On Fighting in Hockey
This is my first article and before I talk about actual hockey with you guys after this article, I have to get something off my chest that really gets me worked up, which was triggered by the Kris Newbury incident ….
This article is quite long….just to let you know. I got writing and just couldn’t stop.
SIDE NOTE: Just saw Forsberg got traded to the Preds. That instantly makes them contenders for the Cup.
My beef is with some of the media personalities who we watch on TV, or read in the newspapers or online. I am talking about guys like Howard Berger, who want to see fighting removed from the game of hockey. For those not familiar with Mr. Berger, this guy is a real idiot. I recently read an article of his on Hockeybuzz.com about this topic. The article is listed below. I also threw some of my own comments directly into his article (my comments to Howard’s article are bolded).
After the article, please see my comments about NOT removing fighting from the game of hockey. I invite people to respond to my comments. The link for Berger’s article is as follows:
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php@blogger_id=3
START OF ARTICLE
The K-O punch delivered by Pittsburgh’s Ronald Petrovicky to the jaw of the Leafs’ Kris Newbury on Saturday night drums up the age-old argument of whether fighting should be legislated out of hockey.
I’m quite sure it’s not an “age-old argument” Howard. In fact, it’s a relatively recent concept (maybe within the last decade or two) and it’s not even an argument really, only a comment proposed by an ignorant, self-proclaimed “hockey analyst” like yourself. Stop over-dramatizing it pal. An “age-old argument” would be something more like “If a tree falls over in the middle of the woods and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?” That’s an “age-old argument” buddy! What’s that one about which one comes first, the chicken or the egg?
Newbury was knocked into tomorrow by Petrovicky and he hit the back of his head on the Air Canada Centre ice when he fell. It’s the same sort of mishap that killed Bill Masterton of the Minnesota North Stars in January, 1968. Though Masterton was not injured in a fight, he catapulted backwards after being sandwiched by Oakland Seals’ defencemen Larry Cahan and Ron Harris, and the back of his head impacted the ice at the old Metropolitan Sports Center. Masterton, who did not wear a helment (as per 98 percent of fellow NHLers back then) never regained consciousness and died less than two days later.
If Masterton was not injured in a fight, then why is it being discussed in an article about the removal of fighting from hockey? Usually, when writing a paper, one would list their primary argument first and then follow-up with their supplementary arguments. Is this your primary argument Howard? That Mr. Masterton was killed from a body check in 1968? No offense to Mr. Masterton, but this argument is pretty weak dude! As a “big-time” sports talk radio host on the Fan 590 in Toronto, shouldn’t you be a little more educated on how to construct a proper argument? Damn, I’m just a simple geologist and even I knew that! Maybe your article should be on “the removal of body checking from hockey”, since that is the apparent underlying cause of Mr. Masterton’s death. Do think we should get rid of body-checking as well Howard? News flash for you, checking is part of the game.
Newbury got lucky. For whatever reason, his fall did not result in a life-threatening predicament, and we’re all thankful for that. The difference is, Newbury was punched to the ice after losing his helmet in the scrap with Petrovicky. Had he been upended by a two-player hip-check like Masterton, every chance is that his helmeted head would have struck the ice without incident.
Is that correct Howard? Would you guarantee that? So, once again, if you were to focus on fighting (which is suppose to be the topic you are discussing), are you saying the only time a player loses their helmet or is in danger of getting a head injury is during a fight? What about body checks, blocking shots, high sticks, accidental collisions, etc? Should we remove sticks and pucks from the game as well? Better yet, how about using foam pucks and foam boards? That would cut down the risk of injury too, wouldn’t it?
Those who deem it ridiculous to consider outlawing fisticuffs almost always make the argument that fans in the arena, and watching on TV, never turn their backs on a melee
Not in my argument on this subject…see my comments following this cheesy article.
That’s a silly, shallow argument. Of course people don’t turn away from a fight, for the same reason motorists slow down to look at an accident site, or car-racing enthusiasts flock by the hundreds of thousands to Indianapolis every May. It’s human nature to be intrigued by conflict and/or misfortune. If not, CNN wouldn’t exist.
Gee Howard, you’re an expert hockey analyst and a philosopher too, that’s great. In your opinion, I guess that’s the ONLY reason why people watch hockey, is for the fighting. I’d get into a debate with you about it, but I want to catch that new reality TV show about the genocide in Rwanda. Mmmmmm…..BLOOD, GUTS…OOGA, OOGA, ME CAVEMAN! What about you Howard? Don’t you succumb to the urge to observe “human conflict” as well? Is a REAL argument coming from you sometime in the near future?
But, is it necessary for fighting to remain a part of hockey?
Absolutely 100%. Again, see my comments below.
Certainly the spectre of fisticuffs hasn’t prompted television viewers in the United States to flock to their sets
No Howard, if you paid attention in the year 2005, you’d notice that the NHL Lockout did that. There’s also a few other minor sports that Americans watch as well, perhaps you’ve heard of them before… football, baseball and basketball. Based on your previous argument, shouldn’t fighting in hockey blindly draw all of us Neanderthals to the TV, considering we are so” intrigued by the conflict and/or misfortune” of the game.
And, it’s highly doubtful that rabid followers in strong NHL markets would either turn in their season’s tickets or refuse to watch Hockey Night In Canada if the league and players came to the conclusion that fighting is essentially useless.
The fact that you don’t realize the repercussions of removing fighting from the game shows how ignorant you really are. Do you really feel confident that Canadian fans (or hockey fans in the US for that matter) wouldn’t be pissed off about that? Do you honestly think that NHL players themselves would “come to the conclusion that fighting is essentially useless”? Why don’t you go ask some of the players in the NHL, AHL, ECHL, OHL, WHL, QMJHL, etc. that very question? I’d be curious to see those results.
Here’s the way I see it: There are so many ways for players to be legitimately injured during the course of the interminable, 82-game season, why provide for artificial means? And, don’t give me the B.S. that players aren’t hurt during fights. Maybe not all of them, but incidents are rising.
Show me some statistics then Howard. Fighting majors are do
wn this year, so are you saying that the number of fighting related injuries is up on a per fight basis? Show me the numbers Howard baby! Oh yeah, just a little reminder, when two guys are pounding on each other in a fight, there is definitely a possibility for an injury to occur. However, last time I checked, these are grown men getting paid to play this game and I’m quite sure they are aware of the potential ramifications of getting in a scrap. Sorry Howard, I hate to burst your bubble, but I doubt any of the players in the NHL care about your opinions on fighting. Howard, if you don’t like the rough style of hockey, then please see my comments above regarding the use of foam pucks and foam boards. Maybe you could start a foam hockey league. Would any of the “rabid” followers of hockey watch that?
It’s the same principle with the silly touch-up icing rule that dinosaurs on the NHL board refuse to amend. At least a half-dozen players are needlessly hurt every season while chasing the puck, just to avoid a faceoff in their zone. It’s stupid — plain and simple.
My God Howard, do we actually agree on something? That’s the first intelligent thing you’ve said yet!
Like I said, there are enough ways in the course of regular action for players to be disabled. It makes no sense to provide them with others. Legislate fighting out of the NHL, and adopt the grossly-overdue no-touch icing rule. Give the league’s entertainers every chance to avoid being removed from the scene. All it makes is sense (In your pathetic little mind).
Howard, I DARE you to tell Georges Laraque or Brian McGratton that in your opinion, they are only considered as “entertainers” in the game of hockey, and tell them that’s the only value they have to their respective teams…entertainment. In fact Howard, I DOUBLE DARE ya to tell them!!
END OF ARTICLE
My Response to Howard Berger’s Article
Who the hell are you to say that fighting doesn’t belong in hockey?? Have you ever played competitive hockey before? Do you know what it’s like to go to war on the ice and be in the trenches? Have you ever been in a hockey fight? Do you realize there are unwritten rules regarding fighting in hockey? How often do you see Brian McGratton go on the ice and kick the shit out of Daniel Briere? NEVER! Do you know why? Because hockey players are gentlemen on the ice (not all mind you – there are exceptions to every rule) and there is a code regarding fighting amongst players.
Hell, when I played junior hockey, as a bare minimum I always shook hands or at least tapped helmets with any guy that I was in a fight with on the ice and said, “good fight”. I even had a beer with a guy I fought one night. After we pounded each other on the ice and got kicked out of the game together, he showed up at my dressing room door with two cold ones. And do you want to know something Howard? Me and the same guy danced again the next time we played against each other too. A guy like yourself would only scratch his head at that because you have no comprehension of fighting in hockey. It’s an honour to scrap with someone on the ice. One thing’s for sure, what happens on the ice, stays on the ice. Another thing’s for sure Howard, it’s obvious you have absolutely no understanding of the deeper level of the game, no concept of what it means to be a part of a team or to protect your teammates, and no perspective of the game, other than what you see from the press box.
Its jerkoffs like you Berger who offer up these pathetic opinions on the game of hockey when you probably have never laced up the blades yourself, at least nothing beyond beer hockey (which I love by the way). In fact, I would be surprised if you have ever played the game at all. This is no offense to the hockey fans out there who have never played the game, I welcome your comments and I would encourage you to give the game a shot. It would be extremely arrogant of me to say that the only people that have played the game have a right to comment on the rules. That’s not what I’m saying. We don’t live in a dictatorship. However, the difference between a guy like Berger and the average hockey fan who has never played the game before is that a guy like Berger is only saying “no fighting allowed” to be controversial and to get people to read his lame-ass columns.
I wondered at first why a sports station or newspaper would ever hire a like Berger, but then it suddenly dawned on me, to get the HIGHER RATINGS or more website hits, etc. (kind of like how Eklund makes up a new trade rumour every day). Berger mentioned in his article that its human nature to be intrigued by conflict and/or misfortune. What he should have said (while looking in the mirror), is that people LOVE controversy and dammit, I’m personally going to capitalize on that!
When I think of it on a bigger scale, it’s actually a societal problem, not just a hockey-related issue. These little arseholes sit in their little offices and offer up their little pansy-ass opinions because that is their job, to stir up shit. The mass media is making us pathetic and weak. Back on the hockey side, the majority of people who are true fans of the game hate the idea of removing fighting, while the bleeding hearts who couldn’t care less about hockey love the concept. Do you know why? It’s not that they actually care about fighting in hockey, they couldn’t care less about a battle between two Neanderthals. The reason is because these people have no life of their own and just want something to complain about. It drives me crazy!
Do we really want a person like Berger contributing his opinions to the rules of the game? NO? MY THOUGHTS EXACTLY! Guys like Howard Berger are a joke! By now it’s obvious that I don’t have an ounce of respect for what he says, but I’ll also be the first to admit that I’m no hockey expert either. However, when I make a comment on changing the rules of the game, its because I’m a fan of it and want to improve it. It’s not because I want to get off on being controversial. Guys like Berger end up giving the game of hockey a bad rap because of his narcissism.
I tried watching basketball and soccer a few times but honestly, I just can’t stand either sport, no matter how much I try to like them (no offense to basketball and soccer fans). Sure, I’ve made some lame-ass opinions on what I think would make these games better, in my eyes anyway. The difference between Berger and myself (and any other average sports fan) is that I wouldn’t publically make negative comments about the inner-workings of these sports, mainly because I’m fully aware that I know jack shit about them. Therefore, I shouldn’t try to influence other of my opinions without fully understanding the sport myself first. Well, the same applies to hockey there Berger boy!
For all you estrogen filled pansies out there, understand one thing….as long as grown MEN play a full contact sport at the level and speed like that at which hockey is played, then some form of aggression is bound to occur. Its common sense and not a big deal. Ask ANY player in the NHL and I would bet that an overwhelming majority (if not 100%) of all NHL players are NOT in favour of removing fighting from the game of hockey. Are those statistics available because I would like to see the numbers?
I’m even willing to bet that even the “non-fighters” in the NHL believe that fighting is an integral part of the game. They know they are not directly affected by fighting because it’s not as if these guys are forced to fight. If you don’t want to fight in hockey then you simply do not fight….just don’t cheap shot som
ebody or yap off to people on the ice. If you do, then you better be prepared to drop the buckets. Look at current players like Joe Sakic, Kyle Wellwood, Daniel Briere and Paul Kariya, or retired players like Steve Yzerman, Wanye Gretzky and Ron Francis. How many fights have they been in? Not many, if any. That’s because the fighting aspect of the game is not of interest to them. These players want to score goals and play the game. That’s awesome, I’m certainly cool with that. It’s not like I envision the Charleston Chiefs with the Hansen Brothers playing every night, bench clearing brawls on a regular basis, and all that crap. Total goon leagues also suck because real hockey is never played. It takes all types of players in hockey. Wayne Gretzky, the most famous player in the history of the game, doesn’t condone fighting. Hmmmmm, whose opinion do I respect more when it comes to hockey….Wayne Gretzky’s or Howard Berger’s? I wonder…
Non-fighters in the NHL do get cheap shots against them though….remember Gary Suter cross-checking Paul Kariya in the face or the constant pounding Sidney Crosby has taken in almost every game this year because Pittsburgh has no real enforcer? If fighting is removed from the game and the players loose all ability to police themselves, then trust me, the injuries will get much, much worse. We are already starting to see this in the NHL, since the instigator rule has been initiated. The instigator rule must to be removed so the players can fully police themselves again. Once again, I will bet that if the instigator rule is removed, then stick-related injuries will decrease. Wanna bet Howard?
To all you people out there who don’t like fighting, if you were a real fan of the game, you’d realize that fighting is a part of it and accept it. When one-on-one fighting happens on the ice, it’s controlled. It’s not like an “anything goes match”, as would happen in a street or pub brawl. There is a code to fighting in hockey that all the players live by. Maybe in order to make it easier to accept, the pansies can give a psychological term to it like “controlled aggression” or something.
The ONLY way I would reconsider my opinion about fighting in hockey is if a majority of NHL players themselves actually stood up and said “Hey guys, I think we need to remove fighting from the game of hockey, its causing too many serious injuries”. Then and ONLY then, would I reconsider my opinion. That’s because the request to change the rule would have come from the people actually playing the game. Do you see the difference?
Howard, if you don’t like hockey the way it is, or if it’s too aggressive for you, then simply watch another sport, or go play tiddlywinks, or any other non-contact sport. Or watch hockey but don’t watch the fights. I don’t really care. Don’t show your children the fights if you think it may “warp” their thinking in the future, that’s your right I guess. But if you take take that approach, then you also better strip the kids of their Playstation and Internet access as well. By all means, complain to your buddies (if you have any) about the fights, but DO NOT, I repeat, DO NOT publicly write about banning fighting in hockey until you know and understand the game fully. Let it go dude. You just look ignorant in the hockey world, although all the bleeding hearts outside of hockey may applaud you for it. That’s my two cents worth on fighting in hockey. OK, so maybe it was a quarter or a dollar’s worth. Sorry for the extremely long article guys but I obviously had a lot to say. Looking forward to your comments, even Howard’s comments, if he has any. Cheers.