No more fighting in junior hockey?

[indes]

Originally Posted by Dion

Watch the stick work and cheap shots go up. Players will find other ways to get back at players.

This. Played a tournament in phoenix one year with no fighting and the penalizing of big hits, the stick work from the Americans was gross, really took the respect out of the game when you didn't have to answer for anything.

[Street Pharmacist]

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

[Gunkle]

My greatest thrill in life, isn't watching 16 year old kids fight. In fact, they are quite terrible at it. My issue is how physicality is being choked out of the game. Kids can't check until they are 14 now. Fighting looks to be on the way out. Down the road, there will be some issues.

Kids are going to develop some bad, and largely terrible habits (ie. skating through the neutral zone with their head down).

I guess that you have to make your own ideal as to what hockey is. To me, there is, and should always be hitting. If there is going to be contact, and yes occasionally fights, let's work to best protect everyone in the long term. They aren't doing any favors by holding these kids back.

If you don't want checking and fighting - be happy, there is a place for you. It's called rec hockey.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by indes

This. Played a tournament in phoenix one year with no fighting and the penalizing of big hits, the stick work from the Americans was gross, really took the respect out of the game when you didn't have to answer for anything.

There was also a tournament in Sochi earlier this year, with no fighting.
It was ok


And, btw, I am not supporting a 'ban' of fighting in the NHL

[Dion]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Actually yes?


What you describe in you post happens at all levels of hockey, I say it happen in Atom games this winter. At what level is it OK to attack and fight the other player.

Hockey has plenty of ways that are within the confines of the game to "get back" at the player.

A Canucks player like say Kesler rams Gaudreau into the boards and he is very slow to get up. You would expect Flames players to do nothing and carry on as if it didn't happen?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Gunkle

My greatest thrill in life, isn't watching 16 year old kids fight. In fact, they are quite terrible at it. My issue is how physicality is being choked out of the game. Kids can't check until they are 14 now. Fighting looks to be on the way out. Down the road, there will be some issues.

Kids are going to develop some bad, and largely terrible habits (ie. skating through the neutral zone with their head down).

I guess that you have to make your own ideal as to what hockey is. To me, there is, and should always be hitting. If there is going to be contact, and yes occasionally fights, let's work to best protect everyone in the long term. They aren't doing any favors by holding these kids back.

If you don't want checking and fighting - be happy, there is a place for you. It's called rec hockey.

You do realize that checking and fighting don't have to exist together, right?

I think you are blurring physicality within the rules to thuggery outside the rules.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Hockey has plenty of ways that are within the confines of the game to "get back" at the player.

I hear some leagues are experimenting with a rule where if a player is penalized, his team will be short a man for the next two minutes of the game (or five if it's serious). The thinking is this will increase the chances of the team with the man advantage to score a goal. It's called an 'advantage play' or 'power ice' or something like that. I think it's worth taking a look at.

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by Dion

Do you have a count for all the slashes, high sticks, elbows etc that happen?

Do you have a count into the future of how many dirty plays will happen if fighting is banned?

Staged fights accounted for pretty much every single fight for the Flames this season. Off the top of my head the only fights I remember which was because of a dirty hit was when Butler stepped in after a dirty hit and fought and Westgarth stepped in after another dirty play.

Actually more fights resulted from CLEAN hits than dirty hits. What do you have to say about that?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Dion

A Canucks player like say Kesler rams Gaudreau into the boards and he is very slow to get up. You would expect Flames players to do nothing and carry on as if it didn't happen?

If the play/hit is legal and within the confines of the rules, then no. If it is not, then I would rather the NHL deal with it via fiens and suspensions.

(The lack of the NHL willingness to do this is another matter, IMO).

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by Dion

A Canucks player like say Kesler rams Gaudreau into the boards and he is very slow to get up. You would expect Flames players to do nothing and carry on as if it didn't happen?

Was the hit clean?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by puckluck2

Do you have a count into the future of how many dirty plays will happen if fighting is banned?

I was hoping you'd have the answers because as you stated in your first post of this thread.... "People are delusional if they actually think banning fighting will lead to more " cheap" plays."

Staged fights accounted for pretty much every single fight for the Flames this season. Off the top of my head the only fights I remember which was because of a dirty hit was when Butler stepped in after a dirty hit and fought and Westgarth stepped in after another dirty play.

Actually more fights resulted from CLEAN hits than dirty hits. What do you have to say about that?

The instigator rule eliminates alot of the fighting as teams don't want the extra 2 minutes. Why eliminate fighting when you have a rule that deters it?

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by fotze

I think those that pay the fees to run these leagues (i.e. the parents and sponsors) should be the only ones having a say in this. Everyone else can have an opinion but have no say. You want a say, get some skin in the game, put your own kids head on the platter and if it comes out to 50% saying ''Yay' than that's how it goes.

Oh I agree. I just mean the CJHL operates under Hockey Canada. The ban will be in effect in the Junior A leagues.
The CHL does not operate exactly under Hockey Canada's rules for amateur hockey. They are their own governing body, and I am pretty certain will not adopt this.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by puckluck2

Was the hit clean?

Does it matter?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

If the play/hit is legal and within the confines of the rules, then no. If it is not, then I would rather the NHL deal with it via fiens and suspensions.

(The lack of the NHL willingness to do this is another matter, IMO).

Flames players will still react. They don't have the advantage that we do where we get to see replays of the hit. They just see one of thier players down on the ice and not getting up quickly. Sometimes it's just pushing and shoving and a few face washes as players exchage words.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Dion

Flames players will still react. They don't have the advantage that we do where we get to see replays of the hit. They just see one of thier players down on the ice and not getting up quickly. Sometimes it's just pushing and shoving and a few face washes as players exchage words.

Wait are we discussion talking after the whistle or fighting?


I love hockey. My son and daughter play hockey.

But I can't understand this mentality to avenge a legal hit by fighting.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Dion

Flames players will still react.

It doesn't stop fighting, necessarily.
So one fights him. Under the suggested rules you simply get a game misconduct as well. It doesn't prevent fighting, but certainly deters it, as you thrown out of the game.
Again - I'm not advocating a fighting 'ban' in the NHL.
But in amateur games among 16-20 year old kids it seems pretty reasonable.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Wait are we discussion talking after the whistle or fighting?


I love hockey. My son and daughter play hockey.

But I can't understand this mentality to avenge a legal hit by fighting.

No. We're talking about players reactions to what they precieve to be cheap shots etc.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Dion

No. We're talking about players reactions to what they precieve to be cheap shots etc.

Dion, we were talking about fighting. The thread is about fighting. The "scrums" post whistle, IMO, are different.

To be clear, I don't see the need to fight in the game.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Dion, we were talking about fighting. The thread is about fighting. The "scrums" post whistle, IMO, are different.

To be clear, I don't see the need to fight in the game.

We're talking about players reactions and how it can sometimes lead to fights.

I also remember watching the "Broad Street Bullies" and all the fighting that went on in that era. What we have now doesn't come close to that. I think the instigator rule is an effective way of curbing fighting today and see no reason to ban fighting from the game.

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by indes

This. Played a tournament in phoenix one year with no fighting and the penalizing of big hits, the stick work from the Americans was gross, really took the respect out of the game when you didn't have to answer for anything.

I also played in a tournament where fighting was allowed and some guy got his brain rattled from a one punch knock out and will live with the repercussions for the rest of his life.

My anecdotal evidence > yours.