Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
"Retribution" was the word I was trying to think of, btw. And fighting serves several purposes. Potential to change momentum. It does have a role as a deterrent (real and/or imagined, take your pick. The Flames players certainly believed it). And, it can serve as retribution following an incident. Sometimes dirty hit, sometimes clean but big. The path Dion was going down is that if you can't fight a guy following such an incident, it is probable that someone is going to jab the player with their stick instead - either immediately or later, after 'taking down the number'.
|
I'll take your point regarding changing a teams confidence/momentum, I'll accept that it's entertaining and I'll also admit that most players want it to continue.
What it doesn't answer, is whether any of that justifies the risk we now know is much greater than we now know. I've come to believe it's not. Entertainment, strategy and workers beliefs don't trump workplace safety in any other industry.
What I don't accept as valid is this fantastical "Cherryism" that taking out fighting will make the workplace more unsafe. It's ludicrous and proven wrong repeatedly. Many leagues do not allow fighting and are not less safe. There is nothing to back it up at all