Your opinion of fighting

[B21]

  Johnson and the flower were laughing hysterically on the bench after the game. The quotes were entertaining and fired up the Isles. In a million years I do not believe the Penguins thought the Isles would react the way they did.  Was it wrong? You betcha. Were the Islanders the main culprit? Of course. But it was fun to watch and if it had been Dipietro knocking out Johnson and the Penguins bringing up every goon in the organization and beating the Islanders into submission it would have been every bit enjoyable. I like those type of non scripted fights.

  The Penguins are not my least favorite team in the league, hell they might not even be in the bottom ten. But you are helping them move on down the list pal.

 

Well again - they weren't "laughing hysterically" so that really kills the argument as to that being the reason the Isles reacted the way they did. The better man...err team in the case...would have accepted the fact that their guy challenged another guy to a fight and got his clocked cleaned.

 

As for it being fun to watch...I think an actual hockey game is fun to watch.  If I wanted to see that kind of BS I'd watch the WWE. 

[B21]

@B21

Well glad you just ignored the whole point about escalation. The point was (and I still don't recall which OTT player it was) got away with a seriously dirty hit and all of a sudden rules are off. If the ref had called a penalty or if the actual offender had stayed on the ice to face the music, MaCammond is not eating mush for the next 3 weeks. That was the point.  You still come charging to the rescue anytime ANYONE has issues with a Pen....go figure. And FYI your boy Orpick is no angel as you would like everyone to believe......You could safely change your avatar to Homer Simpson in a Pens jersey, I think it would be rather fitting.

 

Preventing escalation is a poor excuse used by those who defend the idea of the players policing themselves.  Again - twisted logic.

 

Now Downie's incident (which you dragged into this) was because the official missed an earlier call thus leading to the "escalation" (i.e. - Downie's unquestionable illegal and dirty hit). So you are saying if the official didn't miss that call Downie would not have drilled McAmmond? That's comical.  The Senator who leveled this phantom cross check was not coming back on the ice at any point in the game? Anything to absolve Steve Downie, eh? Talk about rushing to defend.  And I didn't even use this as one of my examples of why players should not police themselves. But thanks for adding to the list.

 

Try this. Officials miss calls. It happens. Sometimes guys will get away with things.  Downie was still playing even after this heinous phantom cross check that he was the victim of.  So because the officials missed that call he is justified in taking matters into his own hands the way he did? Or any player involved in something similar?  Gimme a break.  If players were handing out this kind of vigilante justice everytime the officials miss a call there wouldn't be any players.

 

Oh - and Orpik? B-b-b-b-b-the Pens! Not a dirty player. The only reason he came up is because the incident involving Thornton is another example of why players should not police themselves.  Just because a player is known as a big hitter does not mean he has to answer the bell when one of his hits is borderline but still legal. 

[B21]

  I've typed this many times over the years. There is nothing in hockey more infuriating than a fight breaking out after a good, hard legal check. It's my biggest pet peeve in all of hockey...I get *so* pissed!!!  The problem, is men are not men anymore. In the 60's, 70's and even the 80's for the most part....men were men back then. If your teammate got smoked on a legal hit, for the most part, you took his number and exacted revenge in some way, shape or form. What you didn't do was drop the gloves everytime somebody looked at your teammate wrong. I call it the pussification of our fine sport.

 

  I love fights, but agree with everyone else, the staged fights between the AHL call ups hurt the momentum of a game, and have no real bearing on the outcome. If your AHL bum gets his clock cleaned by the other teams AHL goon, can't see a team getting a pump from that.

 

 I think fighting *has* to stay in the game, so the players have an avenue for revenge and in general losing their temper....question....is it time to adopt the OHL's new rule? You get 10 fights per year, when you pass that threshold, you get fined and suspended. It could work at the NHL level, I believe. It takes the goons out of the equation, maybe they get dressed for a tough divisional battle, but for the most part, they would be rendered useless....AND then, players that can actualy skate will be able to make more of an impact. Players in the league just to fight, would go the way of the Do Do.....BUT should there be a really dirty hit, someone still has to pay the price. This could work IMHO.

 

Great post, Jammer. 

[B21]

Don't ask him to justify his opinions. You'll end up tired, confused, and with a headache.

 

Too late. 

[Polaris922]

It was the intent, not the result and they were Pittsburgh announcers...I would expect nothing less from them. So the team with the reputation for being Bullies and not the darlings of the NHL has more suspensions....I would have never thought that......... <_<

Incorrect Orpik's legs stay right where they started as he approaches the hit, so no intent. It's quite clear in the video he doesn't extend as Stepan side steps.

2. They're not Pens announcers that I was referring to.

http://youtu.be/Uf8hutvso_g

I watched the Pens announcers now too, whom I don't like, and they're spot on as well for a change.

You'd be better off going after the 2006 hit on Cole. That was a deserved suspension. So Orpik is averaging one suspension every five years... Like Giroux...

They're such dirty players! They should throw them both out of the league...

Good grief. How can you even see through such dark orange glasses??

[B21]

@yave1964

 

Ahhh - just went back and checked out the Johnson vs. DiPietro "fight".  (Just look for Johnson vs DiPieto on YouTube). You were right on one point. Fleury lets out a laugh when Johnson reaches the bench though he's hardly "laughing hysterically".  Johnson never cracks a smile. Also, it looks more like Johnson challenges DiPietro though DiPietro is more than willing to oblige.  Back to the topic...Johnson and DiPietro fight because DiPietro went out of his way (i.e. - out of his crease) to whack a Penguin skating by with his stick.  In other words, I'm assuming you have noooooo issue with that fight.  Johnson was sticking up for a teammate ("policing") and it kept to the goalies-fight-goalies rule.  Johnson let up as soon as DiPietro hit the ice. Good, glad we agree.

 

Which gets back to why the players should not "police" the game.  Since Johnson vs. DiPietro was completely justifiable (using your own rationale) how can one justify what the Isles did as "policing" the game as well?  Easy answer. They can't.  Even when the players get it right (Johnson fighting DiPietro) they still get it wrong (just about everything the Isles did the next game).

[DaGreatGazoo]

So is the point of this thread to address; fighting in general, "staged" vs "real" fighting, retaliation fights, or players fighting to police themselves? Cause to be honest, I've kinda lost track at this point

[yave1964]

@yave1964

 

Ahhh - just went back and checked out the Johnson vs. DiPietro "fight".  (Just look for Johnson vs DiPieto on YouTube). You were right on one point. Fleury lets out a laugh when Johnson reaches the bench though he's hardly "laughing hysterically".  Johnson never cracks a smile. Also, it looks more like Johnson challenges DiPietro though DiPietro is more than willing to oblige.  Back to the topic...Johnson and DiPietro fight because DiPietro went out of his way (i.e. - out of his crease) to whack a Penguin skating by with his stick.  In other words, I'm assuming you have noooooo issue with that fight.  Johnson was sticking up for a teammate ("policing") and it kept to the goalies-fight-goalies rule.  Johnson let up as soon as DiPietro hit the ice. Good, glad we agree.

 

Which gets back to why the players should not "police" the game.  Since Johnson vs. DiPietro was completely justifiable (using your own rationale) how can one justify what the Isles did as "policing" the game as well?  Easy answer. They can't.  Even when the players get it right (Johnson fighting DiPietro) they still get it wrong (just about everything the Isles did the next game).

My God man just buy a troll doll and make it your avatar and get it over with.

[yave1964]

So is the point of this thread to address; fighting in general, "staged" vs "real" fighting, retaliation fights, or players fighting to police themselves? Cause to be honest, I've kinda lost track at this point

Thread got hijacked a long time ago, lol. My question was do people like fighting or not? I like a good old fashioned hate on, and hate staged fighting. Like I said tho, somewhere along the way it got lost in translation.......

[Polaris922]

I think goons to be goons are pointless and take away from the game.  I think players who can actually play the game getting caught up in the moment and losing it with one another is a natural response to the physicality of the game having emotion added to it.  I'm all for it when it's clean and mutual.  I don't like the goons.  I don't like the expectation that a guy like Kessel should have to answer to a guy like Scott.  That's utterly ridiculous.  

[yave1964]

I think goons to be goons are pointless and take away from the game.  I think players who can actually play the game getting caught up in the moment and losing it with one another is a natural response to the physicality of the game having emotion added to it.  I'm all for it when it's clean and mutual.  I don't like the goons.  I don't like the expectation that a guy like Kessel should have to answer to a guy like Scott.  That's utterly ridiculous.  

what you said

[jammer2]

@fanaticV3.0  If goons have already died, what is Colton Orr doing in the league?  He bring NOTHING to the table except the ability to fight, and there are 10-15 other examples. I agree the number of goons and staged fights has dropped...but dead and gone...not even close.

[B21]

My God man just buy a troll doll and make it your avatar and get it over with.

 

Someone needs to take their own advice.

[B21]

So is the point of this thread to address; fighting in general, "staged" vs "real" fighting, retaliation fights, or players fighting to police themselves? Cause to be honest, I've kinda lost track at this point

 

Both.   

[B21]

@fanaticV3.0  If goons have already died, what is Colton Orr doing in the league?  He bring NOTHING to the table except the ability to fight, and there are 10-15 other examples. I agree the number of goons and staged fights has dropped...but dead and gone...not even close.

 

They are still around but back in the day every team had 1 or 2 guys who did nothing but fight.  It's seems more teams' designated enforcers actually have some talent these days.  On the Pens it's Engelland...and he can play defense and wing. 

[jammer2]

@B21  I agree Engelland has some actual skill, but the same cannot be said about the Parro's and Colton Orr's of the league. These guys can't even skate well enough to sustain a forecheck....in other words, totally useless.

[hf101]

Thread got hijacked a long time ago, lol. My question was do people like fighting or not? I like a good old fashioned hate on, and hate staged fighting. Like I said tho, somewhere along the way it got lost in translation.......

 

I think goons are very similar to trolls.   Goons hijack a hockey game for a couple of minutes of center attention.     That said I haven't seen anything on this thread that is trolling.

 

I've been entertained by many a fight in the NHL.  I don't think they will completely go away, but imo most fights (goons or not) detract the flow of a hockey game.  Scrums around the goalie net will always remain.  Drop a punch or two, facewash, and call it roughing.    I wouldn't mind if hockey fights yielded a game misconduct for each participant.  Maybe 5 misconducts and throw in a suspension.  It's stupid imo for fights to exist with a plan to limit concussions.  Thus I'm no fan of fights for the sake of fights with helmets and visors.

[yave1964]

Someone needs to take their own advice.

Well it is simple, agreeing to disagree is one thing done with a level of civility but if you see one of my posts seems that you need to be rather doucherish over everything I write why not just move on? We do this in here for fun and you sir, are simply a troll at this point. As soon as I see your avatar attached to a post I know it is going to be filled with negativity. Life is too short for your crap. Move on to someone else.

[B21]

Well it is simple, agreeing to disagree is one thing done with a level of civility but if you see one of my posts seems that you need to be rather doucherish over everything I write why not just move on? We do this in here for fun and you sir, are simply a troll at this point. As soon as I see your avatar attached to a post I know it is going to be filled with negativity. Life is too short for your crap. Move on to someone else.

 

Actually, trolls are people who post things to annoy another/others in the forum.  They tend to go off topic (like you did in this thread). I simply brought up the Pens/Isles brawl and the Thornton/Orpik incidents as examples of why players can't police themselves. But you had to keep at it (trolling) with the "Ha Ha I love the beat down the Isles put on the Pens" nonsense.  Yes, that is way off topic and trolling i/m/h/o.  Also not really an accurate description.

 

Want another example?

 

Here's a quote from first post in a thread you started entitled "Do you still watch hockey after your team gets knocked out?"

 

The Penguins are a team I love to hate. I was shocked when they fell apart so unprofessionally to the Bruins in4 straight last year. Shocked but not saddened. Not saddened at all. I respect Crosby and even love to watch him play, it might be a bit harder disliking them now that Matt Cooke and Kennedy have moved on.

 

And I'm trolling?  Why not just go to the Wings section, start a topic called Why Datsyuk Rocks and just rant about the Pens?

 

It's amazing to me that you seem so surprised that a Pens fan would actually defend their team when someone goes out of their way to take a shite on them like you have done several times.  It's not my place to tell someone what they should and should not post about but maybe you should stick to the Wings.  Either that or be a little more objective and accurate in your rants about the Pens. 

 

Troll on.

[DaGreatGazoo]

Both. 

 

LOL!!!

[yave1964]

@B21

 

  The point of the thread never got lost in spite of efforts to drive it into the ditch. It was a simple question, what do people think of fighting.

[radoran]

Thread got hijacked a long time ago, lol. My question was do people like fighting or not? I like a good old fashioned hate on, and hate staged fighting. Like I said tho, somewhere along the way it got lost in translation.......

 

I tried to find a way to split it out, but gave up

[radoran]

I think goons to be goons are pointless and take away from the game.  I think players who can actually play the game getting caught up in the moment and losing it with one another is a natural response to the physicality of the game having emotion added to it.  I'm all for it when it's clean and mutual.  I don't like the goons.  I don't like the expectation that a guy like Kessel should have to answer to a guy like Scott.  That's utterly ridiculous.  

 

I don't like the expectation that the Leafs could just throw whoever they wanted onto the ice with last change knowing what the situation was and expect that nothing would happen.

 

I don't like the expectation that Kessel can run his mouth with Scott and not be expected to back up his flapping jaw when he knows why Scott is on the ice in the first place.

 

I don't like the expectation that Kessel should be excused for using his stick as a weapon and taking a two-handed slash to the back of the legs of a guy who is engaged in a fight with another player.

 

Aside from that, yeah, it's pretty stupid to expect Kessel to stand up to Scott; immensely dumb for his coach to put him in that situation; freaking unbelievably moronic for Kessel to engage Scott verbally; inexcusable for Kessel to use his stick as a weapon from behind.

 

To be perfectly clear - also dumb for the Sabres to waste a roster spot on Scott, much less actually put him in the lineup.

[Commander Clueless]

I don't like the expectation that the Leafs could just throw whoever they wanted onto the ice with last change knowing what the situation was and expect that nothing would happen.

 

I don't like the expectation that Kessel can run his mouth with Scott and not be expected to back up his flapping jaw when he knows why Scott is on the ice in the first place.

 

I don't like the expectation that Kessel should be excused for using his stick as a weapon and taking a two-handed slash to the back of the legs of a guy who is engaged in a fight with another player.

 

Aside from that, yeah, it's pretty stupid to expect Kessel to stand up to Scott; immensely dumb for his coach to put him in that situation; freaking unbelievably moronic for Kessel to engage Scott verbally; inexcusable for Kessel to use his stick as a weapon from behind.

 

To be perfectly clear - also dumb for the Sabres to waste a roster spot on Scott, much less actually put him in the lineup.

 

I don't like the expectation that a coach needs to throw on his fighter just because the other team wants to start some crap. A coach should have the right to tell his players not engage in a fight, and the other team should be appropriately penalized for "gooing it up" so to speak. Carlyle should have every right to see a team throw out their fourth line, and try to get his scoring line out to generate more offense. Carlyle certainly should anticipate Scott wanting to fight, but there's no reason to anticipate him instigating a non-consensual fight against a non-fighting star forward. Why? Because it's against the rules to jump people who don't want to fight. Coaches/players get praised all the time for not engaging in fights when they are winning. Why is Carlyle held to a different standard here because Scott decided he was fighting no matter what anyone else decided, rules be damned?

 

I don't like the expectation that a player who "runs his mouth" needs to fight for it. If that were the case, there would be a lot more fighting in the NHL because lots of players yap constantly without any real intent to fight. Answering the bell for dirty hits and roughing people up, sure. Answering the bell for being angry at the other team's goon and stating that? No. Big difference there. If you want to punch someone in the face for talking smack, that's your perogative, but it's wrong.

 

I also don't like Kessel's stickwork, though. He had plenty of options to defend himself that don't involve using the stick, particularly when the immediate threat has been handled by another player and the target has his back to you.

Edited March 13, 2014 by Commander Clueless

[yave1964]

@radoran@Commander Clueless

 

  As much as i love bad blood and settling scores i do draw the line at stick work. Using his hockey stick like he was Paul Bunyon attempting to cut Scott down to a more fair size was wrong on all counts. so was Clarkson coming over the boards and onto the ice to fight.

  Both were wrong. But both were equally entertaining. God, i just wish for one season my Wings had that kind of life in them, just once. We win, 22 straight post seasons but man can they be boring sometimes. Nothing against Nick and Stevie and Pavel and the rest of the immensely skilled players we have thrown out there for nearly a quarter of a century of great hockey, but every now and then you just want to see a good old fashioned beat down. At least i do. When it gets too much, watching the Wings skate up and down the ice with nothing more than the occasional face wash i pop in my copy of the game between the Wings and Avalanche from March 1997 and it brings me back. I watch it about once a year on average.