Fighting in Hockey

[JR]

Since Colton "Don't Call me Bobby" Orr knocked out Todd Fedoruk and Colin Campbell's comment that "we should ask the question" about fighting, the debate is in full stride again.

I love a good fight as much as anyone but when you see what happened to Fedoruk in this fight and the one earlier in the season he had with 6-foot-7, 270-pound Derek Boogaard, I agree with Colin--no shrinking violet in his day--you gotta ask the question. Is it time to ban fighting in hockey?

My basic problem with the usual mantra that it's "part of the game" is that fighting virtually disappears in the most intense hockey games of the season--the playoffs and is non existent in the best hockey in the world--The Olympics.

In hockey circles this is like the Dems/Repubs policital debate. There is no middle ground.

If you're against fighting, you're a girlie man and if you're for it, you're a knuckle dragging mouth-breather.

If you haven't seen the Boogard KO on Fedoruk, here you go.

 

[ondeadline]

I'd be fine with all fighting being eliminated except those fights that are the product of a passionate rivalry between the two players. This dance-card crap where one guy asks the other guy if he wants to go and a fight start much like a dance at a dance club is just useless BS.

If referees never missed a player taking liberties with another team's star, then I'd say you don't need fighting. But as long as there are Mick McGoughs among the referee corps, that's not going to happen. There has to be a recourse, and fighting is one of them.

You make a good point about how fighting goes away in games of significance. There's a reason that Laraque was a healthy scratch for much of the Oilers' run to the Stanley Cup finals. So why did the Penguins trade for him knowing that he'll likely sit some during the Stanley Cup playoffs. Of course, to protect Sid.

 

[JR]

The other thing "it's always been part of the game" is forty years ago, the players were mostly all "normal size"--5'11, 175 lbs. A player over 6' was considered a bit of a freak. Now they're all linebackers on blades.

So when you get a guy like Boorgard, who's 8 inches taller and perhaps 90 lbs heavier, you're going to inflict some serious damage with a full right. Just ask Fedoruk about the two titanium plates in his head.

 

[ondeadline]

And 40 years ago, you had few (if any) no-talent goons who had no actual hockey skills.

 

[playthrough]

Banning fighting seems like a too-scripted hey-look-at-us move for hockey. It will make news for a few days, but it's not going to drive millions of fans back. And it might push a few of the diehards away, and certainly the league can't afford that.

I'm not a diehard, so I do probably fall in the middle. I don't need to see fights, but if one breaks out I'm not turning my back.

 

[alleyallen]

I'd be interested to see just how many diehard fans would pull away if you nixed fighting. Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with banning it, although I'll admit I get a bit of a charge watching them. But I get that same charge watching a baseball brawl and I would NEVER recommend making those legal.

 

[SoSueMe]

Neither leaving it in nor taking taking it out will add or subtract to the fan base, so personally I couldn't care less.

If there were fewer teams in the league, there would fewer no-talent hacks whose only attribute is cheap, dirty play and fighting.

Hockey still has so many problems this is the least of them.

 

[Inky_Wretch]

Is it possible to find middle ground?

Increasing the penalty for fighting, for example? Instead of getting a 5-minute major for it, boot the fighters for the rest of that game and the next. Don't allow the team to replace him on the roster for the next game either.

 

[Bubbler]

It doesn't bother me, but on the other hand, I don't think anything would be missing from the game if it went away.

 

[Bubbler]

If there were fewer teams in the league, there would fewer no-talent hacks whose only attribute is cheap, dirty play and fighting.

There were no-talent hacks on rosters before the 90s expansion whose sole role was fighting, I don't think expansion has anything to do with it.

 

[JR]

I'll throw this out.

Ban all hits to the head--like they've done in football.

Elbow a guy in the face--a two minute or a five and a game depending on the severity of the blow.

Fights? Same thing.

 

[JR]

If there were fewer teams in the league, there would fewer no-talent hacks whose only attribute is cheap, dirty play and fighting.

There were no-talent hacks on rosters before the 90s expansion whose sole role was fighting, I don't think expansion has anything to do with it.

I think you'd have to go back the Broadstreet Bullies days. That's when teams hired goons to protect their star players against Dave Schultz.

Up until then, nope, the designated thug didn't exist. Players could fight (hello, Gordie Howe) but they could play.

 

[alleyallen]

I'll throw this out.

Ban all hits to the head--like they've done in football.

Elbow a guy in the face--a two minute or a five and a game depending on the severity of the blow.

Fights? Same thing.

Good idea. Maybe we can add something regarding intentional high sticking, too.

 

[Bubbler]

I'll throw this out.

Ban all hits to the head--like they've done in football.

Elbow a guy in the face--a two minute or a five and a game depending on the severity of the blow.

Fights? Same thing.

Good ideas, but the only way it REALLY changes is if the culture of the game changes. I know of no other sport where its commonplace to send a goon out to intimidate your opponent (John Chaney aside), with the logical response being to send your own goon out and you have a fight. It's like some silly macho ritual that has little to do with the game.

 

[Beef03]

If there were fewer teams in the league, there would fewer no-talent hacks whose only attribute is cheap, dirty play and fighting.

There were no-talent hacks on rosters before the 90s expansion whose sole role was fighting, I don't think expansion has anything to do with it.

I think you'd have to go back the Broadstreet Bullies days. That's when teams hired goons to protect their star players against Dave Schultz.

Up until then, nope, the designated thug didn't exist. Players could fight (hello, Gordie Howe) but they could play.

Right, but do you want a $7-mil player (ala, Jaromoe Iginla) getting tossed because of a fight? Something I think gets overlooked now is that most of those who can drop the gloves can also play the game, they bring something else whether it is a physical presence or a two-way game, and teams like the Ducks are moving towards team toughness. One reason you don't see as much fighting in the playoffs (it still exists, saying it doesn't is an old wives tale) because I think there are fewer cheap shots (like fighting, however, they still exist in the playoffs), for much the same reason fights decrease in the playoffs - players don't want to hurt their own team by chancing a penalty at the most important time of the year. The role for the enforcer is to make sure the stars like Crosby are able to make it to the playoffs in one piece. Otherwise you end up like the Oilers, have your top players get run, get injured and then have the fan base scratching it's collective head when Ryan Smyth is traded at the deadline because you have fallen out of contention. There needs to be that protection . Phil Espositio was on OTR last week saying the dirtiest hockey he ever played in was the 1972 Summit Series because fighting is not allowed in international or Eurpoean hockey, the stick work was incredible. They were able to just skate around and hack eachother with no real recourse – see Clarke on Kharlamov. To my knowledge, the stick work is still pretty bad across the pond.
I still think serious injuries are few and far between due to fights – Fedoruk just had the rotten luck of taking two bad beats this year. True the players have gotten bigger, but for the most part they are taking on similar sized players, not the middle weights and generally both parties consent to dropping the gloves.
And then yes there is the entertainment aspect. The UFC - and like leagues - is one of the fastest rising brands of sport with a wide ranged audience. Before that Boxing ruled the scene off and on for more than a century and is called the sweet science. Why then is hockey deemed barbaric or the lowest common denominator because it allows fighting?

 

[cougargirl]

Bottom line, fighting will always be a part of the sport no matter how much debate surrounds the issue. Traditionally, this argument always seems to be raised and in some manner spun one way or another. While the NHL doesn't necessarily endorse fighting or violence in the game, the appeal of the sport is aided by the fact that fighting is a part of the culture.

If there were fewer teams in the league, there would fewer no-talent hacks whose only attribute is cheap, dirty play and fighting.

There were no-talent hacks on rosters before the 90s expansion whose sole role was fighting, I don't think expansion has anything to do with it.

See:
Kordic, John
Gaetz, Link
Semenko, Dave
Kocur, Joey (However, Kocur did have a bit of a knack for the goals one year.)

 

[Beef03]

Bottom line, fighting will always be a part of the sport no matter how much debate surrounds the issue. Traditionally, this argument always seems to be raised and in some manner spun one way or another. While the NHL doesn't necessarily endorse fighting or violence in the game, the appeal of the sport is aided by the fact that fighting is a part of the culture.

Bettman says fighting has a place in hockey.

"My view on fighting hasn't changed," the NHL commissioner said Monday. "We've never taken active steps or considered eliminating fighting from the game.

"I've always taken the view that it's a part of the game and it rises and lowers based on what the game dictates."

above quotes from the Canadian Press story on TSN.ca

 

[Armchair_QB]

 

[JR]

Bettman says fighting has a place in hockey.

Which in and of itself is a good reason to ban it.

 

[Claws for Concern]

Fighting needs to stay in the game, but how about keeping the fighters out for the rest of that period. If it happens late in a period, say the last two minutes of the first or second period, they miss the entire next period.