Banning Fighting in the NHL?

[alexz2317]

How do you all feel about it? I personally am against it. I think Gary Bettman is ruining the game with all of his rule changes. If he bans fighting, then all we're watching is a figure skating competition. The NHL will lose hardcore fans such as myself if they do indeed ban fighting.

[Beccaria]

All that's going to do is cause more vicious checks and high sticking calls during the game. The players will just find other ways to channel it more subtly.

[WhiteHatBobby]

The NHL is trying to ban the "kayfabe" fights more than the "legitimate" fights currently.

In college hockey, if you fight, you're suspended a few games.

The kayfabe fighting is the junk that the NHL wants banned, and I support that because these fights that are nothing short of "professional wrestling" matches have no purpose in the sport. One clip I found was of the two enforcers during a PHX-STL game a few years ago where one says to the other if he wants a fight. The other agrees, the puck drops to start the period, and the fight is on. That's a "kayfabe" fight for show, and that's what the leagues want banned. That I can agree doesn't make sense. Another is for the two players to be skating around a specific zone for 30 seconds, following each other, nothing near them, and a fight at the whistle. That's the "kayfabe" they want to stop.

As for "legitimate" fights, it's for dirty checking, hard-nosed play that seems to be wrong, or hard plays, that's legitimate. Imagine a football lineman going after a nose tackle who made a hard hit (illegal?) on a star quarterback. That's the type of fight that's not a problem. A player who makes a cheap shot may face being targeted for a fight. That's legitimate.

In the ECHL, there's a "code" that players have been unofficially told; do not go after (Charleston) South Carolina Stingrays defenseman Nate Kiser. Kiser, a career minor leaguer, has been a defenseman who has in his Stingrays career has protected future NHL players Rich Peverly (Atlanta) and Michal Neuvirth (Washington; started the season in Charleston). Kiser's fighting prowess has forced teams to unofficially avoid him and Stingrays boosters have made both shirts and badges with the slogan "Fight Kiser".

They do not want to go after the Michigan native who now lives with his wife in Hanahan; the Stingrays have used a "residential gimmick" similar to professional wrestling in that if a popular player has bought a house and is a permanent resident of the area along with his wife, they bill the player from the area where he lives; a few former Stingrays live in the Charleston area, all of whom are very popular (Concannon, Seitz). Some are teachers and coach scholastic hockey.

This will not go after the passionate hits or defending against cheap shots.

[badkarma]

It boils down to money. The NHL believes that it will gain fans if it removes fighting from the game, which means that it will probably remove fighting if it can. I personally do not believe that fans will flock to the game if fighting is taken out, as hockey is predicated on violence and hitting, and anyone who is not watching because of the violence in fighting will probably not be interested in watching even if fighting was removed.

All sports exist simply as entertainment. For many hockey fans, fighting is part of the entertainment of the sport even if it adds nothing directly to the game itself. Sure, you could have good hockey games without fighting, but an argument could be made that you would have good games if you removed checking too. Just because the game could continue on without something does not mean it should be removed.

Also, I do not follow international hockey all that much, but if I recall correctly their used to be a big problem with stick work taking the place of fighting in leagues where fighting was not allowed. I am not saying that would happen in the NHL, but I am not discounting the possibility either.

[super cool ski instructor]

I am a fan of fighting....I am the fan shouting "show me blood!!!!"
I am against banning fighting.

[Dr. Funkenstein]

I am a fan of fighting....I am the fan shouting "show me blood!!!!"
I am against banning fighting.

None of this surprises me ;)

I'm against banning fighting as well, "kayfabe" or otherwise. Look...two bullies want to throw down to "prove" how tough they are, I've got no problem with that. I've also got no problem with a guy like Aaron Asham beating someone up for going high on guys like Richards or Carter...once you've been hammered for it, you'll avoid the behavior in the future.

Like Bec said...ban fighting, and the real dirty stuff (high sticking, slashing, hitting guys from behind or leaving your feet to hit people) is just going to increase exponentially.

[agoodfoundation]

How do you all feel about it? I personally am against it. I think Gary Bettman is ruining the game with all of his rule changes. If he bans fighting, then all we're watching is a figure skating competition. The NHL will lose hardcore fans such as myself if they do indeed ban fighting.


i go to hockey games just to wach them get in fights! its awesome!!!

[Beccaria]

A bunch of guys got into a fight and a hockey game broke out.

[Amallek]

I say we cannot treat sports differently. Fighting has long been a part of boxing, judo, wwe wrestling, cage fighting, hockey, baseball, football and roller derby. I see no reason it should not be extended to golf, NASCAR, swimming, tennis, bridge and shuffleboard. I am a bit undecided about javelin, archery, shot put, skeet and weightlifting, but perhaps we could allow it with certain limits.

[Beccaria]

I say we cannot treat sports differently. Fighting has long been a part of boxing, judo, wwe wrestling, cage fighting, hockey, baseball, football and roller derby. I see no reason it should not be extended to golf, NASCAR, swimming, tennis, bridge and shuffleboard. I am a bit undecided about javelin, archery, shot put, skeet and weightlifting, but perhaps we could allow it with certain limits.

Tiger Woods vs David Duvall in the STEEL CAGE OF DEATH!!!!!

[Beccaria]

Full contact CURLING!! WITHOUT THE PADDED BROOMS!!!!

[WhiteHatBobby]

Fighting is already against the rules.

1. Five minute penalties that must be served for the entire distance.

2. Three fights and you're out of the game.

There are some players, even in the minors, with so much respect you don't even want to fight them. That's a sign of respect. I've been to two ECHL games this season, no fighting, but good hockey. There are some good fighters who are that good that the opposition knows if you throw a cheap shot, they will throw a fighter to get him back. Spencer Carbery (joined after Fresno folded) is on the same plane as Nate Kiser in that "don't agitate the Stingrays or they'll throw their enforcer down on you" type. Last year the Stingrays won the South Division with only 40 fights.

And that showed in the ECHL fight card of the bottom five teams, by number of fighting majors handed out this season. Teams' affiliations in parentheses.

17. South Carolina (WSH) - 46 (American Conference - South Division, 2nd - leads 5th place by .106)
18. Dayton - 44 (American - North, 6th - trails 4th place by 7 points)
19. Utah (NYI) - 41 (National - West, 3rd, 6th National tie - leads 9th place in National by .034)
20. Bakersfield (ANA) - 39 (National - West, 4th, 8th National - leads 9th place by .002)
21. Victoria (VAN) - 36 (National - Pacific, 3rd - leads 9th place by .100)

That's respect.

Top Five - Number of Fights
1. Reading (TOR) - 81 (American - North, 7th - eliminated on next loss from contention; top 4 teams advance from North)
2. Stockton (EDM) - 77 (National - West, 3rd, 6th National tie - leads 9th place team by .026 percentage points; top 8 in National advance)
3. Wheeling (PIT) - 73 (American - North, 3rd - leads by 1 point over 5th place)
4. Cincinnati (NSH/MTL) - 70 (American - North, 2nd - leads by 4 points over 5th place)
5. Johnstown (COL/CBJ) - 62 (American - North, 2nd - leads by 2 points over 5th place)

NOTE: The American Conference North Division uses points; the South Division and National Conference (Pacific and West Divisions; one team in conference does not qualify) use percentage of points won because some teams play 71, 72, or 73 games because of Fresno and Augusta folding during the season. Top four in each division in American, and top eight overall in National, advance.

[Oddball]

http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/9310/fightingsaintsheadshot.jpg

RAAAAARRRR!!!!!!

[Dr. Funkenstein]

Full contact CURLING!! WITHOUT THE PADDED BROOMS!!!!

I'll go full-contact with the Swedish women's team ;)

:dance: :dance: :dance: :dance:

[iamredbeard]

I went to a fight and a hockey game broke out. :razz:

[iamredbeard]

I am a fan of fighting....I am the fan shouting "show me blood!!!!"
I am against banning fighting.

All I can say is Probie and Kocur appreciated fans like you in Hockeytown.

[Dr. Funkenstein]

All I can say is Probie and Kocur appreciated fans like you in Hockeytown.

Although I'd add it had nothing to do with Ski's affinity for blood ;)

[ALBOB2]

The NHL is trying to ban the "kayfabe" fights more than the "legitimate" fights currently.

In college hockey, if you fight, you're suspended a few games.

The kayfabe fighting is the junk that the NHL wants banned, and I support that because these fights that are nothing short of "professional wrestling" matches have no purpose in the sport. One clip I found was of the two enforcers during a PHX-STL game a few years ago where one says to the other if he wants a fight. The other agrees, the puck drops to start the period, and the fight is on. That's a "kayfabe" fight for show, and that's what the leagues want banned. That I can agree doesn't make sense. Another is for the two players to be skating around a specific zone for 30 seconds, following each other, nothing near them, and a fight at the whistle. That's the "kayfabe" they want to stop.

As for "legitimate" fights, it's for dirty checking, hard-nosed play that seems to be wrong, or hard plays, that's legitimate. Imagine a football lineman going after a nose tackle who made a hard hit (illegal?) on a star quarterback. That's the type of fight that's not a problem. A player who makes a cheap shot may face being targeted for a fight. That's legitimate.

In the ECHL, there's a "code" that players have been unofficially told; do not go after (Charleston) South Carolina Stingrays defenseman Nate Kiser. Kiser, a career minor leaguer, has been a defenseman who has in his Stingrays career has protected future NHL players Rich Peverly (Atlanta) and Michal Neuvirth (Washington; started the season in Charleston). Kiser's fighting prowess has forced teams to unofficially avoid him and Stingrays boosters have made both shirts and badges with the slogan "Fight Kiser".

They do not want to go after the Michigan native who now lives with his wife in Hanahan; the Stingrays have used a "residential gimmick" similar to professional wrestling in that if a popular player has bought a house and is a permanent resident of the area along with his wife, they bill the player from the area where he lives; a few former Stingrays live in the Charleston area, all of whom are very popular (Concannon, Seitz). Some are teachers and coach scholastic hockey.

This will not go after the passionate hits or defending against cheap shots.

As if officiating weren't subjective enough, now they want to add THIS??? Who the Hell can honestly KNOW whether it was legitimate or "kayfabe"? That's crap, just like every other "imporvement" with Bettman's name on it.

Okay, I take that back, not EVERY one with his name on it. I agree with him on trying to increase offense. I'm not a purist in that sense, I think the more goal scoring the more exciting the game is.

[ALBOB2]

Although I'd add it had nothing to do with Ski's affinity for blood ;)


Well done Doctor. BRAVO! :)):clap:

[Dr. Funkenstein]

As if officiating weren't subjective enough, now they want to add THIS??? Who the Hell can honestly KNOW whether it was legitimate or "kayfabe"? That's crap, just like every other "imporvement" with Bettman's name on it.

Okay, I take that back, not EVERY one with his name on it. I agree with him on trying to increase offense. I'm not a purist in that sense, I think the more goal scoring the more exciting the game is.

Banning fighting would inevitably get someone killed. I mean that literally. Some idiot who knows the worst that can happen to him is a suspension is going to take a run at a star in this league and drive them face-first into the glass with an elbow.

Knowing that he can get his ass kicked at any moment for it is what keeps a lot of stupid **** from happening on the ice.

Well done Doctor. BRAVO! :)):clap:

http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-fc/barmy.gif

http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-fc/drunk.gif

[scmarcos]

LEAVE HOCKEY ALONE!

Wait until you see the stick penalties if there is no chance at retaliation. Ovechkin will stop playing hockey all together and just skate around taking runs at everyone!

Banning fighting will lead me to spend zero money (except on tickets) on the NHL. Screw Gary Bettman! If I wanted to watch soft hockey I would become a Red Wings fan.

[Dr. Funkenstein]

LEAVE HOCKEY ALONE!

Wait until you see the stick penalties if there is no chance at retaliation. Ovechkin will stop playing hockey all together and just skate around taking runs at everyone!

Banning fighting will lead me to spend zero money (except on tickets) on the NHL. Screw Gary Bettman! If I wanted to watch soft hockey I would become a Red Wings fan.

Correction...you'd be a Capitals fan.

[homiebrah]

We should introduce fighting in the Hannity Insanity FF league this year. It would give us something to watch other than Funk losing...

[megs280]

I don't want them to change the rules on fighting but I don't think they'll lose many fans over the changes they are proposing.

I heard they are reviewing it because a minor league player recently died from his injuries in a fight. Some other players got some serious head injuries from fighting recently also.

[scmarcos]

I don't want them to change the rules on fighting but I don't think they'll lose many fans over the changes they are proposing.

I heard they are reviewing it because a minor league player recently died from his injuries in a fight. Some other players got some serious head injuries from fighting recently also.

This is just how they will slowly get rid of it. It's the first step and it's sad.

Hockey is doing its best impersonation of football in recent years. Alienating the average fans!

The only sport even attempting to make and keep fans at the same time is baseball. Many teams have actually lowered or held the line on most ticket prices this year!

[ALBOB2]

I don't want them to change the rules on fighting but I don't think they'll lose many fans over the changes they are proposing.

I heard they are reviewing it because a minor league player recently died from his injuries in a fight. Some other players got some serious head injuries from fighting recently also.

Which is exactly why they should NOT change a thing. Creating wholesale change in response to an isolated incident is the source of some of the most stupid laws in history. It's pure reactionary ******** and has no place in hockey, or anywhere else. I concurr, SCREW BETTMAN!:evil:

[Dr. Funkenstein]

We should introduce fighting in the Hannity Insanity FF league this year. It would give us something to watch other than Funk losing...

http://www.emerchandise.com/images/p/TTS/pdMTTTS0006.jpg

[badkarma]

This is just how they will slowly get rid of it. It's the first step and it's sad.

Hockey is doing its best impersonation of football in recent years. Alienating the average fans!

The only sport even attempting to make and keep fans at the same time is baseball. Many teams have actually lowered or held the line on most ticket prices this year!
To be fair, it is not the first step, just the most recent. When was the last time you saw a bench clearing brawl? The stated goal when they changed the rules back then was to eventually eliminate fighting.

[scmarcos]

To be fair, it is not the first step, just the most recent. When was the last time you saw a bench clearing brawl? The stated goal when they changed the rules back then was to eventually eliminate fighting.

True. I would give anything to see two goalies at center ice duking it out again!


So we'll just call it the 'Latest" step.

[iamredbeard]

True. I would give anything to see two goalies at center ice duking it out again!


So we'll just call it the 'Latest" step.

Haven't seen that happen since Osgood and Roy did the deed, that was over a decade ago. Not sure if it has been done since then. Two years ago in the playoffs Giguerre started to come out of the net and skate to center ice and Hasek came out to meet him then Giguerre went back to his net so unfortunately nothing happened.

[Dr. Funkenstein]

True. I would give anything to see two goalies at center ice duking it out again!


So we'll just call it the 'Latest" step.

Goalie fights are the best!

[iamredbeard]

Goalie fights are the best!

Osgood is more than happy to meet any netminder at center ice. but nothing ever comes of it. At first the goalie skates to meet him for a brawl but then retreats to his own net.

[scmarcos]

For my money there is nothing better than a Goalie fight! Roy was the man, but Garth Snow was also a pimp when it came to throwing down.

[snagswolf]

I am all for banning fighting in hockey. The 'appointment' fights are a good place to start, since they are the stupidest.

I enjoy the skating, the shooting, the passing, the hard checks, and the great saves going on in a hockey game too much to have that interrupted for five minutes by two guys pawing at each other.

They'll never get rid of fighting completely, because there are occasional fights in every sport. But they need to get rid of the goon image the game has, that turns a lot of potential fans off.

For those fans who won't watch hockey any more because there's hardly any chance of a fight, then perhaps all this skating and shooting and scoring and checking isn't your cup of tea to begin with.

[Dr. Funkenstein]

For my money there is nothing better than a Goalie fight! Roy was the man, but Garth Snow was also a pimp when it came to throwing down.

It was good times when he was in Philly. I remember him pounding on a goalie from Buffalo back in his early times as a Flyer.

[alexz2317]

For my money there is nothing better than a Goalie fight! Roy was the man, but Garth Snow was also a pimp when it came to throwing down.
1st Mike Vernon's beating on Roy, then Ozzies beating on Roy. Doesn't get any btter than that.

[JimGP20]

If fighting is part of the tradition of NHL Hockey, then they should leave it alone. I don't buy the reason about hockey being a rough and tumble game, so we must expect fighting. The NFL is just as rough, and fighting is not allowed there. Leave tradition alone, but let's not pretend that hockey is the only physical game out there.

[iamredbeard]

If fighting is part of the tradition of NHL Hockey, then they should leave it alone. I don't buy the reason about hockey being a rough and tumble game, so we must expect fighting. The NFL is just as rough, and fighting is not allowed there. Leave tradition alone, but let's not pretend that hockey is the only physical game out there.

Yeah other sports are just as physical. Besides football. Lacrosse and Rugby come to mind. Besides the tradition there is also the reality that fighting makes hockey safer.

[homiebrah]

http://www.emerchandise.com/images/p/TTS/pdMTTTS0006.jpg

My loyal fans adore me.

[super cool ski instructor]

Haven't seen that happen since Osgood and Roy did the deed, that was over a decade ago. Not sure if it has been done since then. Two years ago in the playoffs Giguerre started to come out of the net and skate to center ice and Hasek came out to meet him then Giguerre went back to his net so unfortunately nothing happened.

Didn't Vernon and Roy go at it too? :))

I LOVE FIGHTING IN HOCKEY!!!!!!!!

[iamredbeard]

Didn't Vernon and Roy go at it too? :))

I LOVE FIGHTING IN HOCKEY!!!!!!!!

Yep, they went at it to.

[scmarcos]

I am all for banning fighting in hockey. The 'appointment' fights are a good place to start, since they are the stupidest.

I enjoy the skating, the shooting, the passing, the hard checks, and the great saves going on in a hockey game too much to have that interrupted for five minutes by two guys pawing at each other.

They'll never get rid of fighting completely, because there are occasional fights in every sport. But they need to get rid of the goon image the game has, that turns a lot of potential fans off.

For those fans who won't watch hockey any more because there's hardly any chance of a fight, then perhaps all this skating and shooting and scoring and checking isn't your cup of tea to begin with.


Well you won't see too much of that when people are just running the best skaters and breaking their wrists with slashes.

[Beccaria]

Well you won't see too much of that when people are just running the best skaters and breaking their wrists with slashes.

Yep. And the threat of being in the penalty box won't stop it, either.

[scmarcos]

Yep. And the threat of being in the penalty box won't stop it, either.

Absolutely not, guys aren't afraid of penalties now as it. Slashing is very big in international hockey, I would much rather see two guys who want to fighting, than see people getting their wrists broken on a regular basis because some clown wants to hurt somebody.

We would then have to make even more rules against stick penalties which would lead to more horrible, subjective work from the referees. Let the game police itself. Watering it down won't gain any fans, it only stands to alienate the ones the NHL already has.

[Pudge]

What's next, banning cars from going fast in NASCAR so there are no wrecks?

The only reason to watch hockey is to see a huge melee, and the only reason to watch NASCAR is to see the 15-car pileup.

As long as it's legit, let them fight. Let them race.

[snagswolf]

Well you won't see too much of that when people are just running the best skaters and breaking their wrists with slashes.
Sorry, just not buying that theory.

If threats of multiple-game suspensions from the league doesn't deter players from those actions, the threat of being 'beat up' by some goon isn't going to stop them. Which do you think would bother a player more - being suspended for five games, or having to dance around with some goon, grabbing each other's jerseys while pretending to fight?

The best hockey on the planet is during the Stanley Cup playoffs and during the Olympics. Fighting isn't a part of those two instances, and players aren't taking runs and breaking bones with their sticks.

And speaking of breaking bones with sticks, you may remember Adam Graves breaking Mario Lemieux's wrist with a slash back in the 1992 playoffs. The 'threat' of being beat up didn't stop Graves, nor was he 'beat up' after he did it. The league stepped in and suspended Graves for what turned out to be the rest of the Playoffs. That's the kind of punishment that will deter that kind of activity.

[mrclean]

Hockey without fights.

What's the point?

[snagswolf]

Slashing is very big in international hockey,
Any stats to back that up?

Any incidents in international hockey like the Marty McSorely hatcheting Donald Brashear in the side of the head, Chris Simon's baseball-bat like swing with his stick against Ryan Hollweg's jaw, or Todd Bertuzzi's attack on Steve Moore?

The incidents you're claiming that fighting prevents, are happening despite the fact that fighting is allowed.

[scmarcos]

The reason playoff and Olympic hockey survive so well without fighting is because it's such a short time span. When you have to fill seats 80 times a season, many of which are meaningless games it takes a little more than fancy skating.

Those three things are isolated and stuff like that is always going to happen in sports. I don't know where I'd find stats on International slashing calls, I'm sure they don't keep it. I get that notion from watching international (especially European) hockey.

The Steve Moore attack was a retaliation! it also had nothing to do with a stick, so I don't see where that fits with the other two. He shouldn't have ran someone, then went after a smaller guy in Matt Cooke.

So now we are going to need someone to be the judge on what is an intentional slash and what isn't. Even more suspensions taking players away from games would be great. Maybe we can turn it into the NHL and all forwards can wear skirts too.

[badkarma]

If threats of multiple-game suspensions from the league doesn't deter players from those actions, the threat of being 'beat up' by some goon isn't going to stop them. Which do you think would bother a player more - being suspended for five games, or having to dance around with some goon, grabbing each other's jerseys while pretending to fight?
have you ever been in a hockey fight? It is a lot more than grabbing jerseys and dancing around, trust me.

Also, you want to suspend people for 5 games for a slash? How can you decide what is malicious and what is not? Does the suspension only occur if an injury results?
The best hockey on the planet is during the Stanley Cup playoffs and during the Olympics. Fighting isn't a part of those two instances, and players aren't taking runs and breaking bones with their sticks.
Olympic hockey has larger ice, less hitting and is pretty much completely different overall. Fights still occur in the NHL playoffs, though much less frequently.
And speaking of breaking bones with sticks, you may remember Adam Graves breaking Mario Lemieux's wrist with a slash back in the 1992 playoffs. The 'threat' of being beat up didn't stop Graves, nor was he 'beat up' after he did it. The league stepped in and suspended Graves for what turned out to be the rest of the Playoffs. That's the kind of punishment that will deter that kind of activity.
I remember it well. I personally do not think Graves meant to injure Mario, any more so than the hundreds of other slashes that occur in a game are meant to injure. And I say this as a penguins fan of many years.

Graves was suspended for 4 games (I believe it was 4 games anyway) because Mario got hurt, but if Mario had not gotten hurt, graves would not have had to face any repercussion at all. At least not from the refs or the league.

[snagswolf]

The reason playoff and Olympic hockey survive so well without fighting is because it's such a short time span. When you have to fill seats 80 times a season, many of which are meaningless games it takes a little more than fancy skating.
As I said before, if you need two guys punching each other out during a hockey game to keep you entertained, perhaps hockey isn't your sport.

Those three things are isolated and stuff like that is always going to happen in sports.
Really?

Can you give me three incidents in the NFL like that, where the viiolence was so severe that law enforcement got involved?

I don't know where I'd find stats on International slashing calls, I'm sure they don't keep it. I get that notion from watching international (especially European) hockey.
Can you give me any incidents in international hockey like the McSorely, Simon, and Bertuzzi incidents?

The Steve Moore attack was a retaliation! it also had nothing to do with a stick, so I don't see where that fits with the other two. He shouldn't have ran someone, then went after a smaller guy in Matt Cooke.
No, Moore was attacked because he refused to fight Bertuzzi, and Bertuzzi thought it was his 'right' to fight Moore. The fighting culture in the game made Bertuzzi feel justified in what he did.

And Moore was attacked because he made a clean hit on Markus Naslund, where there was no penalty called, and no resulting action from the league. Those are the kind of hits I like to see in hockey, not morons wanting to fight because of them.

So now we are going to need someone to be the judge on what is an intentional slash and what isn't. Even more suspensions taking players away from games would be great.
Yes, that's what officials are for - to determine when players do something illegal. It works in every other sport just fine.

And yes, hacks who have to use their sticks to get even should be suspended.

Maybe we can turn it into the NHL and all forwards can wear skirts too.
Yeah, here we go. Anyone's a pansy because they don't want to see two goons pawing at each other.

Here's a tip: If you get your rocks off on two guys punching each other, switch the channel to the WWE, and leave the 'boring' hockey to fans who actually like to watch hockey.

[snagswolf]

have you ever been in a hockey fight? It is a lot more than grabbing jerseys and dancing around, trust me.
Yes.

And barely.

Also, you want to suspend people for 5 games for a slash? How can you decide what is malicious and what is not? Does the suspension only occur if an injury results?
That's what officials are for. It works in every other sport. Players in the NFL are suspended for cheap hits, and yes, the amount of time you're suspended depends on whether you've injured someone.

Wacky concept, I know.

Olympic hockey has larger ice, less hitting and is pretty much completely different overall.
And they suspend players for fighting, which is the real reason you don't see it.

Fights still occur in the NHL playoffs, though much less frequently.
Then where are all the stick incidents in the playoffs? If they're rarely fighting to 'enforce' the rules, then the players should be beating on each other with sticks.

At least that's the theory presented here.

I remember it well. I personally do not think Graves meant to injure Mario
Then you disagree with Mario, and he was in a much better position to make that determination than you.

Graves was suspended for 4 games (I believe it was 4 games anyway) because Mario got hurt, but if Mario had not gotten hurt, graves would not have had to face any repercussion at all. At least not from the refs or the league.
Wrong. Graves' slash would be called a penalty by any ref in the league.

And the league isn't going to get involved in slashes that don't injure players, so saying that Graves wouldn't have faced any repercussions from the league if he didn't injure Lemieux is stating the obvious.

Tell me, when you're watching a hockey game, do you sit there thinking, "I'm bored. I wish two guys would interrupt this game, and start punching each other out."?

[iamredbeard]

Maybe if they got serious about suspensions then it might be a deterrent, but I don't see that happening. The league doesn't like handing out big suspensions and that's especially true come playoff time. I'll use Chris Pronger as an example because I really don't like him. He is always going headhunting come playoff time, but he'll only get one game suspension at the most. So I'll stick to my position that fighting makes the game safer. If there was no fighting I think we'd see the stick used a lot more as a weapon. A lot more slashing, hooking, and high sticking penalties.

[snagswolf]

So I'll stick to my position that fighting makes the game safer. If there was no fighting I think we'd see the stick used a lot more as a weapon. A lot more slashing, hooking, and high sticking penalties.
And do you have any stats that show that where fighting isn't allowed, the stick penalties go up?

For example, the NCAA doesn't allow fighting. Are there many more stick penalties in the college game?

[Z_only1]

I am all for banning fighting in hockey. The 'appointment' fights are a good place to start, since they are the stupidest.

I enjoy the skating, the shooting, the passing, the hard checks, and the great saves going on in a hockey game too much to have that interrupted for five minutes by two guys pawing at each other.

They'll never get rid of fighting completely, because there are occasional fights in every sport. But they need to get rid of the goon image the game has, that turns a lot of potential fans off.

For those fans who won't watch hockey any more because there's hardly any chance of a fight, then perhaps all this skating and shooting and scoring and checking isn't your cup of tea to begin with.

Do you have any stats to back that up or are you injecting your opinion?

The product is fine the way it is. Revenues haven't gone down since the last lock out.

If you don't like the staged fighting, then turn the channel.

[snagswolf]

Do you have any stats to back that up or are you injecting your opinion?

The product is fine the way it is. Revenues haven't gone down since the last lock out.
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=413396
Bettman talks economy, fighting as meetings end Wednesday,
03.11.2009 / 4:00 PM /
NHL Insider By Shawn P. Roarke - NHL.com Managing Editor

NAPLES, Fla. -- Two issues dominated discussion between NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman and the media as the NHL GM Meetings ended here at the Ritz-Carlton Golf Resort: The state of the NHL economy and the issue of fighting.

Fighting, particularly ways to change the culture of fisticuffs in today's game, dominated the first two days of the three-day session. Wednesday, it was more about the economic outlook for a league -- like all businesses -- that is being buffeted by the intense storm raging across the global economy.

For Bettman, education is a key to survival in troubling times. He asked NHL Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly to make a presentation to the 30 general managers on where the salary cap stands today and where it might be for the 2009-10 season.

"There was no message, in particular, given; other than Bill Daly made a presentation that, in effect, showed the operation of the (salary) cap and potential impacts, as a general matter, on what will happen if the cap is flat or goes down a little bit," Bettman said. "But we didn't give a whole new series of financial projections. They're still pretty much as I projected them at the All-Star Game.”

Bettman's predictions back in January suggested that real growth in revenues would occur, but the adjusted growth -- for salary cap purposes -- would mean the cap would hover near the present-day threshold of $56.8 million per team.

The cap, however, could see a little bump, Bettman said Wednesday, if the National Hockey League Players' Association decides to apply the inflator it is entitled to exercise by the CBA. Bettman added the widespread concern that the salary cap -- which is based on a percentage of hockey-related revenues -- could go down in the 2010-11 season cannot be discounted.

"The issue, I think, is going to be does the Players' Association want to take the inflator, which in effect, would keep the cap where it was for this year next year, or do they want to take out the inflator," Bettman said. "If you are concerned about the cap really going down in 2010-11, then you might not want to take the inflator to let things come down gradually.

"On the other hand, if you don't want to impact this year's free agents disproportionate to everyone else, than you probably want the inflator -- understanding though that is likely to expand the escrow."

To explain, as part of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, the PA puts a percentage of player salaries into escrow to cover a shortfall of projected hockey revenues as it relates to the salary cap.

As for how it affects on-ice play, most of the league's GMs are operating under the assumption the cap will remain flat in the 2009-10 season and could drop more dramatically in 2010-11.

Detroit's Ken Holland, whose team is right up against the cap this season, has resigned himself to the fact he will be unable to sign several of his free agents if the cap does not grow measurably next season. His job now, he says, is to identify which of those free agents he most needs to sign and which he can most afford to let go.

Brian Burke, the Toronto GM, said he sees a financial correction coming, at least for the Maple Leafs.

"I don't think there will be more or less activity (this summer)," Burke said. "I saw a quote from an agent that he doesn't think there will be any market correction. I know we're planning on the basis that (a correction) is quite likely.

"I look at how quickly it hit baseball, the impact it had on player contracts was almost instantaneous. It was within 90 days and there are still some good ballplayers out of work. I think we'd be delusional to think we're not going to see some impact."

The issue of fighting was more cut-and-dried than the economic forecasting after the GMs spent much of the meetings' first 48 hours discussing an issue that has become a flashpoint in the past few months.

The GMs left the meetings with several recommendations that will now go to the NHL Competition Committee. If approved, the NHL Board of Governors would have final say on whether the measures are enacted.

Included among the suggestions the GMs made this week: Assessment of a 10-minute misconduct -- plus the traditional 5-minute fighting major -- for players participating in a so-called "stage" fight, one that does not occur during game action. The GMs also suggested greater use of the instigator penalty already in the rulebook to limit instances of players responding to body checks -- be they clean or illegal -- through the dropping of gloves in retaliation against the player delivering the hit in question. Players that instigate fights while wearing a visor will be assessed an additional instigator penalty, resulting in a total of 19 minutes in penalties on the play for the aggressor.

Plus, linesman will be encouraged to break up fights earlier when it is deemed one combatant has become vulnerable in the course of the altercation.

It's no coincidence they are discussing fighting along with economic issues.


If you don't like the staged fighting, then turn the channel.
If you like the staged fighting, then you're not going to like the changes the NHL is planning on making.

Too bad for you. I guess you won't be a 'hockey' fan any more.

[Z_only1]

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=413396

It's no coincidence they are discussing fighting along with economic issues.



If you like the staged fighting, then you're not going to like the changes the NHL is planning on making.

Too bad for you. I guess you won't be a 'hockey' fan any more.

May be you can actually show causation instead sourcing maybe skew reports and bunch of assumptions that fighting is bad from an economic senses. Thus you haven't proven the product needs changing.

Greztky supports fighting but somehow it falls on deaf ears.

If your stomach is weak, just turn the channel.

[jelake]

I don't think it's necessary to ban it, though I wouldn't miss it too much. My team(Wings) leads the league in fewest fighting majors this season by a considerable margin as it is anyway. The coaches can be their own police if they want to be when it comes to letting their guys rumble.

[iamredbeard]

And do you have any stats that show that where fighting isn't allowed, the stick penalties go up?

For example, the NCAA doesn't allow fighting. Are there many more stick penalties in the college game?

My opinion is largely based on what I have heard from NHL players, NHL Coaches, and hockey analysts.

[scmarcos]

My opinion is largely based on what I have heard from NHL players, NHL Coaches, and hockey analysts.


Yep. Overwhelmingly the opinion I read from former players and coaches always supports it as part of the game.

[scmarcos]

You mean like when Haynesworth stomped on a Cowboys face? The NFL is constantly suspending guys for rough play, just because the NHL actually had the balls to push criminal charges doesn't mean plenty of guys in other sports shouldn't have been arrested for things they have done.

I mean god knows no one ever fights in the NFL, MLB, or NBA.

[iamredbeard]

Yep. Overwhelmingly the opinion I read from former players and coaches always supports it as part of the game.

Yeah it has always been part of the game and I think it always will be. Comparing it to other sports to not really a fair comparison as fighting in other sports always leads to fines and suspensions when they do happen which is very rare. Not so in hockey. Since the earliest days of the game fighting was apart of it and I don't see that changing anytime soon.

[scmarcos]

Yeah it has always been part of the game and I think it always will be. Comparing it to other sports to not really a fair comparison as fighting in other sports always leads to fines and suspensions when they do happen which is very rare. Not so in hockey. Since the earliest days of the game fighting was apart of it and I don't see that changing anytime soon.

Nor should it. If you don't like something that has always been part of the game, then watch Euro hockey on the internet.

[bmscroft316]

You are right fighting is banned already, and is against the rules. I do like seeing the fights honestly, sure like alot of other people. But I will say they can try to ban it all they want or do whatever to say they are banning it, but if you or I is playing hockey and some guy comes up and checks you into the boards at 90 mph, you know what its gonna make you very angry and get your adrenaline pumping and you will want to do something back, so if they think they can stop fighting they will have to ban checking and might as well make a whole new set of rules to keep contact from happening. I am agaist banning it!

[bmscroft316]

Exactly, thats what it comes down to, if you dont like it then dont watch it!

[snagswolf]

May be you can actually show causation instead sourcing maybe skew reports and bunch of assumptions that fighting is bad from an economic senses. Thus you haven't proven the product needs changing.
Well, the GMs think it needs changing.

That's enough proof for me.

If your stomach is weak, just turn the channel.
Or you could just watch wrassling to get your sweaty man-on-man time.

[snagswolf]

My opinion is largely based on what I have heard from NHL players, NHL Coaches, and hockey analysts.
So no, you don't have any stats to back that up.

[snagswolf]

You mean like when Haynesworth stomped on a Cowboys face? The NFL is constantly suspending guys for rough play, just because the NHL actually had the balls to push criminal charges doesn't mean plenty of guys in other sports shouldn't have been arrested for things they have done.
So that's your only example? One guy stepping on some other guy's face?

Any more?

And the NHL didn't press charges. It was law enforcement that pressed the charges.

So, here we have the NHL, which supposedly 'polices itself' with fighting, yet they have numerous incidents of violent stick incidents and/or attacks that are so severe that law enforcement gets involved.

All the other sports don't used fighting to 'police themselves', and they don't have any incidents where law enforcement has to be involved.

Claiming that fighting allows the players to 'police themselves' is obviously a joke.

I mean god knows no one ever fights in the NFL, MLB, or NBA.
You really can't be serious in claiming the fighting in the NFL, MLB and NBA are in any way comparable to what's happening in the NHL.

When you have a linebacker stopping the game so he can punch out a running back, just to give his team a 'spark', (and having to sit out only one series of downs as a penalty) THEN you can compare what happens in the NHL to other sports.

If fighting was allowed in other sports the way it's allowed in the NHL, they'd be considered jokes, just like the NHL is by most casual sports fans.

[snagswolf]

You are right fighting is banned already, and is against the rules. I do like seeing the fights honestly, sure like alot of other people. But I will say they can try to ban it all they want or do whatever to say they are banning it, but if you or I is playing hockey and some guy comes up and checks you into the boards at 90 mph, you know what its gonna make you very angry and get your adrenaline pumping and you will want to do something back, so if they think they can stop fighting they will have to ban checking and might as well make a whole new set of rules to keep contact from happening. I am agaist banning it!
B.S.

Players get hit harder in the NFL than they do in hockey, and they're not fighting after every play.

If you're going to get suspended games if you fight, then players won't fight. (or will save their fighting for when they REALLY have to fight, just like other pro sports.) It's that simple.

[snagswolf]

Exactly, thats what it comes down to, if you dont like it then dont watch it!
Or, if the sport of hockey without fighting isn't exciting enough for you, find another sport.

Perhaps wrassling, if that's what you like.

[FidelisAdMortem]

Oh great so now all the limp wristed people of this country are going to dictate hockey etiquette to the rest of us. Give me a break. Go away.

[snagswolf]

Oh great so now all the limp wristed people of this country are going to dictate hockey etiquette to the rest of us. Give me a break. Go away.
Actually, it's the hockey GMs who will be 'dictating hockey etiquette' to you.

[FidelisAdMortem]

No worries.......I can go without the fighting, I just think its ridiculous to do a 180 on it to appease those who probably never would watch hockey in the first place.

[snagswolf]

No worries.......I can go without the fighting, I just think its ridiculous to do a 180 on it to appease those who probably never would watch hockey in the first place.
Perhaps if the NHL wasn't looked on as a joke by many casual sports fans, more would be watching it.

Serious question: If NFL games were interrupted regularly by two players fighting at the 50 yard line, do you think the league would be laughed at and not taken seriously?

Also, do you think the NFL and its fans are 'limp wristed' for not allowing fighting in their sport?

[FidelisAdMortem]

Who looks at the NHL as a joke?

[snagswolf]

Who looks at the NHL as a joke?
Answer my questions.

[FidelisAdMortem]

I cant, until I know who is claiming the NHL is a joke. Then I can address it and those who believe it.

I await.................

[snagswolf]

I cant, until I know who is claiming the NHL is a joke. Then I can address it and those who believe it.

I await.................
My questions weren't about the NHL.

Learn to read.

[FidelisAdMortem]

My questions weren't about the NHL.

Learn to read.

Oh I thought I was in the NHL/Fight thread, my mistake............

[snagswolf]

Oh I thought I was in the NHL/Fight thread, my mistake............
It's ok. I understand you can't honestly answer those questions, because doing so would reveal you to be a hypocrite.

So just keep dancing to avoid answering them.

[FidelisAdMortem]

I dont use a broad brush to decide the rules for every sport.

Im not a socialist, are you?

[snagswolf]

I dont use a broad brush to decide the rules for every sport.
Still can't answer the questions, huh?

Im not a socialist, are you?
No, but you are debating like a liberal, doing a tap dance to avoid answering questions.

It's sad, really.

[FidelisAdMortem]

Still can't answer the questions, huh?


No, but you are debating like a liberal, doing a tap dance to avoid answering questions.

It's sad, really.

I like to watch fighting. I think it belongs in sports. If I had my way fighting would be permitted in all sports and would be penalized by penalty but not banned.

Simple as that.

[snagswolf]

I like to watch fighting. I think it belongs in sports. If I had my way fighting would be permitted in all sports and would be penalized by penalty but not banned.

Simple as that.
Why can't you just answer the questions?

Is English not your first language?

Do you need help with the larger words?

[FidelisAdMortem]

Que?

[snagswolf]

Que?
Pathetic.

Yeah, you're a real badass. Calling people limp-wristed while you're running away from a simple debate.

Let me repeat. Pathetic.

[bbt630]

Speaking of fighting.....make sure those jerseys are tied down boys.

[snagswolf]

Speaking of fighting.....make sure those jerseys are tied down boys.
Nice and tight.

Too bad my 'opponent' is turtling.

Which is hilarious, considering his stance on this issue.

[FidelisAdMortem]

Pathetic.

Yeah, you're a real badass. Calling people limp-wristed while you're running away from a simple debate.

Let me repeat. Pathetic.

Im here. *waves*

[Claymore]

No fighting in hockey,,, Then who would even want to watch it?

[BasicGreatGuy]

I played hockey for several years. I never got into fights, but came close a few times. I am old school. I prefer seeing the game without the fighting. Clean old school hockey is where its at for me. If people want to see blood and guts, try the UFC. :D

[FidelisAdMortem]

So fighting wasnt part of hockey back in the day?

I must of watched a different NHL then you did.

[BasicGreatGuy]

So fighting wasnt part of hockey back in the day?

I must of watched a different NHL then you did.

There was fighting back then. Doesn't mean I liked it. I think it takes away from the game. At the same time, I don't think it should be banned. Let the free market decide.

[iamredbeard]

So no, you don't have any stats to back that up.

Nope, just the opinions of those who are more involved in the game then I could ever dream of.

[alexz2317]

Bettman is at it again. Now he moved the NHL Awards Show from Toronto to Las Vegas. What the hell does Las Vegas have anything to do with hockey? Bettman needs to get the boot fast.

[Dr. Funkenstein]

Bettman is at it again. Now he moved the NHL Awards Show from Toronto to Las Vegas. What the hell does Las Vegas have anything to do with hockey? Bettman needs to get the boot fast.

Not like I'm planning to go or anything, but if given the choice I think I'd rather go to Vegas than Toronto too.

[scmarcos]

Fighting is part of hockey's tradition. It has been there forever, fighting hasn't been part of the NFL forever. There is a major difference. It's part of the game.

And to say fighting and violence isn't old school when it comes to hockey is laughable, tell that to someone like Eddie Shore.

It'd be like taking the ground and pound out of the UFC because it's too brutal.

[FidelisAdMortem]

+1 ^.

[snagswolf]

Nope, just the opinions of those who are more involved in the game then I could ever dream of.
You seem to thrive on being spoonfed your opinions.

[snagswolf]

Fighting is part of hockey's tradition. It has been there forever, fighting hasn't been part of the NFL forever. There is a major difference. It's part of the game.
Fighting has been part of the NHL, not hockey. European hockey, the college game, and the Olympics all play hockey without fighting being a major part of it.

And there is no increase in the 'stick' incidents in those versions of the sport.

So no, it isn't part of the 'game'. Thousands are playing the 'game' without fighting.

Without fighting, the NHL would be the same sport that it always was, with skating, shooting, checking, scoring, saving, and it wouldn't be a joke to a lot of sports fans.

It'd be like taking the ground and pound out of the UFC because it's too brutal.
Well, considering the fact that beating up your opponent is the actual sport of UFC, no it wouldn't be the same.

The sport of hockey is to skate, check, and score upon your opponent, not to punch him hin the face. So your comparison is ludicrous.

[snagswolf]

+1 ^.
Wow. All you can do is cheerlead now?

Get out the pom poms! Go team go!

Lame.

Still waiting for your answers, turtle.

[FidelisAdMortem]

You're very abusive, jesus weeps.

[scmarcos]

Its part of the NHL, which is what we're talking about.

Go watch Euro-hockey if you want to watch soft hockey.

[snagswolf]

You're very abusive, jesus weeps.
Still dancing, I see.

And you're such a delicate flower - calling others 'limp wristed' but then whining like a girl when your lack of integrity is pointed out.

[snagswolf]

Its part of the NHL, which is what we're talking about.

Go watch Euro-hockey if you want to watch soft hockey.
And the NHL is attempting to changing the rules to keep the dumbass fights out.

Too bad for you. I guess it's back to wrassling.

And you actually think that there has to be two guys punching each other out for hockey not to be 'soft'?

So 99% of playoff hockey is 'soft hockey'?

And you think you should be taken seriously why?

[badkarma]

Fighting has been part of the NHL, not hockey. European hockey, the college game, and the Olympics all play hockey without fighting being a major part of it.

And there is no increase in the 'stick' incidents in those versions of the sport..
Could you post a link to the stats for stick penalties in international and European leagues vs stick penalties in the NHL? It is probably a pretty interesting comparison, over all, but I couldnt find much when i looked briefly.

[snagswolf]

Could you post a link to the stats for stick penalties in international and European leagues vs stick penalties in the NHL? It is probably a pretty interesting comparison, over all, but I couldnt find much when i looked briefly.
Closest I can find is this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_in_ice_hockey#Efforts_to_ban_fighting

Opponents of fighting cite that international and college hockey, which both harshly penalize fighting with suspensions, lack the incidents or "stick work" violence proponents claim to fear, and question what it is about North American professional ice hockey players — unique to major professional team sport — that renders them incapable of controlling themselves on the ice without fighting.
It links a source, but it's not online.

Do you have any data that shows that stick incidents have increased, as so many here have claimed?

The college game is more of a local example. If the stick penalties were up in college hockey, I'm sure we'd be hearing about it.

[FidelisAdMortem]

Still dancing, I see.

And you're such a delicate flower - calling others 'limp wristed' but then whining like a girl when your lack of integrity is pointed out.

I have feelings, and you hurt me.

[alexz2317]

Its part of the NHL, which is what we're talking about.

Go watch Euro-hockey if you want to watch soft hockey.
:clap:

[Z_only1]

Well, the GMs think it needs changing.

That's enough proof for me.


Or you could just watch wrassling to get your sweaty man-on-man time.

Yeah snag taps out and can't answer direct questions.

Maybe snags needs to go shopping for dresses.

There's a clearance sale at your local mall, I'm sure.

Again, you can't show causation from that dumb link.

[Z_only1]

Wow. All you can do is cheerlead now?

Get out the pom poms! Go team go!

Lame.

Still waiting for your answers, turtle.

Still waiting for your answer on how fighting hurts the game financially, mr tape out.

I can do this all day long.

[Z_only1]

Actually, it's the hockey GMs who will be 'dictating hockey etiquette' to you.

Which is sad and you continue to be pathetic.

The biggest hypocrite is Burke.

He did win a Stanley Cup...remember genius.:wall:

[snagswolf]

Yeah snag taps out and can't answer direct questions.

Maybe snags needs to go shopping for dresses.

There's a clearance sale at your local mall, I'm sure.

Again, you can't show causation from that dumb link.
I answered the question.

Having trouble reading?

That 'dumb link' was to a report about the GM's meeting, where they discussed getting rid of your 'appointment' fights, along with the financial troubles ahead for the league.

The GMs are attempting to make the game more profitable by attracting new fans. They know they're going to lose some morons like you, who won't watch hockey unless two goons are pounding on each other, but there's more potential fans out there to more than take your place.

And I guess NFL fans should go shopping for dresses too, since that league doesn't allow fighting.

Clueless.

[snagswolf]

Still waiting for your answer on how fighting hurts the game financially, mr tape out.
Mr tape out?

Is that supposed to be English?

I can do this all day long.
Yes, I'm sure you can post dumb **** all day long.

[snagswolf]

Which is sad and you continue to be pathetic.
No, the pathetics ones are 'hockey' fans like you, who can't just enjoy the speed, skill, and hard hitting that the game contains, and would rather all that be interrupted by two morons dancing around at center ice pretending to fight.

The biggest hypocrite is Burke.
Why would Burke be a hypocrite?

He did win a Stanley Cup...remember genius.:wall:
Yes, Brian Burke won a Stanley Cup.

Is there a point to this babbling?

[badkarma]

Closest I can find is this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_in_ice_hockey#Efforts_to_ban_fighting


It links a source, but it's not online.
Yeah I read that, also. I could not find anything to prove or discredit it though.
Do you have any data that shows that stick incidents have increased, as so many here have claimed?
Nope, I don't know either way, which is why I asked you. Since you stated as fact that there was no increase in stick incidents, I thought you had actual data, but I guess not.
The college game is more of a local example. If the stick penalties were up in college hockey, I'm sure we'd be hearing about it.
I don't think one can really compare the NHL to college hockey. The game is still hockey in both instances, but realistically the two are pretty far apart. If fighting was completely removed from the NHL (which is not what the GM's are trying to do BTW), international hockey would be a better comparison.

[super cool ski instructor]

Keep fighting in hockey!!!!!!!!!!!!

[snagswolf]

Yeah I read that, also. I could not find anything to prove or discredit it though.

Nope, I don't know either way, which is why I asked you. Since you stated as fact that there was no increase in stick incidents, I thought you had actual data, but I guess not.
Actually, the ones who are claiming that the stick incidents will increase if fighting is banned, are the ones who should be presenting evidence that those stick incidents have increased in leagues where fighting has been banned.

I'm only saying that if stick incidences are higher in European and College hockey, one would think we would have news stories with the stats listed. The lack of those stories provides at least some evidence that it isn't happening.

I don't think one can really compare the NHL to college hockey. The game is still hockey in both instances, but realistically the two are pretty far apart. If fighting was completely removed from the NHL (which is not what the GM's are trying to do BTW), international hockey would be a better comparison.
Nope, hockey is hockey, whether you're playing in the NHL or college. Of course the skill level is higher in the NHL, but all of the things that 'cause' fighting to occur also happen in the college game. There's hard checking, there's cheap shots with sticks, there's guys who play aggressively, and there's physical intimidation of the better players.

The reason the players don't fight in college is that the penalty is too high. The only reason fighting is 'part of hockey' in the NHL, is that the NHL allows fighting to happen.

I remember hearing the same kind of dire predictions when the league was discussing removing the red line for offsides. Opponents claimed that it would make the game too defensive by forcing defensemen to play with a less offensive posture (and baseless claims of it 'happening all the time' in the Euro leagues were used to prop up these theories). As it turns out, removing the red line has opened the game up to be more exciting.

[snagswolf]

A recent poll of Canadians show that the majority want fighting to be banned in hockey:

http://thespec.com/Sports/article/503025

Hockey fighting losing its allure

Slim majority want it out; die-hards say no

January 28, 2009

Andy Blatchford
The Canadian Press
MONTREAL (Jan 28, 2009)
A new poll suggests a slim majority of Canadians believe National Hockey League fights should be banished to the penalty box -- for good.

A Canadian Press Harris- Decima survey conducted during the NHL all-star weekend indicates 54 per cent of the public think fighting should be ousted from the league. Forty per cent believe it should remain.

But the same question posed to the most passionate NHL fans revealed that 68 per cent think players should continue to duke it out.

"Opinion is pretty split on this issue, there's a slight majority overall among Canadians that say that they think fighting should probably be banned from hockey," said Jeff Walker, Harris-Decima's senior vice-president. "However, you've got a core group of hockey fans ... the most ardent fans ... who do not want fighting banned from hockey at all."

The poll indicated that only 30 per cent of people who follow the NHL closely say the league should eliminate fisticuffs from the game.
I personally find it amazing that the majority of Canadians feel that way about their national sport and the 'tradition' of fighting. If fighting is a 'tradition' in the sport, then one can only conclude that those anti-fighting numbers would be larger in the U.S. since there's less knowledge of that 'tradition'.

This is a clear indication that there are many potential fans out there who are turned off from the game because of the fighting.

As for the high support of fighting among core hockey fans, that's to be expected. If your product endorses fighting, it's only natural that the group of people in the set of fans you attract are going to advocate it. Those who are staying away from the game because of the fighting will never be represented in that group.

Kind of like taking a poll of Miley Cyrus fans and asking them if they like young girls who sing.

The real question for me is, of those hockey fans who want fighting to remain, how many of those people would give up the sport if fighting was banned? That is the number that should be compared to how many non-fans would become hockey fans if fighting was banned.

And personally, I really don't give a **** about hockey fans who wouldn't watch the sport if there wasn't a chance of seeing a fight in the middle of a game.

[badkarma]

As for the high support of fighting among core hockey fans, that's to be expected. If your product endorses fighting, it's only natural that the group of people in the set of fans you attract are going to advocate it. Those who are staying away from the game because of the fighting will never be represented in that group.

Kind of like taking a poll of Miley Cyrus fans and asking them if they like young girls who sing.
If you asked Miley Cyrus fans if they like young girls that sing and they all said yes, and then went and replaced Miley Cyrus with Nirvana because the people that you asked but are not even Miley Cyrus fans like Nirvana, would that be good business?

that is exactly what you are suggesting here. People who are not hockey fans don't want fighting while those that are hockey fans think it should remain. Your solution is to make the majority non-hockey fans happy while making the majority of actual fans unhappy.

Yes, the idea is to bring more fans in, but you do not want the old fans to leave in the process. The article you quote doesn't even say that those who are not hockey fans will become so if the fighting is removed. My personal feeling is that if someone is not watching hockey because there are fights in it, then if the fighting is removed they are still not going to watch hockey because of the violence in the rest of the game.

Realize, I am not completely against removing fighting, though I would rather they left it alone I would still be a fan if they didn't. My gripe is I don't think it can be removed without significantly changing the game, and I rather like how the game in the NHL plays now.

While I can't say if stick fouls will become the norm (apparently no one can) I am pretty confident in saying that cheap shots will become more prevalent. With the only penalty for running someone being a 2 minute minor, I can see some 4th line guys pretty much making a career out of doing exactly that. And that is not to mention the actual skill players that might feel free to take a few cheap shots without fear of retaliation. Will it happen? I dunno, but why bother finding out?

[iamredbeard]

And the NHL is attempting to changing the rules to keep the dumbass fights out.

Too bad for you. I guess it's back to wrassling.

And you actually think that there has to be two guys punching each other out for hockey not to be 'soft'?

So 99% of playoff hockey is 'soft hockey'?

And you think you should be taken seriously why?

They are just talking about it, but they won't do anything. No one in the NHL really wants to eliminate it. The announcers, analysts, players, coaches, and executives all think hockey is an important part of the game and want to see it stay in the game. They won't eliminate fighting.

[snagswolf]

If you asked Miley Cyrus fans if they like young girls that sing and they all said yes, and then went and replaced Miley Cyrus with Nirvana because the people that you asked but are not even Miley Cyrus fans like Nirvana, would that be good business?
My point was to show that fans of a product naturally are drawn towards what that product is about. If you take a poll of core NHL fans, of course you're going to get a majority who like fighting, because those who don't aren't in the group. Just like those who don't like singing teenage girls don't show up for Miley Cyrus concerts.

And if you determined that more people liked Nirvana than Miley Cyrus, then yes, putting on a Nirvana concert instead of a Miley Cyrus concert would be good business.

Of course, getting Cobain to show may be a bit of a problem.

that is exactly what you are suggesting here. People who are not hockey fans don't want fighting while those that are hockey fans think it should remain. Your solution is to make the majority non-hockey fans happy while making the majority of actual fans unhappy.
No, my solution is to turn non-hockey fans into hockey fans, and if banning fighting will do that, I'm all for it.

And as for making hockey fans 'unhappy', as I said, I'd like to see some research into how many would be 'unhappy' enough to stop watching the sport.

Yes, the idea is to bring more fans in, but you do not want the old fans to leave in the process. The article you quote doesn't even say that those who are not hockey fans will become so if the fighting is removed. My personal feeling is that if someone is not watching hockey because there are fights in it, then if the fighting is removed they are still not going to watch hockey because of the violence in the rest of the game.
I disagree. Excluding the fighting, there's much more 'violence' in an NFL game than an NHL game, and the NFL is by far the most popular sport in North America.

Fans can tell the difference between sports 'violence' (hitting, tackling, blocking, checking, etc.) and real 'violence' (punching someone in the face). Almost all of the successful professional sports understand this, and promote the sports violence while not permitting the real violence of fighting.

If fighting attracted more people than it turned away, why wouldn't the other (more successful) sports allow it?

Realize, I am not completely against removing fighting, though I would rather they left it alone I would still be a fan if they didn't. My gripe is I don't think it can be removed without significantly changing the game, and I rather like how the game in the NHL plays now.
Again, some of the best hockey on the planet is played during the Stanley Cup playoffs, which is pretty much fight free. Admittedly, much of that excitement is from the intensity being turned up, but it does show that the game can be played without fights, so I don't see your claim that removing fighting will result in 'significantly changing the game' (for the worse, I assume) has much evidence to back it up.

While I can't say if stick fouls will become the norm (apparently no one can) I am pretty confident in saying that cheap shots will become more prevalent. With the only penalty for running someone being a 2 minute minor, I can see some 4th line guys pretty much making a career out of doing exactly that. And that is not to mention the actual skill players that might feel free to take a few cheap shots without fear of retaliation. Will it happen? I dunno, but why bother finding out?
Which penalties, specifically, are you referring to when you talk about 'running someone'? Most 'running someone' penalties are the five minute major variety, such as boarding, elbowing, charging, high-sticking, kneeing, etc.

And I guarantee no one is going to be 'making a career' out of taking five-minute majors, unless it's the career of bag boy after being booted out of the NHL.

Also, we have plenty of examples out there of hockey leagues that don't allow fighting. Can you point to any of those to show data where your fears of 'more cheap shots' and players 'running' other players have come true?

One would think that if that were the case, stories about this vigilante justice in the absence of fighting would be widespread.

[snagswolf]

They are just talking about it, but they won't do anything. No one in the NHL really wants to eliminate it. The announcers, analysts, players, coaches, and executives all think hockey is an important part of the game and want to see it stay in the game. They won't eliminate fighting.
I agree that the majority doesn't want to get rid of fighting, but claiming 'no one' wants to eliminate it is simply wrong.

The decision they've recently made to prevent 'appointment' fights is a first step. The poll I posted that shows most Canadians want fighting banned is another step. Perhaps the NHL getting their balls in a financial vise in the next few years will prompt them to take another step.

Eventually hockey will be like other professional sports, where fighting is considered an abberation, not a 'tactic'.

And it will still be the greatest, most beautiful and exciting sport in the world to watch, and I won't feel bad at all for those who won't be watching any more because there's very little chance of two guys punching each other.

[iamredbeard]

I agree that the majority doesn't want to get rid of fighting, but claiming 'no one' wants to eliminate it is simply wrong.

The decision they've recently made to prevent 'appointment' fights is a first step. The poll I posted that shows most Canadians want fighting banned is another step. Perhaps the NHL getting their balls in a financial vise in the next few years will prompt them to take another step.

Eventually hockey will be like other professional sports, where fighting is considered an abberation, not a 'tactic'.

And it will still be the greatest, most beautiful and exciting sport in the world to watch, and I won't feel bad at all for those who won't be watching any more because there's very little chance of two guys punching each other.


From what I understand they want to make fighting safer, but no one is talking about eliminating it and I don't think it will ever be eliminated. I think fighting will always have a place in the NHL.

[snagswolf]

From what I understand they want to make fighting safer, but no one is talking about eliminating it and I don't think it will ever be eliminated. I think fighting will always have a place in the NHL.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2004-09-02-number-five-change_x.htm

Fighters today are "tough guys," and their role is scrutinized more than ever in a debate about whether the sport would be better off if harsher penalties could discourage players from dropping their gloves.

"I don't believe there is a majority" thinking that way," Nashville Predators general manager David Poile says. "But there's a lot."

Well, there goes your 'no one' claim.

[iamredbeard]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2004-09-02-number-five-change_x.htm

Well, there goes your 'no one' claim.

Ok so maybe I was wrong when I said "no one". but still the vast majority people in the NHL don't want to see fighting removed from the game.

[snagswolf]

I agree that the majority doesn't want to get rid of fighting, but claiming 'no one' wants to eliminate it is simply wrong.
Ok so maybe I was wrong when I said "no one". but still the vast majority people in the NHL don't want to see fighting removed from the game.
:wall::wall::wall:

[scmarcos]

I've rarely talked to a hockey fan who got upset or disgusted by a fight. Hockey is a more popular soccer in America, the vast majority of the country will never get into it. Especially the warmer states (how are those Coyotes doing?). It will never be football, no matter how you primp it.

You keep talking about all these other leagues that don't allow fighting and how they are doing fine but how many people go see NCAA hockey? Really how high are the ratings for college hockey in America?

[Z_only1]

I answered the question.

Having trouble reading?

That 'dumb link' was to a report about the GM's meeting, where they discussed getting rid of your 'appointment' fights, along with the financial troubles ahead for the league.

The GMs are attempting to make the game more profitable by attracting new fans. They know they're going to lose some morons like you, who won't watch hockey unless two goons are pounding on each other, but there's more potential fans out there to more than take your place.

And I guess NFL fans should go shopping for dresses too, since that league doesn't allow fighting.

Clueless.
Financial troubles are with the economy, globally or haven't you been paying attention.

How has the game or the product changed? Please provide reference.

Your dumbass link never showed it.

Your link never showed causation, clueless.

Apparently you can't appreciate the fact I was trying help with your shopping choice, pink dresses and all.

[Z_only1]

No, the pathetics ones are 'hockey' fans like you, who can't just enjoy the speed, skill, and hard hitting that the game contains, and would rather all that be interrupted by two morons dancing around at center ice pretending to fight.


Why would Burke be a hypocrite?


Yes, Brian Burke won a Stanley Cup.

Is there a point to this babbling?

I'm trying to figure out why you don't know the ducks lead the league in fighting majors when the won the Stanley cup, hence the reference of hypocrite, handjob.

Carry-on o'tool job.

[Z_only1]

I agree that the majority doesn't want to get rid of fighting, but claiming 'no one' wants to eliminate it is simply wrong.

The decision they've recently made to prevent 'appointment' fights is a first step. The poll I posted that shows most Canadians want fighting banned is another step. Perhaps the NHL getting their balls in a financial vise in the next few years will prompt them to take another step.

Eventually hockey will be like other professional sports, where fighting is considered an abberation, not a 'tactic'.

And it will still be the greatest, most beautiful and exciting sport in the world to watch, and I won't feel bad at all for those who won't be watching any more because there's very little chance of two guys punching each other.

Have you gone shopping for your dress yet?:)):)):)):))

Opinions are like *******s and everyone has one. Yet you feel comfortable about going to that area.

[snagswolf]

I've rarely talked to a hockey fan who got upset or disgusted by a fight.
As I pointed out earlier, those who are turned off by the fighting enough not to be hockey fans, wouldn't be in the set of people called hockey fans.

Hockey is a more popular soccer in America, the vast majority of the country will never get into it. Especially the warmer states (how are those Coyotes doing?). It will never be football, no matter how you primp it.
No sport will ever be as big as football in America, but that doesn't mean you can't look to the NFL as an excellent example of a league that does things right.

Actually, the NHL can look at any of the other major sports leagues who are outdrawing them, and see that those leagues aren't allowing their players to fight.

You keep talking about all these other leagues that don't allow fighting and how they are doing fine but how many people go see NCAA hockey? Really how high are the ratings for college hockey in America?
The college sports that are successful in the ratings are the sports that have successful professional leagues who primarily draw their talent from the college game. If the NHL became as popular as the NFL and the NBA, there would be more interest in college hockey.

But thanks for bringing up the huge success of NCAA football and basketball. Two more leagues that viewers flock to with virtually no chance of seeing a fight breaking out.

I know, it's hard to believe, huh?

[snagswolf]

Financial troubles are with the economy, globally or haven't you been paying attention.

How has the game or the product changed? Please provide reference.

Your dumbass link never showed it.

Your link never showed causation, clueless.
I posted a poll that showed that the majority of Canadians want fighting banned from the NHL.

And the NHL game has changed over the years, but it will always be a second-tier league as long as it has the goon image.

And how much of a moron do you have to be to call a link to a GM's meeting where they're discussing rule changes about fighting, 'clueless'?

Apparently you can't appreciate the fact I was trying help with your shopping choice, pink dresses and all.
How old are you?

I feel like I'm back in the third grade.

[snagswolf]

I'm trying to figure out why you don't know the ducks lead the league in fighting majors when the won the Stanley cup, hence the reference of hypocrite, handjob.

Carry-on o'tool job.
So tell me, clueless one. What has Brian Burke done or said that would be hypocritical of him, in light of his winning the Stanley Cup with a fighting team?

[snagswolf]

Have you gone shopping for your dress yet?
So tell me, should the NFL and all of its fans be shopping for dresses?

According to your dumbass logic, any sport where you can't drool over two guys interrupting the game and punching each other, is only watched by women or crossdressers.

Come to think of it, I wonder if your desire to see two sweaty men grabbing and wrestling with each other (and your obvious anger over someone suggesting that be taken away) isn't some sort of latent homoerotic feelings you have.

Opinions are like *******s and everyone has one. Yet you feel comfortable about going to that area.
Huh?

Please make an attempt to be coherent.

[scmarcos]

As I pointed out earlier, those who are turned off by the fighting enough not to be hockey fans, wouldn't be in the set of people called hockey fans.


No sport will ever be as big as football in America, but that doesn't mean you can't look to the NFL as an excellent example of a league that does things right.

Actually, the NHL can look at any of the other major sports leagues who are outdrawing them, and see that those leagues aren't allowing their players to fight.


The college sports that are successful in the ratings are the sports that have successful professional leagues who primarily draw their talent from the college game. If the NHL became as popular as the NFL and the NBA, there would be more interest in college hockey.

But thanks for bringing up the huge success of NCAA football and basketball. Two more leagues that viewers flock to with virtually no chance of seeing a fight breaking out.

I know, it's hard to believe, huh?

It's not because of the popularity of the sport above it. March Madness is almost exclusively what draws people to College Basketball and football is just our sport, people will watch freaking Arena Football.

Americans overwhelmingly don't have a use for hockey, they just don't like it.

Just because someone likes fighting doesn't mean they aren't a fan, no matter how much you want to be the judge of what a hockey fan is or isn't. It's been part of professional hockey a lot longer than you or I have been on this planet so maybe you're the one who isn't the true fan.

[snagswolf]

It's not because of the popularity of the sport above it. March Madness is almost exclusively what draws people to College Basketball
Huh? March Madness is exclusively what draws people to college basketball? Are you serious?

College basketball is all over ESPN and ESPN 2 during the entire basketball season.

and football is just our sport, people will watch freaking Arena Football.
Um, no one will be watching Arena Football this year. They've cancelled their 2009 season.

Americans overwhelmingly don't have a use for hockey, they just don't like it.
So that's your explanation? They just don't like it?

Hockey is one of the most exciting sports around, with plenty of non-stop action, hard checks, and great athleticism on display. Since they've, for the most part, gotten rid of the boring hockey that was being played in the 90s and early 00s, the sport should have nothing holding it back from being popular. They've got fresh young talented kids dominating the league, and they've got high-def broadcasts that really show the game off well.

And where are they? Stuck as a second-tier sport on a crappy cable network that many sports fans don't even get.

Isn't it time to start thinking outside the box, and examine WHY people aren't 'liking it'? And at least TRY the suggestion of being like the successful sports and removing fighting?

Just because someone likes fighting doesn't mean they aren't a fan, no matter how much you want to be the judge of what a hockey fan is or isn't.
Never said that. What I did say, is that if someone needs fighting in order for the sport to be exciting to them, then they're not a hockey fan.

It's been part of professional hockey a lot longer than you or I have been on this planet so maybe you're the one who isn't the true fan.
First of all, it's been a part of the NHL, not 'professional hockey' for a long time.

And there are plenty of things that were part of the NHL for a long time, but are no longer part of it. Players used to be 'real men' and not wear helmets. Goalies didn't wear masks or huge pads. There used to be bench-clearing brawls and 2-on-1 fights. Hell, there was even a time when they didn't allow forward passes.

Claiming history as a argument against change is weak, considering how much the game has changed over the years.

[scmarcos]

Huh? March Madness is exclusively what draws people to college basketball? Are you serious?

College basketball is all over ESPN and ESPN 2 during the entire basketball season.


Um, no one will be watching Arena Football this year. They've cancelled their 2009 season.


So that's your explanation? They just don't like it?

Hockey is one of the most exciting sports around, with plenty of non-stop action, hard checks, and great athleticism on display. Since they've, for the most part, gotten rid of the boring hockey that was being played in the 90s and early 00s, the sport should have nothing holding it back from being popular. They've got fresh young talented kids dominating the league, and they've got high-def broadcasts that really show the game off well.

And where are they? Stuck as a second-tier sport on a crappy cable network that many sports fans don't even get.

Isn't it time to start thinking outside the box, and examine WHY people aren't 'liking it'? And at least TRY the suggestion of being like the successful sports and removing fighting?


Never said that. What I did say, is that if someone needs fighting in order for the sport to be exciting to them, then they're not a hockey fan.


First of all, it's been a part of the NHL, not 'professional hockey' for a long time.

And there are plenty of things that were part of the NHL for a long time, but are no longer part of it. Players used to be 'real men' and not wear helmets. Goalies didn't wear masks or huge pads. There used to be bench-clearing brawls and 2-on-1 fights. Hell, there was even a time when they didn't allow forward passes.

Claiming history as a argument against change is weak, considering how much the game has changed over the years.


No using history is totally relevant. Checks have gotten weaker, and penalties are rampant now. Eventually they will just go the course of the NFL and penalize any hard hits.

Seems like you're the only real "Hockey Fan" on this thread. Seems like everyone else overwhelmingly wants fighting to stay. Well except your poll of Canada.

[iamredbeard]

Fighting isn't going to be banned anytime soon for the NHL. Two many fans like to see the fights and to many people inside the NHL (players, coaches, executives, etc...) believe that fighting has a place in today's game. Those who don't like to see fights happen can talk about it all they want but it's not going to have much effect. To many people believe that fighting has a place in the NHL. Even Detroit's team who leads the league in the fewest fighting majors has just about everyone from the players, to the coaches, to the GM and the owner all have said that fighting should not be banned.

[ALBOB2]

Fighting isn't going to be banned anytime soon for the NHL. Two many fans like to see the fights and to many people inside the NHL (players, coaches, executives, etc...) believe that fighting has a place in today's game. Those who don't like to see fights happen can talk about it all they want but it's not going to have much effect. To many people believe that fighting has a place in the NHL. Even Detroit's team who leads the league in the fewest fighting majors has just about everyone from the players, to the coaches, to the GM and the owner all have said that fighting should not be banned.

To = in a particular direction

Too = also

Two = a digit equal to 1+1

ALBOB2 = a fanatic about the proper use of the three different ways to spell "to". :wall:

[alexz2317]

To = in a particular direction

Too = also

Two = a digit equal to 1+1

ALBOB2 = a fanatic about the proper use of the three different ways to spell "to". :wall:
Burn!

[Z_only1]

I posted a poll that showed that the majority of Canadians want fighting banned from the NHL.

And the NHL game has changed over the years, but it will always be a second-tier league as long as it has the goon image.

And how much of a moron do you have to be to call a link to a GM's meeting where they're discussing rule changes about fighting, 'clueless'?


How old are you?

I feel like I'm back in the third grade.

The only moron in the room is you deflecting, sit-n-spin away your opinion which by the way you have yet showed causation that the game has changed.

Apparently you need to go back to 1st grade to learn how to count. You show no numbers o'dumbass.

You mean you actually got past the 3rd grade.:)):)):)):)):)):)):)):))

Your sample size of canadian voters matters how when the majority of teams are in US. Yes another sit-n-spin moment.

[Z_only1]

So tell me, clueless one. What has Brian Burke done or said that would be hypocritical of him, in light of his winning the Stanley Cup with a fighting team?

Done: lead a team to win Stanley Cup

http://en.epochtimes.com/news/8-3-11/67413.html

And the fighting...oh the horror, jackarse.
Snags might have to hide under the covers.:)):)):))

Rinse and repeat for the reading challengedddd in the room, especially posters named snagswolf.

Read and comprehend: http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/marek/2008/04/post.html

Contradicts your dumb posting of canadians view of fighting in the NHL. Why the props for Lucic?

Love to hear this sit-n-spin moment...bwahahahhah.

[Z_only1]

So tell me, should the NFL and all of its fans be shopping for dresses?

According to your dumbass logic, any sport where you can't drool over two guys interrupting the game and punching each other, is only watched by women or crossdressers.

Come to think of it, I wonder if your desire to see two sweaty men grabbing and wrestling with each other (and your obvious anger over someone suggesting that be taken away) isn't some sort of latent homoerotic feelings you have.


Huh?

Please make an attempt to be coherent.

I really think you love sweating men b/c you keep fantasizing about it(skeletons in the closet, eh?).It's okay share your feelings .:))

You still have that boy george poster you were bragging about?


NFL: More sit-n-spin logic. Make reference to other sports when it's already been specified. Learn to read the topic before starting to babble about nothingness.

Sorry you're still stuck in the 3rd grade.

Maybe you can get gov't assistance with your problem(s).

[BOOOOOOSHHHH]

No fighting=no honor.

[sgtmac_46]

I agree that the majority doesn't want to get rid of fighting, but claiming 'no one' wants to eliminate it is simply wrong.

The decision they've recently made to prevent 'appointment' fights is a first step. The poll I posted that shows most Canadians want fighting banned is another step. Perhaps the NHL getting their balls in a financial vise in the next few years will prompt them to take another step.

Eventually hockey will be like other professional sports, where fighting is considered an abberation, not a 'tactic'.

And it will still be the greatest, most beautiful and exciting sport in the world to watch, and I won't feel bad at all for those who won't be watching any more because there's very little chance of two guys punching each other.

Why do you hate fighting in Hockey? It would seem that, if fighting has always been a part of hockey, and you don't like it, you wouldn't be a hockey fan......so why change something you don't like?

If you don't like fighting a sport, why watch it? Go watch girls soccer........or figure skating.......personally i'm sick of the pussification of male sports.

[snagswolf]

Your sample size of canadian voters matters how when the majority of teams are in US. Yes another sit-n-spin moment.
Um, it's not 'my' sample size, clueless one. It was a Harris poll.

And if Canadians are against fighting in their national sport, it's more than likely Americans are too, since Americans aren't really aware of the 'history' of fighting in the NHL.

[iamredbeard]

Um, it's not 'my' sample size, clueless one. It was a Harris poll.

And if Canadians are against fighting in their national sport, it's more than likely Americans are too, since Americans aren't really aware of the 'history' of fighting in the NHL.

It's not their national sport, that would be lacrosse. ;)

[snagswolf]

Done: lead a team to win Stanley Cup

http://en.epochtimes.com/news/8-3-11/67413.html

And the fighting...oh the horror, jackarse.
Snags might have to hide under the covers.:)):)):))

Rinse and repeat for the reading challengedddd in the room, especially posters named snagswolf.

Read and comprehend: http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/marek/2008/04/post.html

Contradicts your dumb posting of canadians view of fighting in the NHL. Why the props for Lucic?

Love to hear this sit-n-spin moment...bwahahahhah.
Why is this so hard for you to understand?

Yes, I know that Burke has lead a fighting team to the Stanley Cup. But for him to be a hypocrite, he would have to criticize fighting and say it was wrong.

Do you have any quotes of him saying that? At all?

Do I have to write this in crayon so you understand it?

[snagswolf]

I really think you love sweating men b/c you keep fantasizing about it(skeletons in the closet, eh?).It's okay share your feelings .:))

You still have that boy george poster you were bragging about?


NFL: More sit-n-spin logic. Make reference to other sports when it's already been specified. Learn to read the topic before starting to babble about nothingness.

Sorry you're still stuck in the 3rd grade.

Maybe you can get gov't assistance with your problem(s).
Do you have ADD?

You post like a child.

[snagswolf]

Why do you hate fighting in Hockey? It would seem that, if fighting has always been a part of hockey, and you don't like it, you wouldn't be a hockey fan......so why change something you don't like?
I've been a hockey fan for over 35 years now, and it's the best sport on the planet. That's why I can't stand two goons interrupting the game to paw at each other.

The best hockey is NHL playoff hockey, and Olympic hockey. Two versions of the sport that have almost zero fighting. I'm sorry that's too boring for you, and you'd rather that great hockey be stopped so two men can punch each other.

If you don't like fighting a sport, why watch it? Go watch girls soccer........or figure skating.......personally i'm sick of the pussification of male sports.
And perhaps if you like watching two men grabbing each other and grappling in the middle of a sporting event, you should pop in a wrasslin' video.

Tell me, do you watch an NFL game and secretly wish they would stop the game so the linebacker can punch out the running back?

[iamredbeard]

When the Ducks went on their Stanley Cup run two years ago I seem to remember plenty of fights in their post-season games.

[snagswolf]

It's not their national sport, that would be lacrosse. ;)
Actually, they passed a law in 1994, making hockey their official national winter sport, where lacrosse is their national summer sport.

I guess you need to watch more of the 'experts' you listen to.

[snagswolf]

When the Ducks went on their Stanley Cup run two years ago I seem to remember plenty of fights in their post-season games.
Can you comprehend the English language?

[iamredbeard]

Actually, they passed a law in 1994, making hockey their official national winter sport, where lacrosse is their national summer sport.

I guess you need to watch more of the 'experts' you listen to.

I was just about to post a correction to that, but you beat me to it. ;) I use to Wings games in Toronto all the game when they were both in the Norris division and once made a comment about how hockey was their national pastime and I was quickly corrected and they told me that it was lacrosse. :)):)):)) I got a friend over that is Canadian and he just told me that in 1994 the Canadian Parliament was about to pass a law to make hockey the national sport and how everyone got upset so they amended the law so that lacrosse and hockey would both be the national sport. What a bunch of silly canucks. :)):)):))

[iamredbeard]

Can you comprehend the English language?

Ducks are a bunch of goons, I dislike them and Pronger is one of the two players in the NHL that I detest. :evil: Didn't you mention something about how there aren't fight during playoff time? I was just pointing out that I remember the Ducks getting in a lot of fights during their Stanley Cup run.

[snagswolf]

Ducks are a bunch of goons, I dislike them and Pronger is one of the two players in the NHL that I detest. :evil: Didn't you mention something about how there aren't fight during playoff time? I was just pointing out that I remember the Ducks getting in a lot of fights during their Stanley Cup run.
It would be nice if you would actual back up your claims with statistics, instead of your usual 'I remember'.

The fact is, the Ducks had ONE fighting major in their Cup run, and it was against the Wings. (And that was a Ducks team that loved to fight, proving that yes, the fighting pretty much stops in the playoffs. How boring for you losers.)

So much for your memory.

Link:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/playoffs2007/index

[iamredbeard]

It would be nice if you would actual back up your claims with statistics, instead of your usual 'I remember'.

The fact is, the Ducks had ONE fighting major in their Cup run, and it was against the Wings. (And that was a Ducks team that loved to fight, proving that yes, the fighting pretty much stops in the playoffs. How boring for you losers.)

So much for your memory.

Link:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/playoffs2007/index

Ok, then I stand corrected. I seem to remember them always getting in fights, but as it turned out my memory was faulty and I was wrong.

[Z_only1]

.

And if Canadians are against fighting in their national sport, it's more than likely Americans are too,

How do you come to that conclusion captain thought process?

:)):)):)):)):)):))

Oh yeah more sit-n-spin responses.