Quote:
Originally Posted by strombad
We're having two different conversations. Fighting has a place in the game, it has a role, it's PART of the game. It is those things because players almost unanimously agree that it is. There is no higher authority than the opinion of the players in this regard. This is not "getting back out there," this is an element of the game.
Now, you want to talk about safety? Alright, we can have that conversation, but what your post doesn't address and what I take issue with people like Textcritic saying is that players aren't the most reliable experts on the role of fighting in the game. We aren't talking about the negative after effects of fighting, we are talking about it's role in the game. Of course most players will not be experts on the health effects of fighting in the NHL, but they are the HIGHEST experts on fighting's effectiveness in the game of hockey.
Aside from that, I'm not sure what basis there is for saying hockey players aren't that smart, or if you weren't suggesting that but rather actually suggesting you had to be a scholar to understanding the effects of fighting, then I'm not sure I really agree with that either.
|
I think the extent of it being "part" of the game is debatable. It most definitely is part of the culture and tradition, but it exists outside the rules of the game. As for players deciding, if it were strictly up to the players lots still wouldn't be wearing helmets. If it had never been implemented as a rule, the culture would be the same as the Don Cherry view on visors. A macho culture can't make objective decisions on the removal of a physical aspect of the game.