Jump to content

NotPartoftheGame

Member
  • Posts

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location
    Ontario
  • Favorite Team
    Leafs

NotPartoftheGame's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

0

Reputation

  1. I'm OK with the pansy label, I enjoy gardening and long walks on the beach. But don't ever accuse me of being a ref... I suspect that dispite our differences on the issue of fighting we could enjoy a beer together or watch a game....just not the Leafs. I don't have a lot of faith in refs today but a change in the rules and some instruction to this group to be more consistent is necessary for fighting to be reduced or eliminated. I still say add a misconduct to every fight. That would get rid of the one-dimensional guys pretty quick and brawls like those in last nights Rangers - Devils game would be gone. But if a player really needs to stick up for himself or his team then he can, but he knows it will cost him to sit out the rest of the game. That means a lot better choices about when fights occur. I think fights would drop to the levels seen in the 60's and I could live with that.
  2. Sorry for the delay, I meant to reply to Podein25's post earlier but the Leafs won a game and I had to participate in the parade.... Now that I know you are a Flyer's fan, it all makes sense. No apologies necessary. The problem with your scenario is that incident would be in the minority. Most of the fights today are between 30 or 40 players, enforcers who seem to get summoned from the pressbox when they play another tough team who also has enforcers. It has little to do with respect and everything to do with revenge, like going after someone who has just laid a clean but hard hit on one of their teammates. I've been watching hockey since the mid 60's (one of the few who saw the Leafs win a cup) and haven't seen any period where the cheap shots disappeared because of fighting. Doesn't work. I would agree that the star players get more room to skate, but not because they are protected. It's because the enforcers are too busy fighting each other and getting tossed. I've also played hockey and never had a fight. I played tough but earned respect with clean hits and out-working my opponent. If I got high-sticked then I let the refs call it. You can't have a player policing the game because they do so with emotion, bias and no rule book other than what they think happened and what is deserved.
  3. Podein25. I now understand the "pansy" comment. And I can't explain my status as a Leafs fan... I get your scenario and I've been speared by players and got in their face, but never dropped the gloves. I preferred to let the refs call the game and get on the powerplay. I can only imagine what a Flyers fan will say about that. But today fighting is more staged with the same 30 or 40 guys in the league dropping the gloves for most of the fights. How does that police the game? Then you have the fights that start at the 2 second mark of the game or when players have to respond after a clean hit. I think that the game would be far more exciting if you let the refs enforce the rules and let the players just play. Add a misconduct for every fight and if someone absolutely feels that they have to respond to something they still can. But they will pick their spots a lot better. That will also go a long way to putting the final nail in the coffin of the one-dimensional player, the guy who sits in the press box until his team plays an opponent who also has a guy sitting in the press box most nights. I realize that letting the refs call the game is a big assumption that they will be consistent (a penalty is a penalty in every situation) and that the NHL somehow improves the officials ability to see a lot more of what goes on. Maybe add a couple of off-ice refs situated up high in each arena as has been discussed in the past. But I would rather have an unbiased official enforcing the rules than a biased player who is charging into the situation with emotional and only "the code" to justify his actions.
  4. An intelligent and well thought out response. I guess Jim Thomson, former NHL enforcer who is now advocating the elimination of fighting in hockey is also a pansy. What about Wayne Gretzky, who stated in his auto-biography back in the early 90's that fighting should be taken out of the game. Study the issue and you'll see that the reasons provided for keeping fighting in the game are mostly myth and perception. It's not needed and only takes away from watching skilled players in one of the best sports on the planet.
  5. I have two recent posts on my blog that I think are important to the discussion on fighting (of course I'm biased). Based on feedback over the past few months I thought I would address some two key issues: I was looking for data to prove or disprove the whole accountability argument, that fighitng polices the game. I couldn't find anything so I studied the past 12 seasons and analyzed statistics related to fighitng and PIM. In summary, when fighting is reduced, non-fighting related PIMs are also reduced. And teams who fight the most also take more non-fighting PIMs. That tells me that enforcers may be contributing to the violence and cheap shots, not controlling it. http://itsnotpartofthegame.blogspot.com/2012/02/additional-statistics-on-impact-of.html A lot of pro-fighting fans have been throwing out that 98% of NHL players want fighting, based on the HNIC poll released in February. Actually the question was "do you want fighting completely banned". Regardless I am willing to acknowledge that fighitng will not be reduced or eliminated without the involvement of the NHLPA. Therefore I have written an open letter to them and suggested the course of action they should take to study the issue. http://itsnotpartofthegame.blogspot.com/2012/03/open-letter-to-nhlpa.html
  6. First of all let me say that I am impressed with the quality of the discussion and the respect that is shown for other viewpoints. Maybe that is because I'm comparing this forum to the discussions I have had with the hockeyfights.com crowd that has been posting on my blog :-) I agree with Blocker that the NHLPA has to make a decision on fighting before there will be any change. The NHL executive and general managers are not in any rush and until the players decide to approve tougher penalties on fighting, or leave the game the way it is, there won't be movement on this issue. Pubic pressure will continue to influence opinion and I believe that the anti-fighting fan base is growing. There is a lot of faith in that statement because when I'm at the Air Canada Centre I am one of the few people sitting down when a fight breaks out. Then again no one goes for a hot dog when a dugout-clearing brawl breaks out in Baseball, but that doesn't mean MLB is about to allow fighting. Recent polls by Sports Illustrated, CBC.ca and by the NHL at past All-star games show that 30% - 70% of fans want to see fighting eliminated. And I hope that I am wrong but I think we will see increased awareness of health issues amongst enforcers in the future due to the press of the past year. That will impact the image of the league and begin to influence advertisers and sponsors. The NHL and NHLPA will have to do something to show that they are concerned about controlling something that is not integral to the game and protecting the health of players. Fighting may not cause many concussions - somewhere between 4% and 7% depending on what figures the NHL releases - but even 1 is too many. And fighting is easy to fix unlike changing the speed of the game, the size of the players or the layout of the rink.
  7. If you read Nader's letter closely you will see that he did not state that fighting caused the head trauma experienced by Crosby, LaFontaine, Lindros and Primeau. He is making the point that any concussion is serious and the NHL should take action, even if fighting only causes 3% or 4% of all head trauma (NHL data). You can't have a department of player safety and tolerate an activity where players punch each other in the head. Yes Nader's letter has some mistakes, like misspelling a few names and stating that the OHL has banned fighting (later corrected on League of Fans website) but the point he makes is valid. The problem I have with fighting is that it serves no purpose other than to ruin the flow of the game. If it is an important part of the game, why does it virtually disappear in the playoffs, when winning is critical? I enjoy fast paced, hard hitting hockey, not marginal players throwing punches. Get rid of fighting, let the refs police the game through increased penalties and suspensions and hockey would improve dramatically.
  8. Nader is delivering the right message to Bettman. How can the NHL care about the players when they allow two people to pound each other in the head. It’s time to eliminate fighting from the game – http://itsnotpartofthegame.blogspot.com/. I don’t believe that fighting ever had a place in the game and as far as the accountability argument goes, why were the 70′s and 80′s some of the bloodiest hockey years while fighting was at its peak? There were lots of “policemen” in the game but it didn’t seem to help. Let’s focus on skilled hockey players, good hard hitting and fast paced action. Not two grown men wrestling for a few minutes before falling to the ice.
  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 31 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
×
×
  • Create New...