Should fighting be banned?

[DaneykoIsGod]

We've got this tired old debate waging, more or less, in two different threads. So let's consolidate ... let the Sid thread be about Sid and the other thread be about the player who lost his life.

Should fighting be banned in the NHL, yes or no?

Personally, I think it's part of the game. Hockey is a violent sport and there are aspects that refs just can't control. It isn't illegal for a fourth-line player to hit your undersized skill player. If if your fourth-liner punches their fourth-liner in the face a few times, he might think twice before taking a run at someone smaller and more valuable to his team than him. It's not a perfect way of doing things, but we've seen it work in New Jersey this season. When Ryan Hollweg took a run at Zach Parise (legal hit), Mike Rupp used his fists to make Hollweg bleed from the head later that shift. By my memory, Hollweg didn't go near Zach the rest of the game.

In a perfect world for some people, we could have an NHL of 30 teams where every slot on the roster is filled by a skill guy. But that ain't happening. There will always be players who earn their living with physical play. As long as they're in the game, someone needs to protect the skill guys and let them do their thing. The Penguins are a good example of this concept. Last year with a big guy like Georges Laraque doing the dirty work, Sidney and Malkin lit up the scoreboards while the Pens went all the way to the Cup Finals. This year with no Laraque, Sidney (while still scoring at a decent clip) is getting his hands dirty standing up for himself and his teammates when he should be out there playing a skilled game instead. Let the goons good it up while the skill guys skill it up.

And the actions that instigate these fights will not cease if players are no longer allowed to fight. We see fights started in all sports: football players, usually linemen, pushing and shoving and smacking each others' helmets after a late hit; baseball players clearing the benches after a brushback; basketball players fighting fans or each other after a tossed beer or a hard foul. Hockey is just as violent, if not more so, as all those sports. Tempers will flare. If fighting isn't allowed, then you have a sport where there are 12 p!ssed off dudes skating around with weapons in their hands. Violent stick incidents have happened for as long as the game has been around, but you can bet they'd be more frequent if dropping the gloves wasn't an option, IMO.

We've all got opinions on this, and most of us have already shared them at least once or twice on this forum. What's one more gonna hurt?

[Baggy Spandex]

No. Fighting needs to stay

Reasons?

Sometimes, it keeps this crap from happening.

Edited January 6, 2009 by Baggy Spandex

[Dadds3424]

i feel really bad for Don Sanderson because i never want to see that happen to anyone, but i think fighting has always been a part of the game and i think it is also a bg part of the game

[Coorslight]

Just say no.

[sameblood]

I don't think so. Unfortunate things can happen no matter how hard they try to avoid them. I mean, look at the throats that have been cut just as the game was going on normally. I do actually think it's safer to let them vent their frustrations in an organized way.

I'm trying to say this without sounding completely insensitive but it doesn't seem to be working.

[eaglejelly]

No. Fighting needs to stay

Reasons?

Sometimes, it keeps this crap from happening.

Not a good argument, that crap happened with fighting allowed.

In reality the league is very schizophrenic about fighting. They let the players fight, and then

[Chorske17]

Fighting DID NOT kill Don Sanderson. His head hitting the ice did, however.

Until equipment is worn correctly I hardly think anyone or anything can be blamed. I see the "Cool" look on chin strap were it is really loose (and really not being worn the way it was intended) and kids chewing on mouth guards instead of wearing them (see Patrik Kane who is hardly the only one doing it, but the first that comes to mind).

I do think a bigger step towards preventing cheap shots need to be made. Players who have taken cheap shots like Chris Simon, Sidney Crosby, Tie Domi, McSorley, Downie, Claude Lemieux ,Steve Moore, Bertuzzi (ironically back on Moore for his to Naslund), and Dale Hunter (to name a few) need bigger suspensions (or in the case of Crosby a suspension period) for their actions. Perhaps the "eye for an eye" rule stating you don't play until that player returns to ice plus your suspension as handed down by the league. That would deter a lot I think.

The NHL needs to figure out what to do.

[Elias26]

3rd pole in a few weeks. Answer is still the same. NO

[theamazingtiny]

I don't think it's needed. And only hurts the sport from gaining mass appeal. No other sport has fighting and plenty of other sports are violent.

[msweet]

No... In fact remove the instigator rule

I am so sick of this PC culture we've turned into.

[Don]

Stupid poll.

Romans absolutely loved seeing Christians thrown to the lions.

People love seeing violence done to other people. We are a very savage species.

Look at Somalia. If there are no laws banning violence towards others, then it becomes pestilent, internecine. Hell, look at Rwanda... people killed as many innocent people as they could for fun.

[mrthemike]

Fighting has to stay. I can fall down the stairs and bang my head. It's just crappy luck. Fighting is an integral part of the game.

[Triumph]

I don't think fighting keeps hockey from mass appeal, though it does put the game in a different class from other sports. It is great to have the catharsis of not only seeing your team win, but seeing the opposing fighter get his ass kicked (i.e. Game 1 of the 2005-06 playoffs vs. the Rangers). On the other hand, I think the league has recognized that the phenomenon of late-game fights in blowout contests is not overall good for the game and has tried to put a stop to that.

I certainly don't think fighting is integral, considering that the majority of professional and amateur leagues around the world have it banned, and that the Stanley Cup winning Red Wings are consistently at the bottom of the league in fighting majors.

Eventually something like this will happen in the NHL and it will force the game to examine whether or not fighting should be allowed. As it stands now, it is mostly a sideshow attraction and little more. Occasionally a fight will be for a reason, but much of the time it is merely to fight - the heavyweights around the league know the only way they keep their jobs is if they drop the gloves on occasion.

Edited January 6, 2009 by Triumph

[SatansDevils]

NO. It needs to stay. It is part of the game and hopefully it will always be part of the game. A few more incidents like that though, the NHL may take that look to ban fighting in the NHL. Some fans just come to the games to see if there would be some fights during the games for excitement. It is bad enough that the "new" NHL has changed a lot of rules and the style of the game. Like Msweet said. Get rid of the instigator penalty and rule before even thinking of getting rid of fighting.

[mouse]

I don't think fighting keeps hockey from mass appeal, though it does put the game in a different class from other sports. It is great to have the catharsis of not only seeing your team win, but seeing the opposing fighter get his ass kicked (i.e. Game 1 of the 2005-06 playoffs vs. the Rangers). On the other hand, I think the league has recognized that the phenomenon of late-game fights in blowout contests is not overall good for the game and has tried to put a stop to that.

I certainly don't think fighting is integral, considering that the majority of professional and amateur leagues around the world have it banned, and that the Stanley Cup winning Red Wings are consistently at the bottom of the league in fighting majors.

Eventually something like this will happen in the NHL and it will force the game to examine whether or not fighting should be allowed. As it stands now, it is mostly a sideshow attraction and little more. Occasionally a fight will be for a reason, but much of the time it is merely to fight - the heavyweights around the league know the only way they keep their jobs is if they drop the gloves on occasion.

Which is pretty good evidence that fighting happens for a reason. If a heavyweight fights, a lot of the time something serious happens. Skill players are protected just because heavyweights are on the roster.

[Devil Fan]

No-brainer (which is no)

[mikeford]

I certainly don't think fighting is integral, considering that the majority of professional and amateur leagues around the world have it banned, and that the Stanley Cup winning Red Wings are consistently at the bottom of the league in fighting majors.

With this said, it makes me wonder how prevalent fighting is around European leagues. The Wings are predominantly European (mostly swedes), so is this the reason they don't drop the gloves?

[Don]

Fighting DID NOT kill Don Sanderson. His head hitting the ice did, however.

Given that the opponent ripped the helmet off, that is like saying "well that bank guard wouldn't have died from a bullet to the heart if he had have been wearing the bulletproof vest the robber took off him".

Amazing the difference a day makes. Yesterday it was all "RIP Don Sanderson". Today it is "Don Sanderson would be alive today if he were not such an idiot not wearing his helmet tightly enough".

[Triumph]

Which is pretty good evidence that fighting happens for a reason. If a heavyweight fights, a lot of the time something serious happens. Skill players are protected just because heavyweights are on the roster.

no, it's not. most heavyweight fights are in the first period on their first or second shift to 'get the team going' or 'get the crowd into it' or some other dubious nonsense. most heavyweight players are on the bench by the third period.

skill players are protected by the rules of the game. they are also protected by players who will fight, but clearly one is more responsible for their safety than the other.

mikeford: fighting is banned overseas - it's an automatic game misconduct, and might be more than that depending on the league. nonetheless, here is johnny oduya fighting in a swedish league game:

[theamazingtiny]

Which is pretty good evidence that fighting happens for a reason. If a heavyweight fights, a lot of the time something serious happens. Skill players are protected just because heavyweights are on the roster.

Whats wrong with letting the refs enforce the rules?

[theamazingtiny]

I don't think fighting keeps hockey from mass appeal, though it does put the game in a different class from other sports. It is great to have the catharsis of not only seeing your team win, but seeing the opposing fighter get his ass kicked (i.e. Game 1 of the 2005-06 playoffs vs. the Rangers). On the other hand, I think the league has recognized that the phenomenon of late-game fights in blowout contests is not overall good for the game and has tried to put a stop to that.

I certainly don't think fighting is integral, considering that the majority of professional and amateur leagues around the world have it banned, and that the Stanley Cup winning Red Wings are consistently at the bottom of the league in fighting majors.

Eventually something like this will happen in the NHL and it will force the game to examine whether or not fighting should be allowed. As it stands now, it is mostly a sideshow attraction and little more. Occasionally a fight will be for a reason, but much of the time it is merely to fight - the heavyweights around the league know the only way they keep their jobs is if they drop the gloves on occasion.

I agree with all your points. Doesn't the fact that the Red Wings are consistently at the bottom just prove how useless fighting is to achieving the end goal of every team? Doesn't it seem telling that most of these enforcers and bruisers are out of the lineup come playoff time? Wouldn't you agree that the different class of sport is in most people's mind a lower class? You might disagree with my conclusion that removing fighting would open hockey to more mass appeal but we both seem to agree fighting only hurts the sport.

[Troy Crowder]

I always believed that with the ban of fighting in hockey would come increased stick infractions. If I was to personally measure the risk of serious injury by comparing the two I would have to say a stick could cause a greater injury. What happened to the young player that lost his life is indeed a tragic event, however removing fighting from the game is not the answer. Young kids have been killed by batted balls in Little League play, and in some parts of the country the composite bat was outlawed. Our game has undergone some drastic post lock out changes. As a traditionalist I'm still struggling to adapt. Some things must be left in the game and fighting I believe is one of them. Here is a list of what I think should be returned or removed from the game;

1. Do not secure water bottles to the top of the goal nets. When a top shelf goal is scored the water bottle should pop up in the air and land on the ice

2. Put the center line back in. Too many cherry pickers in the league now. I like 2-1 games!

3. In overtime, take a ref off the ice, two is too many.

4. Put Matt Loughlin back on TV and put Steve Cangelosi on the radio. He has a far head made for radio.

5. The goalies stick glove is a waffle board not a blocker.

6. Get rid of the trapezoid. It's stupid and adds nothing to the game.

7. The overweight guy who sits in 233 who feels compelled to take his shirt off during the game, thanks for making me feel good about my own weight problem.

8. Ranger fans who attend Devil games and root for the other team while the Rangers are playing a home game the same night. You're an idiot, at least go home and watch it on TV.

9. Dollar Dog Night are cool, dollar Beer Nights would be really cool.

10. We need a good bar outside the arena. The Arena Lounge is a joke, it looks like a Turkish Bathhouse inside.

[mikeford]

9. Dollar Dog Night are cool, dollar Beer Nights would be really cool.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Cent_Beer_Night

Not the best idea in the world, unfortunately.

[Prucenterrules]

You can't take fighting out. It helps players police themselves. If you take out fighting you will see a rise in cheapshots because players can't settle things by dropping the gloves.

[DaneykoIsGod]

I agree with all your points. Doesn't the fact that the Red Wings are consistently at the bottom just prove how useless fighting is to achieving the end goal of every team? Doesn't it seem telling that most of these enforcers and bruisers are out of the lineup come playoff time? Wouldn't you agree that the different class of sport is in most people's mind a lower class? You might disagree with my conclusion that removing fighting would open hockey to more mass appeal but we both seem to agree fighting only hurts the sport.

True, but didn't the Red Wings add Darren McCarty to the lineup right before the playoffs? It's not like they added him for his goal scoring prowess. One of the values of having fighting in the game is that the mere presence of someone who is a "fighter" will help create room for your skill players.

And like Tri said, fighting is illegal in Euro leagues. But, as the video he included proved, that doesn't mean fighing doesn't happen. Fights will always be a part of sports.

Personally, I believe that if fighting was made illegal, we'd see more Sean Averys running around in the NHL. Pests are OK, but they all occasionally need to be punched repeatedly in the face.