Yzerman, Shero and Rutherford want to explore eliminating fighting

[Stay Golden]

Hypocrites,

i wonder if Stevie Y considers all the protection and ice guy's like Probert, Kocer, McCarty, Grimson, Shanahan, provided him and his team mates over much of his career.
Fights that occur during the general play of a game or staged fights set the tone for any team don't take runs at the Stars or young players.
Often when 2 enforcers line up across from each other and don't fight that message can be enough.

Funny how Shero's dad gooned up his team the Flyers more than any in the history of the game.

As for Ray Shero with the Pens... Godard, Asham, McIntyre, Rupp, Laraque, I suppose they were with the Pens for their goal scoring right Ray. He brought all them in and lets not forget that rat Matt Cooke who he has kept employed. The filthy garbage Matt Cooke has unleashed during his career has been despicable and without fighting more Matt Cookes will emerge.
Now he changes his tune because his current team has no real enforcer.

[Flames89]

It would be scared to see what Marchand, Lapierre, Downie, and Burrows would become without the fear of a knuckle sandwich holding them back.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Flames89

It would be scared to see what Marchand, Lapierre, Downie, and Burrows would become without the fear of a knuckle sandwich holding them back.

When did a heavyweight, or anyone scary for that matter, hold them back? Sorry, it doesn't scare them now

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Flames89

It would be scared to see what Marchand, Lapierre, Downie, and Burrows would become without the fear of a knuckle sandwich holding them back.

I think it is highly unlikely that they fear a knuckle sandwich at all or hold back because of it.

Each and every one of them get paid good money to do what they do and I am sure the dollars speak louder than the threat that they *might* get into a fight. Besides, even if they do cause a fight to take place with their actions, it is far more likely that it will be their goon fighting the other team's goon and not them directly.

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

When did a heavyweight, or anyone scary for that matter, hold them back? Sorry, it doesn't scare them now

Get rid of the instigator rule and it will scare them.

[Ped]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

Hypocrites,

i wonder if Stevie Y considers all the protection and ice guy's like Probert, Kocer, McCarty, Grimson, Shanahan, provided him and his team mates over much of his career.

Actually I'd be willing to bet that Yzerman was remembering Probert very much when he came to his decision.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Zarley

Get rid of the instigator rule and it will scare them.

No it won't

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

No it won't

Thoughtful response.

I'll admit that I'm too young to have watched hockey in the years before 1992 so perhaps some of the older posters can chime in here, but I believe there were far fewer career weasels (think Matt Cooke) around in the years that they had to answer to the other team's goon for a cheapshot against star players on the opposing team.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Zarley

Thoughtful response.

I'll admit that I'm too young to have watched hockey in the years before 1992 so perhaps some of the older posters can chime in here, but I believe there were far fewer career weasels (think Matt Cooke) around in the years that they had to answer to the other team's goon for a cheapshot against star players on the opposing team.

I did watch and slashes and the like were more prevalent than now. Messier broke noses and cats not for the fight afterwards. Kenny Linsman didn't care if he ended careers. None of them did. The reason for the "thoughtless" response was it's just as hypothetical as yours. It's something cherry started and people rolled with it. Suspensions change behavior. Fear of fights doesn't.

[Zarley]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

I did watch and slashes and the like were more prevalent than now. Messier broke noses and cats not for the fight afterwards. Kenny Linsman didn't care if he ended careers. None of them did. The reason for the "thoughtless" response was it's just as hypothetical as yours. It's something cherry started and people rolled with it. Suspensions change behavior. Fear of fights doesn't.

Sounds like good old time hockey.

Obviously this argument is entirely subjective, but from a fan standpoint it's a lot more satisfying to see justice on the ice rather than a suspension handed out the next. At least to me it is - but perhaps I'm just a bloodthirsty meathead.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Zarley

Sounds like good old time hockey.

Obviously this argument is entirely subjective, but from a fan standpoint it's a lot more satisfying to see justice on the ice rather than a suspension handed out the next. At least to me it is - but perhaps I'm just a bloodthirsty meathead.

I like it, don't get me wrong. When I see a flame player get hit dirty I want vengeance in the form of pugilism, but that doesn't make it right IMO. There seems to be some misplaced nostalgia that had clouded the picture of what old time hockey looked like

[Iggy Snipe]

I would hate to see fighting go. Is it dangerous? Yes. Players do get hurt from it. Players get hurt way more often from the fast paced, hard hitting game though.
That is a fact. I get the protecting the players thing, but you can only take it so far before it changes the game to something less.

The best protection from players is eliminating body contact altogether. That is a fact. That wont happen though will it? So lets take fighting out, but we can still smash each other into the boards and hit each other in open ice? I get fighting is different than hitting, but the exact same risk is there, maybe more so from a hard hit with your head down.

People who say fighting adds no value to the game are crazy. Listen to any crowd when two players engage in a fight. It is louder than goals half the time. It is exciting, no doubt. The players themselves all stand up on the benches. It is an adrenaline filled moment.

What I do agree with some people is that the staged goon fights need to go. I totally agree with that, I have never been a fan of two 6-6, 230 pound guys pounding each other. Eliminate those fights and you will eliminate a lot of the one-punch knockout type of fights that are so dangerous.

They have made an instigator rule. They have made a no helmet removal rule. That is a step in the right direction. Now eliminate the goons and staged fighting.

Players who fight from in game happenings, and heat of the moment plays, those fights add value. No doubt. There is a place for fighting in hockey.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

Hypocrites,
I wonder if Stevie Y considers all the protection and ice guy's like Probert, Kocer, McCarty, Grimson, Shanahan, provided him and his team mates over much of his career.

Yzerman delivered the eulogy at Bob Probert's funeral, so he probably has considered that.

I've seen some decent "keep it in the game" arguments in this thread, but...

Yzerman put as much into it as any hockey player, ever. Scotty Bowman is arguably the greatest hockey coach to ever stand behind a bench.

Now sure, it's not outside the realm of possibility that there are people on this board who are more qualified than Yzerman and Bowman to talk about hockey, but I'm pretty sure Gordie Howe doesn't post here, and Toe Blake is dead.

So, if you aren't Gordie Howe, and you aren't the ghost of Toe Blake, go ahead and disagree, but it's pretty goddamn dumb to question the qualifications of Steve Yzerman and Scotty Bowman.

[Stay Golden]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Yzerman delivered the eulogy at Bob Probert's funeral, so he probably has considered that.

I've seen some decent "keep it in the game" arguments in this thread, but...

Yzerman put as much into it as any hockey player, ever. Scotty Bowman is arguably the greatest hockey coach to ever stand behind a bench.

Now sure, it's not outside the realm of possibility that there are people on this board who are more qualified than Yzerman and Bowman to talk about hockey, but I'm pretty sure Gordie Howe doesn't post here, and Toe Blake is dead.

So, if you aren't Gordie Howe, and you aren't the ghost of Toe Blake, go ahead and disagree, but it's pretty goddamn dumb to question the qualifications of Steve Yzerman and Scotty Bowman.

what a weird post. I didn't question Stevie's, Bowman, or Shero's QUALIFCATIONS.
I said Stevie and Shero are being hypocrites.
Shero has employed some of the more notorious scrappers and tea bags and Stevie Y benefited from having guys like Probert, Kocer, McCarty police the Red Wings.
As for the great Scotty Bowman I never mentioned him so get off your pulpit.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

what a weird post. I didn't question Stevie's, Bowman, or Shero's QUALIFCATIONS.
I said Stevie and Shero are being hypocrites.
Shero has employed some of the more notorious scrappers and tea bags and Stevie Y benefited from having guys like Probert, Kocer, McCarty police the Red Wings.
As for the great Scotty Bowman I never mentioned him so get off your pulpit.

Whoopsy-daisy, my bad. Only the first line of my reply was in response to you. You ignored it, but that's okay.

The rest of it was in response to the sentiment in this thread from a few posters that Scotty Bowman, Steve Yzerman, and Jim Rutherford, despite their Hall of Fame resumés, don't understand hockey because they either never played, or aren't playing tonight, and that's just dumb.

I apologize for dragging you into that.

As for hypocrites, some people do change their minds over time. Is that against the rules? You say Yzerman is a hypocrite now, because he had all those tough guys looking out for him back when.

Maybe his opinion changed? Is that hypocrisy?

[WilderPegasus]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

As for hypocrites, some people do change their minds over time. Is that against the rules? You say Yzerman is a hypocrite now, because he had all those tough guys looking out for him back when.

Maybe his opinion changed? Is that hypocrisy?

Since it wasn't his decision to play with enforcers because he wasn't the coach or GM I don't see how he could be a hypocrite.

[craigwd]

Originally Posted by RyZ

At some point this season Mcgrattan and Macintyre are going to square off and no matter if it is at the Dome or in Rexall the fans are gong to blow the roof off the building. It will likely be the most talked about part of the game and there wont be a single person sitting on their hands.

A dozen people in Pitt Meadows surrounded, cheered, and took photos while that girl getting raped. It doesn't make it right.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by craigwd

A dozen people in Pitt Meadows surrounded, cheered, and took photos while that girl getting raped. It doesn't make it right.

Rape compared to willing combatants in a hockey fight? Please think before typing.

Please consider the context of your judgments.

Sorry to comment in the absence of the extreme thumbs down

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by craigwd

A dozen people in Pitt Meadows surrounded, cheered, and took photos while that girl getting raped. It doesn't make it right.

A patently ######ed comparison. You should be ashamed of yourself.

[Itse]

Since fighting is obviously dangerous, the people who keep coming up with these excuses for fighting should come up with some kind of facts to back up their claims that there are also benefits.

For example; if fights or having known fighters "keep the opposition honest", then that would logically mean that they make less dangerous plays, which should result in less injuries?

Please show that this is the case, this shouldn't be too hard as a statistical exercise. Feel free to come up with another statistical method if you can think of a better one.

I'm getting tired of people trying to build a case for fighting without anything in the way of facts to back them up. Just saying it doesn't make it so.