Whats your opinion on fighting in the NHL?

[Twizted]

I think that fighting is ok if your a team that is winning games and it dont screw u into a loss. I think a good fight can change a game a little bit like the other night with philly. After those three fights it seemed to get there crowd fired up and changed the team to play harder too.

 

whats everyone else think?

 

i also found this on some canada website

 

But according to University Professors after a 5 year study on fighting in the nhl.

 

"An intensive numbers-crunching of five years of statistics shows major penalties -- those most often issued for fighting -- increases the total points of the offending player's team and decreases the number of goals scored by their opponents."

 

"The study compares the effect of penalties -- both minor and major -- on several factors indicating team success. The study looks at team points (the points awarded to a team for a win or a tie) as an indicator of a team's offensive outcome and at goals allowed (the number of times an opponent scores) as an indicator of defensive success."

 

Those are some tidbits, I know there has been some argument over Andrew Peters the past few weeks, personally I think hes garbage. But maybe he should should just fight someone every game. It can't hurt right? It gets him off the ice, and motivates the team.

 

[GGM]

It really depends on the situation. Personally, I enjoy the odd fight now and again, but it seems too staged in today's NHL.

 

The fights I REALLY want to see are the ones involving two teams that are "not pleased" with each other, and finally get to a point where two or three from each have a go.

 

It's all about emotion and drama...The NHL can keep its sideshows for the most part.

[deluca67]

It's a waste of time.

 

I'd rather see a solid hit, a great save or a tape to tape pass that leads to a goal.

[eddieshack]

I think that fighting is ok if your a team that is winning games and it dont screw u into a loss. I think a good fight can change a game a little bit like the other night with philly. After those three fights it seemed to get there crowd fired up and changed the team to play harder too.

 

whats everyone else think?

 

i also found this on some canada website

 

A complete waste of time, effort, and energy.

[nfreeman]

I think it frequently does change momentum and as such can be a strategic move by a coach.

 

Having said that, I don't like it and would prefer to see it banned (along with blows to the head). This would free up more roster spots for speedy skill guys and make the game even faster and more exciting.

[ofiba]

Fighting can be a good way to have the players police themselves on the ice.

[mrjsbu96]

don't ever ban it....although it does not happen as much as it used to, fighting was a way to police the cheapshot artists. they might get their cheapshot in still, but like a good WWF plot, they would eventually get what they had coming to him!

 

i'm all for speed and skill, but i still personally feel there is a place for good fighting. and not the kind of fighting that gets 'nasty.' what i mean by that is after the fight is over, or if one guy gets a decided edge in the fight, he knows when to let up. that is an unwritten rule that used to happen during fights all the time in the old days.

[TM8-PL16]

i could care less about it... and like another person mentioned it's too staged now. Someone takes a run at someone else and neither guy fights about it, each teams goon fight eachother... dumb. If it went away I wouldn't care and we'd have one more skill player in the line up every night. But that being said, if it went back to the old days of everyone having to worry about defending themselves, things would get a little more interesting and players would also think twice before doing some stuff. If I can cheap shot you and Goon A fights Goon B, what do I care... there is a possiblity that I can avoid retaliation and never have to be responsible for it. my goon will take care of it. There is a place for a so called "enforcer" but not the way it is now with that being almost exclusively who fights eachother.

[blugold43]

i have no interest at all in them...i wish they'd get rid of them.

[Orange Seats]

I kind of used to like them... but I don't miss them at all.

 

The only thing I think is lacking is a way for a team to respond to cheap shots that a losing or thuggish team is taking when, and only when, the refs are turning a blind eye to it.

[bob_sauve28]

Last night in my league two of my team mates got in a fight on our bench :D :D

 

We stood on the ice, players from both teams, shaking our heads.

[Alaska Darin]

Thankfully, because the NHL has stood up to the thuggery of fighting, we never see guys like Erik Cole throwing elbows at the head of guys like Brian Campbell. <_<

[X. Benedict]

Thankfully, because the NHL has stood up to the thuggery of fighting, we never see guys like Erik Cole throwing elbows at the head of guys like Brian Campbell. <_<

 

Interview shown on local tv tonight:

 

Reporter: Brian, what did you think of Cole's hit on you the other night.

Campbell: I told him, hit me clean all you want, but don't punch me in the head. And he

said to me, I going to be doing that to you all night long. It is pretty surprising coming

from him because he took that hit last year and had a lot to say about it (he wanted Orpik thrown out of the league) . So I just don't know.

[Sabre Dance]

I could live without seeing another hockey fight, BUT...in the "old days", if a player A took a cheap shot at player B, player B's team mates would stand up for him. Someone (or often more than one) team mate would grab player A and whale away at him, to hell with the extra 2:00. Watch any game from the Gretzky-era Oilers. Anyone laid a hand on Wayne, one of the Oilers would lay him out (Marty McSorley made his living that way). These days, that doesn't happen much anymore. I've seen players get hacked, slashed, cross-checked and no team mate even lifts a finger. If I was playing in the NHL (OK, I'm laughing at that mental picture :D ), I would want to know that my guys had my back and I certainly would watch theirs. Until we can eliminate cheap shots (not bloody likely), I think the fighting needs to stay in as a pressure valve. If things get too chippy, two guys drop the gloves and go at it. I can't say I like the "staged" ones, though. Nor do I care for someone dropping the gloves just to fire up his team. You want to fire up the team? Put in a good shift on the forecheck and set up a scoring chance.

[Alaska Darin]

Interview shown on local tv tonight:

 

Reporter: Brian, what did you think of Cole's hit on you the other night.

Campbell: I told him, hit me clean all you want, but don't punch me in the head. And he

said to me, I going to be doing that to you all night long. It is pretty surprising coming

from him because he took that hit last year and had a lot to say about it (he wanted Orpik thrown out of the league) . So I just don't know.

Get used to it. As we continue to have more and more success, it's going to happen at an increasing rate. The NHL, as with most entities that try to please everyone, has completely missed the boat on this one.

[wjag]

Interview shown on local tv tonight:

 

Reporter: Brian, what did you think of Cole's hit on you the other night.

Campbell: I told him, hit me clean all you want, but don't punch me in the head. And he

said to me, I going to be doing that to you all night long. It is pretty surprising coming

from him because he took that hit last year and had a lot to say about it (he wanted Orpik thrown out of the league) . So I just don't know.

I think this is a conference-wide reaction to the Sabres style of play. I've been giving this some thought lately. When the Sabres look fluid out there, it is because they are either just too fast for the other team or the other team is attempting to play their up-ice tempo. When the Sabres look clunky, its because the other team has chosen to play the lanes, hit, clutch, hook, etc. I suspect what you saw the other night was the realization from Carolina that they couldn't match the skating; they got frustrated and reverted to what the rest of the league is trying to do, hit, clutch and hook.

 

I think Montreal, Ottawa, Pittsburgh, Atlanta, Carolina and on some nights the Rangers and Toronto play up tempo. Teams like Florida, New Jersey, Philly, and Boston play more defensively and the games look that way. We just went thru a stretch of clutch and grab and now are admidst a stretch of high flyers with Carolina, Ottawa, Pittsburgh, and Ottawa.

[LabattBlue]

I know I stated my view recently in another thread, but fighting should be eliminated. It has become nothing more than an exercise in jersey grabbing followed by a tumble to the ice. The sooner you get rid of it, the faster that another talented minor leaguer can take the place of a goon.

[Goodfella25]

Fighting is great, it better not ever get banned from hockey. If you don't think people like it, next time you're at a game and there's a fight, take a look around you and realize that 80-90 percent of the arena is standing up and cheering. It changes the momentum of the game sometimes, and its entertaining. I think the NHL should ditch the instigator and tie-down rule, because that's what makes fighting a problem in hockey. Boring fights are stupid, and that only happens when the referees break it up too quickly or the stupid tie-downs restrict players from punching.

[BetweenThePipes00]

Boring fights are stupid, and that only happens when the referees break it up too quickly ...

 

Give me a break. Peters last "fight" he danced around for 30 seconds never throwing a punch with his head turned the other way and the refs just stood there. It was boring not because they broke it up too quick, but because Peters had no real reason to be fighting the guy ... it was just because he felt he should. It's freakin pro wrestling on skates anymore. people stand and cheer at those matches too, doesn't make it part of hockey.

 

If they still fought out of frustration with each other and anger and to truly protect stars and all that, it would be fine. But like I have said before, the enforcers just fight each other. The cheap-shot artists out there know they can do whatever they want and the goon on the team has to fight the battle for them. The only thing Peters gets frustrated about is his ice time.

 

I don't see how ditching the instigator will make a bit of difference. Every fight is agreed upon before a faceoff. The tie down thing, whatever. Let the goons dance around with no shirts on, I still don't see the allure.

 

Again, I don't have a problem with the idea, sometimes it is necessary and it can change the momentum of a game. But it loses most of that when it is just designated goons fighting each other. Very rarely does anyone who takes a regular shift fight anymore.

[Goodfella25]

If they still fought out of frustration with each other and anger and to truly protect stars and all that, it would be fine. But like I have said before, the enforcers just fight each other. The cheap-shot artists out there know they can do whatever they want and the goon on the team has to fight the battle for them. The only thing Peters gets frustrated about is his ice time.

 

I don't see how ditching the instigator will make a bit of difference. Every fight is agreed upon before a faceoff.

 

Do you know what the instigator is? It's when the referee determines one player started the fight or was the aggressor when the other player didn't want to fight. That's why someone like Peters couldn't go after, say, someone like Kasparaitis and pummel him for a cheap shot. If he does that, he'll put his team down a man, probably get booted from the game, and possible suspended. How else do you propose stopping the cheap shot artists? It's all about accountability as far as I'm concerned, and players need to be able to hold others responsible instead of getting penalized for it.

 

A couple other things:

With the wrestling analogy...are you saying all of those people are just stupid for cheering? Should they all listen to you when you tell them to sit down?

 

And the fact that you write off the tie-downs as being an issue shows you haven't looked into it at all. Before the tie-down rule, there were some great scraps because players could get their hands free and throw some punches instead of grappling like a bunch of ballroom dancers. If you don't believe me just ask Rob Ray or see Probert vs. Domi, Ray vs. Jeff Brown, Ray vs. Domi, Probert vs. McSorley, etc, etc, etc I got a whole list of great scraps.

 

It's not always the 2 enforcers fighting each other either. Most of the time it is, but there are other times when it's not the usual suspects... Just a few examples from this season: Rupp v. Greg Campbell, Paestch v. Mike Richards, Phaeuf v. Penner, Morris v. Reasoner, Mayers v. Morrow, Mair v. Eager, Kostopoulos v. Bell, Asham v. Mike Richards, Derek Armstrong v. Robidas, Thorburn v. Commodore, De Vries v. Craig, Hatcher v. Whitney, Thoresen v. Svitov, Tollefsen v. Lupul...hell even Ovechkin had a scrap in the preseason.

 

BTW, I am in agreement w/ the Peters fight, you're right on about that one. I'm not exactly a big fan of Peters anyway.

[BetweenThePipes00]

Do you know what the instigator is? It's when the referee determines one player started the fight or was the aggressor when the other player didn't want to fight. That's why someone like Peters couldn't go after, say, someone like Kasparaitis and pummel him for a cheap shot. If he does that, he'll put his team down a man, probably get booted from the game, and possible suspended. How else do you propose stopping the cheap shot artists? It's all about accountability as far as I'm concerned, and players need to be able to hold others responsible instead of getting penalized for it.

I do know what the insitgataor is. Do you really think that without it Peters would be able to get anywhere near Kasparaitis or Darcy Tucker or god forbid Mr. Stickwork Forsberg? Unless he comes off the bench, which has ALWAYS been a penalty, it ain't gonna happen. The point is every team has their designated guys, and as soon as one hits the ice, so does the other and the follow each other around until they decide to fight, and MOST (not all) of the time they only do it because they feel they have to.

 

 

With the wrestling analogy...are you saying all of those people are just stupid for cheering? Should they all listen to you when you tell them to sit down?

Go back and read what I said again. I said the fact that it was always the same guys dancing around and not really hitting each other made it like wrestling, and that is not hockey. I never said anything about the people who watch wrestling. You put that in yourself. people would stand and watch if they had a shootout at the end of every period too, that doesn't make it hockey, nor does it make the people stupid.

 

 

And the fact that you write off the tie-downs as being an issue shows you haven't looked into it at all. Before the tie-down rule, there were some great scraps because players could get their hands free and throw some punches instead of grappling like a bunch of ballroom dancers. If you don't believe me just ask Rob Ray or see Probert vs. Domi, Ray vs. Jeff Brown, Ray vs. Domi, Probert vs. McSorley, etc, etc, etc I got a whole list of great scraps.

 

Yeah, and the other great feature about not having tie-downs is that if you can get the guy's jersey over his head before he pulls his arms out, you can cave his face in because he is completely defenseless in what amounts to a straight jacket. Maybe we should make the goalies play without masks too, they would never buttefly and I bet a lot more goals are scored. And hey, we might even get to see some blood.

 

Listen, obviously you love the fighting and are a historian and that's cool. Like I said, I have no problem with it when it was Schony fighting Clark Gillies because he ran him in the corner or Danny Gare taking on anyone, no matter how much bigger than him, because he was not going to be pushed around and intimidated. Or even the Sabres as a whole basically starting a brawl in the playoffs againist Montreal in the 75 playoffs because they got beat 7-0 and 8-2 in Montreal and they needed to change that series.

 

But you know damn well that is NOT what it is anymore. It's like a whole seperate thing. 17 guys play hockey and 2 guys wait around for their turn to fight and then they don't even do it well. The game has changed and it has become annoying. That's all i am saying.

[Bmwolf21]

Fighting serves a purpose in policing some of the stickwork and cheapshots, but not much is served when two enforcers go at it. If every team had no designated enforcers, and instead had some more skilled players who can/will throw off the gloves, then the threat of having to face retribution should greatly cut down on the amount of Darcy Tucker-esque crap that goes on.

 

Interview shown on local tv tonight:

 

Reporter: Brian, what did you think of Cole's hit on you the other night.

Campbell: I told him, hit me clean all you want, but don't punch me in the head. And he

said to me, I going to be doing that to you all night long. It is pretty surprising coming

from him because he took that hit last year and had a lot to say about it (he wanted Orpik thrown out of the league) . So I just don't know.

This is where Mair or Goose needs to take Cole out to the woodshed, and diplomatically explain to him the pros and cons of trying to intimidate Soupy...

[BetweenThePipes00]

This is where Mair or Goose needs to take Cole out to the woodshed, and diplomatically explain to him the pros and cons of trying to intimidate Soupy...

 

Or better yet, someone, ANYONE, who was on the ice at the time during the same shift ... but again, instead they wait and send the "tough guys" out the next shift and the other coach does the same ... it's a puppet show.

[Bmwolf21]

I disagree, mainly b/c Mair and Gaustad are not just tough guys - they are guys who can take a regular shift, contribute AND can keep other teams honest at the same time. When a guy like Mair or Gaustad goes out there, he could be out there to bang bodies, could be trying to score a goal or draw a penalty - he's not just out there for revenge. Chances are much better that a guy like Mair or Gaustad will get a shot at Cole, while Peters likely won't.

 

On the other hand, if using one of those guys to help keep order means enduring a "puppet show" then I'll take it; I don't want to see Drury or Briere or Vanek trying to stick up for someone and breaking a hand in the process.

[BetweenThePipes00]

I disagree, mainly b/c Mair and Gaustad are not just tough guys - they are guys who can take a regular shift, contribute AND can keep other teams honest at the same time. When a guy like Mair or Gaustad goes out there, he could be out there to bang bodies, could be trying to score a goal or draw a penalty - he's not just out there for revenge. Chances are much better that a guy like Mair or Gaustad will get a shot at Cole, while Peters likely won't.

 

On the other hand, if using one of those guys to help keep order means enduring a "puppet show" then I'll take it; I don't want to see Drury or Briere or Vanek trying to stick up for someone and breaking a hand in the process.

 

Well that's just the point. That is how the game has changed ... you have expensive skill guys who no one wants to see get hurt, so there are a select few guys who have to do it, and only with each other. It's not really PART of the game anymore, it's separate. I'm not saying it's BETTER, it's just different, and it is so different I don't think it can be legislated back in, no matter what rules you change.