^ Interesting, thanks. I didn't know about the instigator in the last 5 minute rule until now. Those number of fights statistics are interesting as well, I'd didn't know they had dropped that drastically
The reason its not that well known is the instigator is almost never called.
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to Coach For This Useful Post:
First, this injury could have been prevented if they hadn't taken the lids off. That's not a thing anymore in the NHL and it shouldn't be in the AHL either. Yes, leaving them on means you're more likely to hurt your hand, but it makes it less likely that you hit your head on the ice, and even if you don't, less likely that a punch catches you in a way to do permanent damage.
Second, I am fine with getting rid of fighting, but I like the way it's trending right now. The number of fights has been declining steadily. The NHL just needs to keep prioritizing what they have been and after a few more years like this, we'll be able to get rid of fighting without even having to have much of an argument about it, because it'll be more or less already done.
Third, if they do remove fighting, now or in the future, it needs to be accompanied by a massive overhaul in officiating generally. Part of that is taking measures to eliminate bull#### by guys like Marchand who are just terrible humans and have no respect for the game or the other people they're on the ice with. Like, the lick results in 2 minutes for unsportsmanlike conduct and an immediate suspension. Another part of it is increasing the duration of suspensions for illegal hits and lowering the threshold, particularly where it's clearly avoidable but doesn't cause an injury (but could have). Unfortunately, that last part in particular is a really tough sell, for reasons that make no sense, but it just needs to happen.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
"I’ve thought about death a lot over the past few years.
About dying. And what it might be like if I wasn’t around.
I’ve struggled a ton since I retired from hockey in 2011, and I’ve faced a bunch of different personal demons. But recently I’ve been unable to shake thoughts of….
Steve Montador.
Wade Belak.
Derek Boogaard.
Rick Rypien.
I knew those guys. They were real people to me.
They played the same game I did, and when it was all said and done … they were really just suffering, man.
They struggled with depression and anxiety and substance abuse and just … pain. All of the things I’ve been dealing with. They went through some of the exact same stuff.
And now … I talk about them in the past tense. How they were my friends. And how they used to be my brothers.
They’re just … gone."
" And I can tell you that, yes, coaches do actually sometimes tap you on the back and tell you to get out there on the ice and fight. Whether you want to believe it or not, it happens.
And I was always game — right there at a moment’s notice, ready to oblige."
Do you think he could change that decision now if he could? I bet he would
More....
"I had it in my head that there was a specific way that hockey needed to be played. And there was a level honor to it, a certain pride that came along with kicking some ass.
I didn’t enjoy it, though. That’s for sure.
It’s what I did, and it paid the bills and allowed me to support my family. But I never loved it."
It's a goddamn waste of human life.
I think you missed something in your zeal to blme fighting:
Quote:
I can honestly say that it was the everyday hits during the course of the game — little blind-side shots and other things you wouldn’t even notice if you were watching on TV — that did the most damage over time.
What you found was more a testament to removing hitting than fighting.
So can someone point to statistical evidence that hitting is a necessary part of the game? Women's hockey proves you can play the game without it, so should we remove the barbaric act of one player slamming into another to take the puck away? After all, hits lead to way more concussions, and presumably CTE cases, than fights.
Have slapshots been statistically proven to be a necessary part of the game? Propelling the puck around at 90+ mph injures players all of the time. Should we remove this reckless act?
There are few things that you can say are proven necessary for the game. One thing that is proven by clips like the one below is that as soon as a fight starts the crowd erupts like it only other does for a goal or a barbaric big hit. Qoutes like the one from Iginla show the players still feel it serves a useful purpose, and other than players who feel that they needed to fight regularly to stay in the league, I've never heard a big outcry that the players themselves dislike fighting.
Like many things, fighting may not be a necessary part of the game, but it's a wildly popular part of the game with fans, the players support it in the game, and players are very seldomly injured in fights, which is why it's remained in the game despite the league's increased focus on reducing concussions.
It may pass from the game naturally, but I don't see it being banned.
^You are preaching to the choir because I've also argued that hitting needs to evolve to be about puck retrieval and nothing more.
I don't really care though how fans react (people are savage) or what a player like Iginla says. I think the players are terrible at guarding their own safety.
But it's about removing something (fighting) that I think is unnecessary to the game but does present long-term risks to players.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
Of course it is.
Can someone explain to me the logic of a physical altercation where you are engaging in actions designed to hurt that person, but not hurt them THAT badly.
He punches Kessy to the ice and then immediately calls for help.
Yeah man - when you punch someone and cause them to fall to the ice - there's a chance they could ACTUALLY get hurt. WTF
I mean it's just silly, reckless and unnecessary.
And it WILL be eliminated at some point. We all know that.
So let's just cut to the chase and do it now.
At some point, say in 10 years, we will look back and wonder how on earth it was still allowed, much in the same way we marvel at how players used to play without helmets.
What's appalling is that we now know enough about brain injuries that there is NO reason why the logical steps haven't already been taken to eliminate fighting.
It's the great embarrassment of the sport I love.
I've said it before, I grew up with the 80s brawl style hockey and LOVED it. To me all the fights, the brawls was something I looked forward to often got super hyped over before games where I knew something would happen like in the battle of Alberta.
Now I am a grown up and see this all in a different light, the harm, the risk and what this message sends to kids growing up in the sport. They see their hero's fighting, they emulate and try to be like them.
I just have zero desire to see any more fighting.
__________________ Allskonar fyrir Aumingja!!
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Thor For This Useful Post:
^You are preaching to the choir because I've also argued that hitting needs to evolve to be about puck retrieval and nothing more.
I don't really care though how fans react (people are savage) or what a player like Iginla says. I think the players are terrible at guarding their own safety.
But it's about removing something (fighting) that I think is unnecessary to the game but does present long-term risks to players.
No disrespect but it seems to me you're the one preaching in this thread, I think everyone will agree in 20-30 years we'll look back and say hockey in 2020 was a brutal barbaric game with dangerous violence, but it wasn't that long ago we had 20 fights on the ice with bench brawls which was extremely dangerous with only 3 officials, it also wasn't that long ago people were ending peoples careers Scott Stevens style and it was within the rules.
Change takes time, let the evolution of the game eliminate fighting and if you look you'll see it's already happening.
^You are preaching to the choir because I've also argued that hitting needs to evolve to be about puck retrieval and nothing more.
I don't really care though how fans react (people are savage) or what a player like Iginla says. I think the players are terrible at guarding their own safety.
But it's about removing something (fighting) that I think is unnecessary to the game but does present long-term risks to players.
OK, so you don't care about fans opinions, and you don't care about players opinions, and you don't care about management and league officials opinions, you just want hockey to conform to your opinion.
If you want me to take you seriously, how about providing some statistical (not just anecdotal) evidence that fighting in the NHL presents a long term risk to the players more than other collisions (even just puck retrieval collisions) do. After all, statistical evidence is what you've demanded of fighting supporters.
OK, so you don't care about fans opinions, and you don't care about players opinions, and you don't care about management and league officials opinions, you just want hockey to conform to your opinion.
If you want me to take you seriously, how about providing some statistical (not just anecdotal) evidence that fighting in the NHL presents a long term risk to the players more than other collisions (even just puck retrieval collisions) do. After all, statistical evidence is what you've demanded of fighting supporters.
This isn't the standard he has established.
Jiri's point is that hitting and fighting represent unnecessary risks of head injuries and that removing either or both would be an improvement on the current situation. Considering that fighting is currently illegal under hockey's rules, it would seem simple to remove that risk from the game. Collisions can be argued to be hockey plays between the whistles and are more difficult to remove the risks, but banning something already illegal under the rules should be pretty obvious, simple, and easy.
Do you really need statistical evidence that punches to the head sometimes lead to head injuries?
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Flash Walken For This Useful Post:
OK, so you don't care about fans opinions, and you don't care about players opinions, and you don't care about management and league officials opinions, you just want hockey to conform to your opinion.
If you want me to take you seriously, how about providing some statistical (not just anecdotal) evidence that fighting in the NHL presents a long term risk to the players more than other collisions (even just puck retrieval collisions) do. After all, statistical evidence is what you've demanded of fighting supporters.
I think we should primarily be paying attention to scientific evidence that shows that head trauma has long-term serious consequences, and we should be taking logical steps to reduce those consequences.
I don't think we should listen to the opinions who's views have been deeply rooted and formed within hockey culture.
It isn't about conforming to my opinion. It's about doing what is both logical and moral.
The Following User Says Thank You to Jiri Hrdina For This Useful Post:
I think fighting should be removed from the game (although I'm not bothered if it stays), but as a few other posters said, then they will need to overhaul the officiating and be more much more strict.
OTOH, I don't want the officiating to get to a point like the stupid dramatics that appear in soccer... with players acting like they were shot every time they get touched. That fake diving-crap is embarrassing to watch.
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina
^You are preaching to the choir because I've also argued that hitting needs to evolve to be about puck retrieval and nothing more.
I don't really care though how fans react (people are savage) or what a player like Iginla says. I think the players are terrible at guarding their own safety.
But it's about removing something (fighting) that I think is unnecessary to the game but does present long-term risks to players.
See...YOU think this....the majority actually involved in the game....really dont.
People get hurt fighting? Yup.....always have and always will. In ant sort of circumstance or walk of life.
The VAST majority however? No long term issues.
in fact in that ^^^^statement, you say you dont care what fans OR players say....YOU want something different,
How about YOU quit trying/wanting to change what the majority wants/enjoys and find another form of the game you are comfortable with, and let those that want the game to have what is has always had....which is what THEY want?
See...YOU think this....the majority actually involved in the game....really dont.
People get hurt fighting? Yup.....always have and always will. In ant sort of circumstance or walk of life.
The VAST majority however? No long term issues.
in fact in that ^^^^statement, you say you dont care what fans OR players say....YOU want something different,
How about YOU quit trying/wanting to change what the majority wants/enjoys and find another form of the game you are comfortable with, and let those that want the game to have what is has always had....which is what THEY want?
Vast majority isn't good enough when there are logical measures that could be taken to prevent it further.
