Forsy Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Pretty weak arguments supporting fighting coming from the "true hockey fans" in the red corner. Logical, rational discussion involving statiatics and science coming out of the blue corner. You guys supporting fighting should probably just stop. It's not an argument you can easily win. The name calling and straw man argument is not working. I'm not saying that fighting should be gone either, I'm just saying that if you wish to intelligently support fighting, it's going to be difficult because fighting is not intelligent. All you guys can do is beat your chest and grunt "that's the way it is" without actually making a solid supportive stance solidifying "fightings place in hockey". And I don't need any poll to tell me that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal1 Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 If the instigator rule was removed, fighting would keep the players honest. All the Cooke's and Kaleta's of the league would be ragdolled and beaten down when they took liberties out on the ice. That's how you cut down on repeat offenders. No one gives a crap about a phone call from Brendan Shanahan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmlmommy Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 I have no issues with a good old fashioned fight, its exciting and I for one will be the first to admit that when one of our tough guys lays out an opponent, I cheer.... Taking fighting out of the game of hockey will cause more and more cheap shots, thus causing more serious injuries than what would come from some bare knuckles to the face. It is IMPOSSIBLE to have that much testosterone on the ice in such a physical, high spirited game like hockey and expect the players to be gentlemen 100% of the time..... its not going to happen.... ever. Thats is all..... from a female fans point of view Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rey Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Shows you how little NHL players know about the game. See this: "As part of the Hockey Night in Canada/NHLPA player poll this year, we once again asked the players whether they would like to abolish the instigator rule. Last year, 66 per cent of the respondents wanted to keep the instigator rule. This year, only 53 per cent wanted to hang on to the rule." (from HNIC website, a poll of current NHL players). That was survey done by the NHLPA of NHL players. Still 53% do NOT want the instigator rule abolished. They just don't understand, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronning4center Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Pretty weak arguments supporting fighting coming from the "true hockey fans" in the red corner. Logical, rational discussion involving statiatics and science coming out of the blue corner. You guys supporting fighting should probably just stop. It's not an argument you can easily win. The name calling and straw man argument is not working. I'm not saying that fighting should be gone either, I'm just saying that if you wish to intelligently support fighting, it's going to be difficult because fighting is not intelligent. All you guys can do is beat your chest and grunt "that's the way it is" without actually making a solid supportive stance solidifying "fightings place in hockey". And I don't need any poll to tell me that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal1 Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Well it's not like every NHL player is a tough guy. Say a guy like Lucic or a Chara kills one of your teams best players, is there really anyone who can take proper retribution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal1 Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Dude...go away and pick on tennis. We support it...and to the point the players do. Take your dictator ways to another sport and just don't watch if it bothers you that much. Its a high paced high energy contact sport. The fights hold accountability on the ice. Yes you can argue that more penalties and stronger disciplin would curb that as well...but then you'd ruin the dynamic of the game...which is again...a high paced, rugged contact sport.Finally...the players have a union to protect their intrests in the game. I promise you the second theres a motion from the players to remove it from the game...the fans will have their backs. There isnt and its their game not yours. Offense is taken based on personal opinion...which is fine...but does not give you the right to change others lives and realities...this is dictatorship...and wicked beyond all measure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John.Tallhouse Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Who doesn't love a good ol' donnybrook!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleedingbluegreen Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 we live in a violent world it makes sense to me why plp WANT! fighting in hockey,but if we dont want to see it we can turn it off,for those who like it.......have a nice peaceful life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twilight Sparkle Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 simple fact is you'll never take fighting out of hockey. it's a sport fueled from emotion. always has been, always will be. people find fighting entertaining. it adds a charm to the sport that no other major sport out there can offer. for a person who's new to watching hockey, what's the first thing they want to see? A fight, since that's what everyone who doesn't follow the sport know it for i'm on the fence about staged fighting, though. should be between two guys with a disagreement. a fight should tell a story, not just "wanna go?" between two tough guys who want to get a crowd reaction. i don't have anything against staging a fight to get the crowd in to it, but i feel they're cheering for the wrong reason. that's just how i feel. i'm fine with staged fighting, but there's nothing really there. i like the fights where it's just the heat of the moment they managed to get rid of bench clearing brawls, for the most part, and i found those the most entertaining thing in sports. rare you see those anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canidiot Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Shows you how little NHL players know about the game. See this: "As part of the Hockey Night in Canada/NHLPA player poll this year, we once again asked the players whether they would like to abolish the instigator rule. Last year, 66 per cent of the respondents wanted to keep the instigator rule. This year, only 53 per cent wanted to hang on to the rule." (from HNIC website, a poll of current NHL players). That was survey done by the NHLPA of NHL players. Still 53% do NOT want the instigator rule abolished. They just don't understand, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disisdayear Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Wow, your position and intention of stimulating intelligent, philosophical debate/discussion sure deteriorated to a soap box pontification of banning fights real fast...cerebral evolution, the last time I checked, was all about understanding the many sides of any argument...appears you're still dragging your knuckles and barely walking erect with your own evolution. Maybe you should talk about that before you lecture everyone on how our world has evolved. Good luck to you, science dude...hope no one steals your Darwin fish off your back bumper. So far, I've not read anyone except one or two persons make compelling arguments in favour of fighting. I would like to reply to these people, but for now I will reply to Boudrias. Overcoming "brute force" is understandable. Actually, no one is even talking about that, as there are many sports with a brute force aspect to it, and they are undergoing their own studies and analyses on the subject; e.g., American football, rugby, and boxing, to name a few. We are talking about fighting in hockey, not brute force in sport. Two very different things that clearly must be spelt out to you. Let me be clear: one is a deliberate act of harming a player, the other is a team sport with specific rules. Fighting isn't in the rule book. If you don't want rules or you want to play by unwritten rules, you can take it to the streets. There is a difference between organised sport and people thugging it out. What the game is or isn't about is your opinion; it is not for you or anyone to say what it is definitively or creating some type of elitist game where you decide who the 'real' fans are or are not. I have my own opinion on what hockey is. I don't care to waste time on personal opinions because, as they say, opinions are like... No player goes on the ice thinking he wants to beat some shmuck? Really? Can you tell that to McLaren? 26 seconds into the first period? Oh, suddenly it's not "no player" but just a 'handful' or 'on rare occasion', right? Let's get the facts out without all the cheap rhetoric. The rest of what you say here is irrelevant to the discussion. Thank you for the advice, but I think I'm a big boy and can make up my own mind. I'm sure when fighting is banned from hockey, which it will be (maybe not soon but it will be), you will stop watching and forget about the sport you so cynically loved only because of the fighting, right? I suggest you throw in the towel (pun intended), and realise the sport you romanticise is not coming back. Luckily, newer generations are capable of thinking logically and will improve the game. I know this because even though I do not know hockey inside-out, there are a couple of other sports I grew up with since I was born, and know the history of them. What is going on in hockey is not unique to hockey. Crack open a (history) book on other sports and you will understand how the evolution of sport occurs. I don't waste my time campaigning against anything. I waste my time on improving areas of society which I love. For the record, I hate UFC. The people who participate in that are a bunch of morons. Someone who used to be my bestfriend now trains for and wants to compete in UFC/MMA. I've had that discussion with him and know more about it through him educating me than the average viewer. Suffice it to say our friendship could not last because he lost a few billion neurons that have left him so incapable of rationalising, that he has been brainwashed into thinking UFC is 'cool' and 'fun'. I know through him what that 'sport' does to someone and the side effects of it. To be honest, the whole rhetoric of those in favour of fighting is disgusting and a little insulting. But let me humour you. The fact that you bring up NFL is pretty hilarious. You see, human evolution is a funny thing. 'Cuz, you know what? When humans evolve, they don't only evolve in one sport. They evolve in all areas of life. This means (gasp!) hockey is affected by human evolution. Ain't that a funny thing? Let me be a little less subtle. There has been data by orders of magnitude suggesting long term damage is severely crippling players as early as late 20s and in their 30s in football as you know. This is because of their improved training techniques. Your oldtime hockey buddies did not have the bodies, resistance, adrenaline, legal drugs/enhancers, training that new kinesiology has brought forth. If there is something that surprises me, it is that within each sport, there are many fans so hell-bent on not accepting the facts or numbers, that they make up excuses, use conspiracy theories or nitpick so much and lay the blame at a billion other things in order to defend their position on the matter at hand. One cannot rationalise or think logically with these people. Thus, I will not even bother with them. It's the same reason Richard Dawkins has said he will not debate or argue with creationists, who do not care about facts and cannot be persuaded with scientific analyses. To continue with this analogy, all us rational folk can do is ensure these barbarics are not in a position to make decisions or influence the rules, in this case, of hockey. Unfortunately, in society, some people need help to protect them from doing harm to themselves and to others because of their destructive personalities. So if you can't play hockey to save your life, in the future, this will mean you cannot just be used as a goon or an enforcer/instigator just to cash in, because not only is this harmful to others, but this type of person is being used himself, as a mere puppet, and this responsibility falls not only on the league, but on the organisation's management. Imagine a world where people actually need skill and intelligence to be compensated. I know, it's a crazy idea, eh? But we're getting there, slowly but surely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jovocop55 Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 want staged fighting to be gone. its stupid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
literaphile Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 I don't think there's a place for fighting anymore, especially since most fights are of the staged "side-show" variety. Pre-determined fights between two tough guys, fights right after the puck drops, etc. They add nothing to the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-DLC- Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Not this Canadian Fighting happens when you have a fast paced, intense game of contact...it's part of a natural progression in that. I think there'd be a lot more dirty cheapshots if there wasn't fighting...fighting is a way to make sure guys have to answer for that stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 I don't think there's a place for fighting anymore, especially since most fights are of the staged "side-show" variety. Pre-determined fights between two tough guys, fights right after the puck drops, etc. They add nothing to the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brick Tamland Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 I have been attending hockey games for 35+ years, I can tell you I have yet to hear anyone say when a fight starts "Oh, not again... this is so dumb" They cheer their asses off. Fighting is part of hockey. It has been since day 1. Want to make the game safer? Go back to the old, soft equipment. Thin pads etc.. guys will think twice about a lot of things... I put a pair of elbow pads on today and I swear they are bullit proof. Make the rinks bigger, the equipment smaller... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dedalus Posted March 9, 2013 Author Share Posted March 9, 2013 Wow, your position and intention of stimulating intelligent, philosophical debate/discussion sure deteriorated to a soap box pontification of banning fights real fast...cerebral evolution, the last time I checked, was all about understanding the many sides of any argument...appears you're still dragging your knuckles and barely walking erect with your own evolution. Maybe you should talk about that before you lecture everyone on how our world has evolved. Good luck to you, science dude...hope no one steals your Darwin fish off your back bumper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heysoulsisters21 Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 you just bring a blindfold when you watch a game and put em over when there's fights.... gosh jeez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal1 Posted March 10, 2013 Share Posted March 10, 2013 oh yes they understand quite well. who do you think will now have to protect themselves for their actions?my guess is about 53% of players would be on the loosing end of fights. therefore voting against letting the players regulate them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.