.

    I was too young to see it but from what I have read of the NBA and ABA in the 60s and 70s fighting was not an uncommon occurrence. The sport evolved away from it, don't know why hockey can't do the same.
     
  12. that's such bullshit. Both of those could be stopped as soon as the NHL -- and the NHLPA -- decided to stop them. Both choose not to, because the NHL rivals Premier League Football in the UK for archaic "tradition" and culture.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page