haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted October 2, 2013 From experience. Even if what you're saying is true, the reasoning is flawed. Fighting is essentially something that happens outside of normal gameplay. So to reduce the risks to players, it's a reasonable argument that removing something like fighting can increase player safety while having little impact on normal gameplay. To be clear, I've watched hockey for 30 years. To me fighting is part of the game. But honestly with what we know now and probably me getting older, I'm not sure where I stand on it all. So I'm not saying they necessarily should eliminate it. But I absolutely see the valid reasoning behind it. So your saying that these guys didn't know the risks of getting punched in the head multiple times??? They know the risks. Frankly a lot of them probably don't. Some guys do sure, but the research is still evolving. And some 22 year old straight out of a minor league may not have paid a whole lot of attention to the cutting edge research on concussion and CTE. And even if they had, many may be willing to risk their brains anyway for the potential of millions of dollars. Just because someone may think they know the risks and be willing to risk permanent brain damage for money doesn't make it the right thing for the league to do, ethically or financially. There's already been the class action lawsuit in the NFL. It probably won't be the last one for that league and seems only a matter of time before it happens in the NHL. 1 The Greek reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Playmaker Report post Posted October 2, 2013 So your saying that these guys didn't know the risks of getting punched in the head multiple times??? They know the risks. How can you say guys know the risks when you have boneheads like Cherry saying, hey look at me, I got in fights, and I'm fine. Did they think they'd get a broken nose, or a black eye or a headache for a day or two? Sure, I'm sure they knew that. Did they know they could get severe depression or dementia or have debilitating headaches for the rest of their lives amongst other things? I don't think so. 2 Nev and matthewdanna reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewdanna 143 Report post Posted October 2, 2013 I agree that there are times to fight (someone throws a cheap elbow in a check, some drives hard into a goal, or some other unsportsmanlike act that requires retaliation) but I agree with #19 there should be a stiffer penalty than just a 5 min major. I don't know if it's a game misconduct automatically, but the NHL should definitely track those players that are prone to fighting and institute a progressive suspension criteria. Get the goons out of the game, eliminate stupid injuries, protect the stars, make the game better. How can you say guys know the risks when you have boneheads like Cherry saying, hey look at me, I got in fights, and I'm fine. Did they think they'd get a broken nose, or a black eye or a headache for a day or two? Sure, I'm sure they knew that. Did they know they could get severe depression or dementia or have debilitating headaches for the rest of their lives amongst other things? I don't think so. I love this... Cherry is a fricken idiot. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Seraph 240 Report post Posted October 2, 2013 Sounds like Stevie forgot about all the space he had out there because of the beloved bruise brothers and #25. 2 frankgrimes and Hockeymom1960 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hatcher#2 13 Report post Posted October 2, 2013 How can you say guys know the risks when you have boneheads like Cherry saying, hey look at me, I got in fights, and I'm fine. Did they think they'd get a broken nose, or a black eye or a headache for a day or two? Sure, I'm sure they knew that. Did they know they could get severe depression or dementia or have debilitating headaches for the rest of their lives amongst other things? I don't think so. Im sorry but it doesn't take a genius to know that the head is one of the most important/fragile parts of the anatomy and therefore you should try to avoid putting yourself in situations where you could get hurt. If they don't know this then that proves to me that its not the fighting that causes the issues but that they already have issues before embarking on their career. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frankgrimes 1,836 Report post Posted October 2, 2013 I agree that there are times to fight (someone throws a cheap elbow in a check, some drives hard into a goal, or some other unsportsmanlike act that requires retaliation) but I agree with #19 there should be a stiffer penalty than just a 5 min major. I don't know if it's a game misconduct automatically, but the NHL should definitely track those players that are prone to fighting and institute a progressive suspension criteria. Get the goons out of the game, eliminate stupid injuries, protect the stars, make the game better. I love this... Cherry is a fricken idiot. Cherry has seen and probably played more hockey than 90 % of this planet he knows what he is talking about and I am glad there are people like him, who don't tolerate the watering down of this great game. 3 F.Michael, Hockeymom1960 and Hatcher#2 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Greek 323 Report post Posted October 2, 2013 (edited) Cherry has seen and probably played more hockey than 90 % of this planet he knows what he is talking about and I am glad there are people like him, who don't tolerate the watering down of this great game.It's not watering down the game though. Hitting is part of the game, fighting is not. It is ancillary and unnecessary. The GAME stops when two guys start fighting. Haroldnepsts said it, removing fighting would not have major effect on the game itself. Edited October 2, 2013 by The Greek Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frankgrimes 1,836 Report post Posted October 2, 2013 (edited) It's not watering down the game though. Hitting is part of the game, fighting is not. It is ancillary and unnecessary. The GAME stops when two guys start fighting. Haroldnepsts said it, removing fighting would not have major effect on the game itself. It wouldn't? Guys like Kaleta (nice to meet him tonight without an enforcer...), Cooke, Torres and other over the line rats would have a field day with younger and star players because they won't have to answer to qualityguys like Orr, McGrattan, MacIntyre, McLaren, Engelland or Thornton or Scott. Like I said if people hate fighting that much, there are other sports to watch..Yes hitting is part of the game and that's why this stupid front-office and the department for players safety has been to remove it from the game, with ridiculous rules. Edited October 2, 2013 by frankgrimes 1 F.Michael reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted October 2, 2013 Cherry has seen and probably played more hockey than 90 % of this planet he knows what he is talking about and I am glad there are people like him, who don't tolerate the watering down of this great game. And unlike Cherry, Yzerman actually played in the NHL. For 22 seasons and over 1,500 games. I can understand you personally still wanting fighting to be a part of the game but if we're talking about the credibility of informed opinions, I'm going with Stevie Y over Grapes every time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frankgrimes 1,836 Report post Posted October 2, 2013 And unlike Cherry, Yzerman actually played in the NHL. For 22 seasons and over 1,500 games. I can understand you personally still wanting fighting to be a part of the game but if we're talking about the credibility of informed opinions, I'm going with Stevie Y over Grapes every time. Sure Stevo Y has had the more succesful carreer no doubt, but I mean in terms of experience Cherry has seen it all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted October 2, 2013 It wouldn't? Guys like Kaleta (nice to meet him tonight without an enforcer...), Cooke, Torres and other over the line rats would have a field day with younger and star players because they won't have to answer to qualityguys like Orr, McGrattan, MacIntyre, McLaren, Engelland or Thornton or Scott. Like I said if people hate fighting that much, there are other sports to watch..Yes hitting is part of the game and that's why this stupid front-office and the department for players safety has been to remove it from the game, with ridiculous rules. Like I said, I'm not sure exactly how I feel about fighting being taken out of the game, but the more it gets talked about the more I see there's not a lot of strong arguments to support it. And I'm kind of hoping someone will make one. Because overall I like fighting in hockey. But think of the guys you just mentioned. Cooke and Torres have a long history of cheapshotting players. All while fighting is still a part of the game. It's apparently not an effective enough deterrent for either one of them to stop cheapshotting. What finally got to Cooke's attention was a 17 game suspension from the league. The league's suspensions clearly haven't gotten Torres' attention yet, but neither has any enforcer. 3 Nev, Pskov Wings Fan and FlashyG reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Franzine 739 Report post Posted October 2, 2013 Steve Yzerman is a real man. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mackel 763 Report post Posted October 2, 2013 I think the problem is with "fighters" not fighting. I have no problem at all with a guy like McCarty, Shannahan, Drake, Big E, etc having the odd tustle when the chips are down. I do have a problem with guys like Parros, Orr and the like who have no business being in the NHL. These guys are in the league exclusively to fight, any points they earn or plays they make are minor miracles. I like tough hockey players who can fight when called for, I don't think a player who can only fight at the NHL level has a place in the league. 2 haroldsnepsts and Pskov Wings Fan reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Greek 323 Report post Posted October 2, 2013 It wouldn't? Guys like Kaleta (nice to meet him tonight without an enforcer...), Cooke, Torres and other over the line rats would have a field day with younger and star players because they won't have to answer to qualityguys like Orr, McGrattan, MacIntyre, McLaren, Engelland or Thornton or Scott. Like I said if people hate fighting that much, there are other sports to watch..Yes hitting is part of the game and that's why this stupid front-office and the department for players safety has been to remove it from the game, with ridiculous rules. Nothing but inference. There is ZERO proof that having fighters prevents cheap shots. I watch hockey because I love hockey. I've played the game my whole life. I don't really care about the fighting. If you love fighting so much, why don't you watch MMA? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WorkingOvertime 536 Report post Posted October 2, 2013 (edited) . Edited October 14, 2016 by WorkingOvertime Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frankgrimes 1,836 Report post Posted October 2, 2013 (edited) Nothing but inference. There is ZERO proof that having fighters prevents cheap shots. I watch hockey because I love hockey. I've played the game my whole life. I don't really care about the fighting. If you love fighting so much, why don't you watch MMA? Why should I? Fighting is part of hockey, just like hitting, goaltending, offense and defense it is part of the tradition of the game, it always was and always will be. I am not saying the anti fighting crowd should change their opinion, but if it's that big of a deal for people maybe hockey isn't the right sport for them. I mean, I wouldn't watch soccer and complain about the lack of toughness or fighting there, because - unlike hockey - it's not part of the game there. The thing is: Players want fighting in the game, they love guys like Parros, Orr, Scott...look at how much bigger Montreal played yesterday because of the presence of Parros. MacTavish has been quoted saying what guys like MacIntyre can do for the whole locker room. Think Cooke, Torres and Kaleta would still do their crap if the enforcers actually were allowed to go after them ? I don't. Edited October 2, 2013 by frankgrimes Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Playmaker Report post Posted October 2, 2013 Cherry has seen and probably played more hockey than 90 % of this planet he knows what he is talking about and I am glad there are people like him, who don't tolerate the watering down of this great game. If I have to pick sides, I'll go with Yzerman and Bowman. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cusimano_brothers 1,655 Report post Posted October 3, 2013 TSN's OTR with Michael Landsberg is always right on top of the latest topics. Today, he had a a spirited debate between two former players all too familiar with the subject: Lyndon Byers and Jim Thompson. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Greek 323 Report post Posted October 3, 2013 Why should I? Fighting is part of hockey, just like hitting, goaltending, offense and defense it is part of the tradition of the game, it always was and always will be. I am not saying the anti fighting crowd should change their opinion, but if it's that big of a deal for people maybe hockey isn't the right sport for them. I mean, I wouldn't watch soccer and complain about the lack of toughness or fighting there, because - unlike hockey - it's not part of the game there. The thing is: Players want fighting in the game, they love guys like Parros, Orr, Scott...look at how much bigger Montreal played yesterday because of the presence of Parros. MacTavish has been quoted saying what guys like MacIntyre can do for the whole locker room. Think Cooke, Torres and Kaleta would still do their crap if the enforcers actually were allowed to go after them ? I don't. http://www.youtube.com/embed/0DnQVtnRRMQ?autoplay=1 Please watch the video. Most of those incidents occured during a time when enforcers were used regularly. It certainly did not stop these situations from happening. That's because violence begets violence. As much as I hate Cooke, he has actually cleaned up his act quite a bit. Guess what, it was the league's sanctions that caused him to do it, not some enforcer punching his face in. If a hit is dirty, then it should be sanctioned by the league. If one of our star players are crushed with a clean hit there is no reason for an enforcer to fight him. 1 Mckinley25 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
evilmrt 636 Report post Posted October 3, 2013 Steve? Seriously? Too much sun down in Florida, Stevie? 1 Hockeymom1960 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mckinley25 679 Report post Posted October 3, 2013 I agree with Steve, lets use our brains to find ways to make the gameplay safer, not the players fists. Ive always hated when fighting happened, I cant think of any better way to describe it than stupid. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
John Marvin Murphy 33 Report post Posted October 3, 2013 I don't normally log in and post, just read, but people, listen. Remember when Drapes got his face ran into the boards? You think McCarty WANTED to fight Lemieux before that? Nope. Fighting in hockey is the equalizer. You make a dirty play on the ice, you're going to have to answer the bell. If you want to get rid of fighting, get rid of all the cheap dirty plays and the players who commit them. That's how you'll get rid of fighting, Hockey is a sport where team mates look out for each other, that should never change, it's what makes hockey different from every other sport. You know when Lidstorm got ran into the boards, SOMEONE was going to come running to politely object. No one fighting in hockey is out to injure another person. Evidence the other night in the Habs Leafs game. Parros was hurt, you could tell Colton wanted to immediately HELP his fellow hockey player, not punch him anymore. Keep hockey hockey. /rant 2 F.Michael and 55fan reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Greek 323 Report post Posted October 3, 2013 Keep hockey hockey. /rant Again, hockey will still be hockey once fighting is inevitably banned. I am puzzled by your logic. You propose the league gets rid of dangerous hits in order to reduce fights. Couldn't they just reduce both by sanctioning them in a logical and consistent manner? Also, it doesn't matter if anyone is trying to hurt someone else In a fight, because it still happens. It even makes less sense if that's the case. You have guys subjecting themselves to brain trauma with no cathartic benefit or deterrent effect. It's for nothing but entertainment value at this point. You can see it with all the stupid, scripted fights that happen right after the puck drops. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RyanBarnes! 293 Report post Posted October 3, 2013 So Stevie has now done a complete 180 from his playing days now that he has become management. How disgusting.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frankgrimes 1,836 Report post Posted October 3, 2013 TSN's OTR with Michael Landsberg is always right on top of the latest topics. Today, he had a a spirited debate between two former players all too familiar with the subject: Lyndon Byers and Jim Thompson. Byers is my man I love his reference to soccer mums and dads. The guy is one of the toughest to ever lace them up so he should know and Byers *like most players* is fully aware of the danger. Stevo Y can not tellme that he was not happy, when guys like McCarty, Koccur or Downey had his back, otherwise the Lidstrom incident against the Avalanche would have happened a lot more often with way worse outcomes. If the soccermums and dads of the world are deciding against hockey, because it is dangerious an violent so be it, these are also the type of parents who will scream bloody murder after a foul in soccer. Stuff like this sadly happens but banning the on ice policy and watering down the game even more is just pure nuts. It is too funnz that a guy lke Rutherford has also joined the discussion, maybe he just wants a rat like Ruutu being free to do his stuff. I am also not surprised that Shero is in favor of banning fighting, because the Penguins would never sign an enforcer right...oh the irony The players have already spoken they feel safer with an enforcer in the lineup, the enforcers are well aware of the danger so I really don>t think this debate will amount to anything, thankfully. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
