Yzerman, Shero and Rutherford want to explore eliminating fighting

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Then it will just snowball due to the major amount of concussions come from body checks. If fighting leaves the NHL you can bet body checking will follow shortly after. Any type of hard hit will be illegal. Body checks, not fighting is the biggest liability risk in hockey.

Removing a player from the puck via a clean check is a hockey play and requires skill to execute within the flow of the action.

Stopping the game altogether, removing your equipment, and landing haymakers on an opponent is very different. Its actually a hinderance to the flow of the game. Fighting and hitting are not even remotely the same thing. Risk of injury in something that is part of the game is very different than risk of injury from something that is by and large pretty useless.

[zukes]

I'm fine with an ohl level of removing it. It reduces almost all of the goon vs. goon just because fights.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

If they did ban fighting some guy with money will start a hockey league where fighting will be the showcase. A bunch of goon teams.

Complete with teams loaded with players who are barely a grade better than beer league level regulars. The level of hockey played wouldn't even rival the ECHL, and you think that any more than a handful of patrons would actually pay money to watch this?

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

If they did ban fighting some guy with money will start a hockey league where fighting will be the showcase. A bunch of goon teams.

Cool, and people can watch that "hockey" along with their WWE, UFC, boxing, etc.

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Absolutely agreed, getting rid of goons should be the priority right now. They're taking the spot of guys that can, you know, actually play the game.

I think the fix to that is to pick a number of fights and start suspensions after that.

Fights 1-5 = no suspension
Fight 5 = 1 game suspension
Fight 6 = 2 game suspension
Fight 7 = 4 game suspension
Fight 8 = 8 game suspension
Fight 9 = 16 game suspension
Fight 10 = 32 game suspension
etc.

Reset the meter with every season and see what happens.

There should also be a measurement of fights per team so that you do not simply bring up a fighter for 5 games and then swap him for another fighter.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Igottago

Removing a player from the puck via a clean check is a hockey play and requires skill to execute within the flow of the action.

Stopping the game altogether, removing your equipment, and landing haymakers on an opponent is very different. Its actually a hinderance to the flow of the game. Fighting and hitting are not even remotely the same thing.

The flow has nothing to do with it. We were talking about player safety and liability. Body checking results in way more concussions and injuries than fighting.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

If they did ban fighting some guy with money will start a hockey league where fighting will be the showcase. A bunch of goon teams.

He Hate Me says hi

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Come on, are you guys in this thread that are against fighting honestly saying you don't enjoy watching Grats beat the living hell out of some Oiler or Canuck that desperately deserves it?

I think most of us enjoy watching fights, but we're just starting to realize that the added enjoyment that we get isn't worth the long-term health risks to the players.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Complete with teams loaded with players who are barely a grade better than beer league level regulars. The level of hockey played wouldn't even rival the ECHL, and you think that any more than a handful of patrons would actually pay money to watch this?

People pretend to watch people fight in the WWE. Yes, I really think there would be a market for it. Not from me but many would watch.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Then it will just snowball due to the major amount of concussions come from body checks. If fighting leaves the NHL you can bet body checking will follow shortly after. Any type of hard hit will be illegal. Body checks, not fighting is the biggest liability risk in hockey.

Don't forget getting rid of the ice, that's slippery, much like the ridiculous slope your argument rests upon.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by gargamel

I think most of us enjoy watching fights, but we're just starting to realize that the added enjoyment that we get isn't worth the long-term health risks to the players.

Ok, then take out big hits. If the issue here is health risks then that should be the 1st thing to go.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

People pretend to watch people fight in the WWE. Yes, I really think there would be a market for it. Not from me but many would watch.

I love that you mentioned WWE. The non-##### XFL really lasted.

[GirlySports]

I agree with Yzerman, anything goes or eliminated it, can't have NHL office be this hypocritcal, condemn fighting but love when it happens.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by valo403

Don't forget getting rid of the ice, that's slippery, much like the ridiculous slope your argument rests upon.

So you are saying more people get hurt from fights in hockey than body checking? Ya, ok.

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Ok, then take out big hits. If the issue here is health risks then that should be the 1st thing to go.

You can take out fighting without fundamentally changing the game, but you can't do that with big hits. It all comes down to risk/reward, and the reward for allowing fighting just doesn't seem to be worth it any more.

[WilderPegasus]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Come on, are you guys in this thread that are against fighting honestly saying you don't enjoy watching Grats beat the living hell out of some Oiler or Canuck that desperately deserves it?

You are sick. Do you really enjoy watching someone getting brain damage?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Zevo

e. Don't mind fighting eventually going the way of the Dodo bird, but not as a knee jerk reaction. Would be my vote.

Define a "knee-jerk reaction". My way of approaching this issue is to question the value and purpose of fighting in hockey. Can anyone actually make a convincing case for fighting as a useful deterrent to sickwork and other in-game intended acts of violence? I have yet to see one. If its only purpose is to entertain fans, is this enough of a reason to risk players safety and long-term quality of life? I say no. If it serves no purpose, then what possible reason is there to delay its removal altogether?

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

The flow has nothing to do with it. We were talking about player safety and liability. Body checking results in way more concussions and injuries than fighting.

Except (and the point that Igottago is trying to make) is that the body check is an accepted hockey play that is used as an actual part of the game. Fighting is more like an intermission where the hockey stops and the mini-show begins.

That would be the line that one would draw while trying to ban fighting and keep checking.

[dissentowner]

Personally I could care less if fighting stays or not but somebody has to argue the other side.

[WilderPegasus]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Personally I could care less if fighting stays or not but somebody has to argue the other side.

So you're just trolling then?

[Igottago]

I think when I saw Ivanans get KO'd a couple seasons ago I probably started to seriously reconsider my stance on fighting. To the point now I actually look at it and feel embarrassed by it sometimes. I don't need to watch some machismo ritual interupt a hockey game anymore.