Let's take shots to the head out of the game!

[Stoner]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Enj_6Br9gQQ

 

Ban fighting. What does this garbage add to a wonderful sport? The time has come.

[sabregoats]

I for one enjoy fights, not necessarily when two goons go at it, but definatley when it is in response to a cheap shot. It is one of the few places in sports where emotions aren't held completely in check. I think it is fun to watch as long as no one gets seriously hurt, which rarely happens as both players are on skates which makes it hard to get good punches in. Also, let it be known that i am not just a blood thirsty fan, I hate the head hunting that occurs in the game, but fights are a natural part of hockey that should be here to stay.

[mrjsbu96]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Enj_6Br9gQQ

 

Ban fighting. What does this garbage add to a wonderful sport? The time has come.

 

As long as hockey finally accepts that it will never - with or without fighting - be a major league sport on the same level as the football, baseball, and basketball (and hell, golf and auto racing), than fightings stays.

 

At what point in a game does the crowd usually go most ballistic? i was watching the ranger game last night and in the 3-5 seconds before that fight got going the place was nuts. watch the fan reaction in the OTT/BUFF game a month back. it is engrained in the sport. there is a code that fighters learn as they progress up the ranks that you back off when the other guy is hurt in a fight and you protect your stars and to me that makes fighting all the while worth it...

[MichFan]

I understand the need for fighting ... that having fighting in the game ultimately makes it safer for the players. But the crap that Peters pulled last night -- uninstigated, during a clean game -- that should draw a game misconduct and possibly even a suspension. It served no purpose other than to make him look like an idiot. It was not a natural part of last night's game, it was a freak sideshow attraction.

[Claude Balls]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Enj_6Br9gQQ

 

Ban fighting. What does this garbage add to a wonderful sport? The time has come.

You can't ban something that has been in the game as long as the game has been around. It's no worse than UFC or boxing. The KOs are far and few between. It takes talent to fight with skates on. If any sport should ban fighting it should be indoor lacrosse. Those guys being on their feet could definitely hurt each other.

[bcsaberks]

+1 for eliminating goons / designated fighters. When lydman or "yo-yo" fights, that's real, good stuff. When Peters does his thing its pretty stupid.

[blugold43]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Enj_6Br9gQQ

 

Ban fighting. What does this garbage add to a wonderful sport? The time has come.

i agree. it's ridiculous. the international game is just fine without it. i wish the nhl would get rid of it.

 

and peters... :doh:

[Seth Greenstein]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Enj_6Br9gQQ

 

Ban fighting. What does this garbage add to a wonderful sport? The time has come.

 

Couldn't disagree more. I believe that fighting is the way that the sport polices itself. I believe that the addition of the Instigator rule can be where we can trace this increase in violent stick work to. When you knew that there was physical retribution to your actions, the violent stick work was kept to a minimum. I understand that it happened even when the Instigator rule wasn't around (see Dino Cicirelli (sp?), Dale Hunter, etc.). But those were isolated incidents.

 

When you knew that any illegal act that you performed could mean that you could your lights knocked out with a fist to the face, it kept the illegal work to a minimum. When I swing my stick at someone, my punishment could be 10 games. That doesn't "hurt". If the punishment was 5 games and a broken jaw in a fight and I'll be drinking my cheeseburgers for the next month, then I'd think twice about it.

 

Fighting is the way that players police themselves. With the addition of the instigator rule, what the NHL in it's infinite wisdom has done is allow the perpetrators of these violent acts to get away with a penalty and some money but no physical retribution. And in a sport like hockey, that is critical.

 

Penalizing a professional poker player with a fine might mean something. To the guys who ON AVERAGE make $2million (Salary cap of $44 mil divided by 22 players), a $100,000 fine is nothing to them.

 

When players police themselves, the players will maintain control and yes, occasionally, you'll have things like the Sabres-Senators brawl from a couple of months ago, but generally speaking, things will be taken care of on the ice and the cheap shots will diminish.

 

There are, just like in general society, bad guys in the NHL who will do stupid things (see Tootoo). But with the Instigator taken out, we're allowing anyone to get away with anything.

[nfreeman]

If it were up to me, I'd ban fighting. However, I care much less about fighting than I do about after-the-play cheap shots, e.g. Ovechkin-Briere, Neil-Drury, Tucker-Hecht and Jannsen-Kaberle. Especially when blows to the head are involved. I would give out substantial suspensions for cheap shots like those, and escalate significantly for repeat offenders. I don't understand why the NHL hasn't done this. Invariably the victims of these cheap shots are the stars, which the NHL needs for an exciting, profitable product.

[Claude Balls]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Enj_6Br9gQQ

 

Ban fighting. What does this garbage add to a wonderful sport? The time has come.

How can you call it a wonderful sport if you don't like the fighting? It's been part of the game ever since you have been watching it. It's also not "adding" anything, like I said, it's always been there. I don't know how long you have been watching hockey, but the NHL has done a good job in reducing the fighting. 20-25 years ago there were at least 1,2 maybe 3 fights a game and you never went a month without seeing a good bench clearing brawl. Fighting is nothing like it used to be.

[Stoner]

How can you call it a wonderful sport if you don't like the fighting? It's been part of the game ever since you have been watching it. It's also not "adding" anything, like I said, it's always been there. I don't know how long you have been watching hockey, but the NHL has done a good job in reducing the fighting. 20-25 years ago there were at least 1,2 maybe 3 fights a game and you never went a month without seeing a good bench clearing brawl. Fighting is nothing like it used to be.

 

Hey, I remember the 30-minute delays, or longer, for bench clearing brawls. It led to the loss of one of the great moments in sports: the bench clearing celebration. Go look at the some of the old highlight reels of the Sabres in the 70s. Luce would score a second shorthanded goal and the players would bomb out. So cool. But the league banned it when the brawls got out of control.

 

I hope fighting just naturally peters out (ha), but why not just give it the final shove out the door?

 

Again, the point is you can't rail against the blow to the head and cheer fighting. Makes no sense.

 

 

 

As long as hockey finally accepts that it will never - with or without fighting - be a major league sport on the same level as the football, baseball, and basketball (and hell, golf and auto racing), than fightings stays.

At what point in a game does the crowd usually go most ballistic? i was watching the ranger game last night and in the 3-5 seconds before that fight got going the place was nuts. watch the fan reaction in the OTT/BUFF game a month back. it is engrained in the sport. there is a code that fighters learn as they progress up the ranks that you back off when the other guy is hurt in a fight and you protect your stars and to me that makes fighting all the while worth it...

 

At what point is it usually most excited? Overtime. And I can't remember the last time a fight broke out in overtime -- or the last time someone delivered a cheap shot. Why? The hockey game is the thing. And it's so entertaining, the other garbage isn't needed. Same thing with playoff games: very few fights, if any. Coincidence?

[jad1]

Hey, I remember the 30-minute delays, or longer, for bench clearing brawls. It led to the loss of one of the great moments in sports: the bench clearing celebration. Go look at the some of the old highlight reels of the Sabres in the 70s. Luce would score a second shorthanded goal and the players would bomb out. So cool. But the league banned it when the brawls got out of control.

 

I hope fighting just naturally peters out (ha), but why not just give it the final shove out the door?

 

Again, the point is you can't rail against the blow to the head and cheer fighting. Makes no sense.

At what point is it usually most excited? Overtime. And I can't remember the last time a fight broke out in overtime -- or the last time someone delivered a cheap shot. Why? The hockey game is the thing. And it's so entertaining, the other garbage isn't needed. Same thing with playoff games: very few fights, if any. Coincidence?

 

Banning fighting could be a bad idea. Sometimes a guy just needs to be stood up, especially when that guy plays to the edge of the rules, like Domi or Neil.

 

There are a lot of players whose only goal is to disrupt the opposing team. So you can either send a guy like Peters out to stand him up, or you can have your skill guys play duck-and-cover all night long.

 

Self-policing is also a huge element. Hockey has to be the most difficult game to officiate. Calls are missed, and players take liberties. If you don't provide an outlet to the players to respond to these actions, dirty plays will actually increase.

 

And blind-sided shots to the head and late hits are far worse than fighting. After Neil walloped Drury, he fought Stafford. Drury ended up sitting in a pool of his own blood while Stafford scored the winner in the shootout. Dirty hits to the head result in far more severe injuries than fighting.

 

Finally, there are several exciting moments in a hockey game, that's what makes it a great sport. Just because overtime may be more exciting than a fight, doesn't nullify the fact that a fight could be exciting.

[Claude Balls]

Again, the point is you can't rail against the blow to the head and cheer fighting. Makes no sense.

At what point is it usually most excited? Overtime. And I can't remember the last time a fight broke out in overtime -- or the last time someone delivered a cheap shot. Why? The hockey game is the thing. And it's so entertaining, the other garbage isn't needed. Same thing with playoff games: very few fights, if any. Coincidence?

Sure you can cheer fighting. Fighting is a choice between two willing parties. Cheapshots to the head are not a choice. There is a huge difference between the two. Cheapshots need to be better controlled by the league. If the league banned fighting, cheapshots would be more common due to the lack of retribution the dirty party would recieve. You can ban fighting, but your Tucker's, Neil's, Tootoo's, Marchment's, Barnaby's are still going to be around to dish out the dirty hits and then you have no one to retaliate. If you remember the 70s then you should also notice that cheapshots have increased since the instigator rule was instilled.

 

I agree there is less fighting in the playoffs, but there are also less cheapshots too. Although, there is more fighting in the Western Conference than the Eastern during the playoffs.

[Stoner]

Let me debate myself for a minute here. Hey PA, how do you "ban" fighting anyway? I guess you make the penalties so severe, there is a great deterrent to doing it. But it COULD still happen, when absolutely necessary (Stafford on Neil, some will argue). What a "ban" on fighting could do is get rid of the silly fights, like Peters vs. Brashear when it had nothing to do with the game whatsoever.

 

This is always a good debate. You guys make great points.

[pkwwjd]

Just think back to the great days of fighting, when the Bruins would crawl into the stands to take on their fans ...

[Claude Balls]

Let me debate myself for a minute here. Hey PA, how do you "ban" fighting anyway? I guess you make the penalties so severe, there is a great deterrent to doing it. But it COULD still happen, when absolutely necessary (Stafford on Neil, some will argue). What a "ban" on fighting could do is get rid of the silly fights, like Peters vs. Brashear when it had nothing to do with the game whatsoever.

 

This is always a good debate. You guys make great points.

I understand your points as well. There's good and bad points to just about everything really. Like the shootout. I don't mind it, but some people hate it. I think the losing team getting 1 point is ridiculous, but that's a whole other debate.

[wonderbread]

if i may interject, i enjoy fighting for what it is worth. Policing dirty hits, head hunting, etc etc etc. Sometimes it dioes turn into a comedy of sorts (example Peters v Brasher) but where do you draw the line sure you could say that stafford v neil was a direct result of the hit on Drury and you could also say that Peters and Brasher was bullspit but there is just to much gray in between to draw a definite line, you cant say this fight is ok and this fight is not. Its similar to hits to the head. I enjoy the game when there is an actual emotional fight a grudge match fight. but these fights lately have almost been annoying to the point of me wanting Peters to get knocked out just so he will stop. oh well the post season is almost here and like some one else said Peters will be enjoying the buffet or better yet meeting Darcy Tucker for a good day on the course. Sorry for my rant i can be a passenger for only so long

[connee]

The problems is these goons that can't play hockey, started by the Philadelphia Flyers and the disgusting Dave Schultz who was hired to bodyguard that little twerp Bobby Clarke. This goon started to attack non fighters, like when he assaulted John Van Boxmeer and knocked him unconcious. Back then, the Flyer goons used to get arrested for their antics, then all the other teams hired their own goons and we have the system of today. I hate when these "players" are called "tough guys" or "enforcers". They're goons who can't play hockey and that includes Peters and Rob Ray. It was OK when real players fought in the old days, like Johnnie McKenzie or Jerry Korab, but goons are an embarrassment to the NHL IMHOhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmIpIR3exrE

[SabresFan526]

I don't particularly have a problem with fighting per se, but I have a problem with what fighting has become. I don't have a problem with fights that are due to retribution for a dirty or cheap hit. Stafford vs. Neil was a justified fight in my opinion. Subsequent shift of Peters, Mair, Kaleta vs. Ottawa Senators was also a justified fight in my opinion. That was a team rallying around a player that was cheapshotted. But, I have a problem with some of these staged fights i.e. last night's Peters - Brashear fight. It really served no purpose beyond giving Peters and Brashear a reason for making a living and taking up a roster spot on a talented team. It's one thing when you are defending a player or the honor of your team. It's another when it's completely planned out. Did anyone see the Laraque - Ivanans fight from earlier this year? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zNUTSTRnz8

Laraque wished Ivanans luck before the fight?! See, that kind of fight is worthless in my opinion. So, given the situation, how do you say what kind of fight is okay and what kind of fight isn't? My personal opinion would be to keep fighting in the NHL, but get rid of all of the guys who just fight because they add little value to the game.

[blugold43]

just get rid of it, period, and call the penalties the way you're supposed to. that way you wouldn't need a "code," like in the "old days" ...all of which is a bunch of romanticized garbage imo.

 

again, the college and international games prove there is no need for this crap. you don't need goons to keep players honest (whatever that means); you just need the penalties to be called, and you need to suspend players who do stupid dangerous things (ovechkin, neil, et al.) for a very long time.

[deluca67]

You can't ban something that has been in the game as long as the game has been around. It's no worse than UFC or boxing. The KOs are far and few between. It takes talent to fight with skates on. If any sport should ban fighting it should be indoor lacrosse. Those guys being on their feet could definitely hurt each other.

 

Do you see what's wrong with you are saying here? The fact you can compare the NHL to the UFC or boxing pretty much makes the argument to eliminate fighting once and for all.

 

It's brings nothing to the game.

 

Is this really the who you want as the face of hockey?

[Taro T]

Couldn't disagree more. I believe that fighting is the way that the sport polices itself. I believe that the addition of the Instigator rule can be where we can trace this increase in violent stick work to. When you knew that there was physical retribution to your actions, the violent stick work was kept to a minimum. I understand that it happened even when the Instigator rule wasn't around (see Dino Cicirelli (sp?), Dale Hunter, etc.). But those were isolated incidents.

 

When you knew that any illegal act that you performed could mean that you could your lights knocked out with a fist to the face, it kept the illegal work to a minimum. When I swing my stick at someone, my punishment could be 10 games. That doesn't "hurt". If the punishment was 5 games and a broken jaw in a fight and I'll be drinking my cheeseburgers for the next month, then I'd think twice about it.

 

Fighting is the way that players police themselves. With the addition of the instigator rule, what the NHL in it's infinite wisdom has done is allow the perpetrators of these violent acts to get away with a penalty and some money but no physical retribution. And in a sport like hockey, that is critical.

 

Penalizing a professional poker player with a fine might mean something. To the guys who ON AVERAGE make $2million (Salary cap of $44 mil divided by 22 players), a $100,000 fine is nothing to them.

 

When players police themselves, the players will maintain control and yes, occasionally, you'll have things like the Sabres-Senators brawl from a couple of months ago, but generally speaking, things will be taken care of on the ice and the cheap shots will diminish.

 

There are, just like in general society, bad guys in the NHL who will do stupid things (see Tootoo). But with the Instigator taken out, we're allowing anyone to get away with anything.

I call BS. You admit yourself that "violent stick work" occurred prior to the instigator rule. Unless you show me a study that shows it has increased in the last 5-10 years (and until I see data proving it has, I will believe it hasn't, having watched the NHL since the early 70's), I think it is simply opinion that it's increased.

 

I won't dispute that severe shots to the head have increased in the past few years, but my question is, how much of that is headhunting, and how much is equipment?

 

And, I disagree that players should police the league. The @#%!%!#% league office officials are paid good money to police the league. If they won't do their jobs, pay someone else to do them. The NFL office "polices" football, and I can't recall the last brawl on the gridiron, but I can recall the last brawl on the ice (ESPN won't let me forget it).

[Claude Balls]

Do you see what's wrong with you are saying here? The fact you can compare the NHL to the UFC or boxing pretty much makes the argument to eliminate fighting once and for all.

 

It's brings nothing to the game.

 

Is this really the who you want as the face of hockey?

Fighting is part of the game! Deal with it. UFC bouts end with someone either getting knocked out or tapping out. Hockey fights don't usually end that way. That's why it is no worse. You totally missed the point. Did you hear Roby and Ray tonight during the intermission? Hockey is as big a part of hockey as shootouts are. Your going to have one once in a while whether it's deserved or not. You could always watch curling.

[Chief Enabler]

Unofficial Buffalo Sabres Training videos.

 

 

 

Wish we could get a Brian Murray vignette for training purposes.