A new spin on an old debate...should fighting be banned (or at least curtailed) in the NHL?

Question

I have yet to engage the contributors here on the hockey forum with this long-standing issue: has fighting in the NHL become...outdated? With a premium on skill and speed (where have we heard this before), the enforcer is going the way of the Hartford Whalers. For every Derek Boogaard and Georges Laraque there are at least ten guys who can not only provide a physical force, but they can be nightly contributors also. Having a guy on a roster just for fighting is senseless, especially during the salary cap era.

The point is, should fighting be outlawed as it is in the other sports? Is it time to finally refine the great game of hockey? The best rebuttal (pro or con) will get the prize. Have at it!

Answer 1

The only thing I agree with you is the last sentence on your first paragraph. It is very pointless to have a guy on the roster who just fights nowadays. Players who can do both are the asset though (and Wade Belak who can play any position...he's a good economical filler for injuries).

Fighting will always exist in hockey. Period. It curbs the heavier violent incidents like stick infractions. Player A has a problem with something that Player B did (say, he went after the star player or something like that) so they duke it out and everything's fine afterwards. If fighting is banned, Player A will do everything in his limited power to get back at Player B without getting fined or suspended. Again, stick infractions are popular. I remember back in the mid to late '90s where some guy just swung his stick at another player's knees. There's almost no protection there and that could've ended that player's career.

Also, the theory that more fighting in popular culture in bullcrap. Even on the same level as an old wive's tale. Let's start with the stereotype of Canadians. We're known to be friendly people (side note: all Canadians except for Toronto...source: personal experience). I think it's because of things like hockey where we can take our aggression out. We don't need laws like the right to bear arms. That just causes more problems.

Another theory resides more within criminology. Japan has THE lowest pedophiles and sexual assault rates anywhere in the world. Why? Their sexually innuendo'd anime. More guys spend more time jerking off to that stuff than going out and raping some little girl. Sick? Yeah, it is, but the ends do justify the means. Another example is the Netherlands. One simple thing: they legalize and regulate the crap out of prostitution. The government regulates the burlesque owners like there's no tomorrow. In return, the prostitutes are protected by the owners and the government. Some idiot decides to take advantage of the girl outside the contractual agreement? No problem. Police will hunt him down and process him to the full extent of the law. The Dutch actually make the oldest profession more prestigeous than it is here. Anyways, as a result of these laws, the Netherlands has the lowest overall crime rates in the world. One of the few justice systems in the world where it's not clogged.

The common factor in these: people have an outlet to their primal urges. In the Western world, we tend to submerge these urges because they're not socially "acceptable," much like fighting in hockey. As a result, the ends in doing so will have heavier damage like taking out someone's kneecap or or head on the ice because two NHLers cannot consentually settle it and be done with it. If they can't, what's next? Parking lot brawl between two professional hockey players?

Answer 2

Sure, when you ban war, boxing, football, violence in movies, some reality shows that purposely show violence, all news, and the list goes on! This topic is getting so sick. Really, I mean, what is the percentage of people that watch a hockey game compared to other types of violent shows? It's probably not that high and if you compare it to many of the video games that are out what's worse? The game has been changed and continues to be changed from what it once was and that was an interesting sport to something that just barely resembles what it used to be. The other thing is how do you ban emotions because that is what a lot of it is based on as well. The only people that really get hurt are the two players involved and that should be their choice as part of the game. What about this new boxing that is the fad that allows just about anything and everything? That's entertainment? That's okay for kids to view along with some adults that don't understand that it is supposed to be entertainment? Get real! Enough changing and talk has been done about the game of hockey so just leave it alone for a while and let people adjust to what has happened and seriously, if someone does not like fighting in hockey there are plenty other sports to watch or other shows so don't go trying to be some kind of saviour of the universe and changing something you have no idea of what it is about.

Answer 3

Fighting will always or at least for a while in the be a part of the sport yes they are having guys that can fight and play the game more than just having a guy that cant play the game like Rob Ray( not dising him b/c i actually liked his style of play) but fighting is a part of the game too also most fans like this part of the game and get excited about it on the Buffalo Sabres web site there was a Q and A session with Enforcer Andrew Peters and here is the question

Q: Do you think fighting will always be a part of hockey?

Andrew Peters Answer

A: It doesn't look like it's leaving for the next few years with all the [fighters] signing two and three year deals.

If it does, it won't be for a while.

But I think it will always be a part of the game. The fans would be disappointed because it's definitely something that they love. It's been part of the game forever. If you take that out then you get rid of some grit. People love to see the hard-hitting grittiness.

Also here is the web site
http://sabres.nhl.com/team/app/?service=page&page=NewsPage&articleid=336427

Answer 4

No.

The rules permit fighting. It is also a game of agression. Unlike football where the purpose of the game is agression (so the outlet is always present), hockey needs its own outlet.

Gone are the days when 15 people on the team will end up in a fight, now the number is down to 5 or 6.

One of the most celebrated fights in recent history was Iginla/Lecavalier. They fought as 'equals'. Neither one would take on Derek Boogaard or George Laraque unless they absolutely had to.

Even the goons go after themselves nowadays.

Wade Belak said it best a couple of years ago. He said he wouldn't fight Mario Lemieux, but he'll do everything he can to frustrate him and heep him at bay (which would be fine if Belak had the skills to be in Lemieux's face).

Baseball? The agression is against the ball.
Basketball? Personally, I think figting should be permitted....but only among the players
Football? Every play is an act of agression.
Hockey? It's no fun getting hit, especially in the face. Sometimes you just need to give the guy a noogie to let him know you care! The next time...you break his nose!

Answer 5

I agree that hockey has changed alot over the last ten years, and 'goons' have become more and more rare. (examples are Brashear, Domi etc...).
This does not mean that fighting should be banned or even curtailed in the NHL. A huge amount of NHL fans watch the game because they love the physical aspect. Seeing guys get smashed into boards or bloodied in a fight gets the crowd going and gives Hockey an intensity found in few other sports.
The game is becoming more and more a game of finesse, and i dont complain about it, but we need to let hockey evolve by itself. If teams can win more games by playing a less physical style, then yes fighting will become less common, because managers will build their rosters to reflect that style.
I do Not think that fighting should be outlawed as it is in other sports, but i do think that it is possible for the game to continue to see decreases in the amount of fights.

Answer 6

The game is and will continue to evolve, but the perception will forever remain.. from the Hanson brothers, to the broad street bullies.. Fighting is part of hockey's history, lore and mystique..

Even when goalies go at it (not very well, Vernon and Roy) it's front page, lead Sports center stuff..

Hockey can ill-afford to ban it all together.. it is, part of the marketing value of the game.. I hear from casual fans who are disapoointed when they go to a game and there is no fighting.. So for some, it is the reason they watch.. the wrong reason in the long run, but if it gets them interested so they see the full beauty of the game's speed, skill and aggressivenes, then to rid the game of it would be a huge mistake.

I also believe fighting can reduce the number of serious injuries simply because it is dissuasive to illegal stick use.. a stick to the knee, rib cage or wrist has a longer effect of games missed than a punch in the nose or eye.. and without fighting, other teams are more inclined to take those cheap shots at the skilled players, and are more likely to go for the 'intent to injure' And the intent to injure is not always premeditated, often it's a 'crime of opportunity' to which some players would think twice if they had to face a Stu Grimson fist in retaliation to a cheap hit on one of his teammates..

Bottom line is fighting needs to be in the game, but it does need to be 'highly regulated' and controlled..

Answer 7

There seem to be less and less fights every year. I think fighting might "fight" itself out. Fighting is an important part of the game, I think it should never be banned. However, people that don't really watch hockey, when they see fighting, that lowers the sport in their mind. Fighting is illegal in all sports, except hockey, so when people see fighting in hockey, they get turned off by it because it makes the sport seem less professional. Remember I'm talking about people that don't follow hockey, but maybe try to. That's the con of fighting in hockey, the biggest con there is. But to people who follow hockey, like me, fighting is part of the game and should never be banned.

Many guys are enforcers, but are very useful to their teams overall. Look at Ian Lapperiere, he was 2nd in the NHL in fights last year, but he had 20+ G and 20+ A in 05-06. He can fight, and score, and he's the alternate captain. I think there will be no true enforcers in the NHL in 10 years, but there will be players who can act as enforcers when needed.

Answer 8

no, fighting always has and always will be a part of the game. it was there long before entertainment was a factor in its existence because it is not for entertainment, it is to keep players honest and the game moving by controlling cheap shots and illegal stickwork, to protect a team's skill players, and to swing the momentum. does it entertain? yes, but that is not its sole purpose. hockey will not be the same it fighting is removed - it would take away a valuable part of the game. the argument that u would lose fans - toss up. you would gain some, too, and not many would leave for good. however, illegal stickwork and injuries would skyrocket, the crosbys of the nhl would be getting killed every game, and the game would slow down. the refs cannot control every aspect of the game, fighting keeps the games under control and running smoothly by allowing the players to police themselves. as for enforcers being outdated, i don't really care. I heard one argument that any player who fights must average 10 minutes of ice per game - fine with me. hockey doesn't need goons with a roster spot just to fight, but it does need fighting.

Answer 9

Ban it altogether to correspond with the new rules in the NHL....no other team sport allows a player to stay in the game after fighting....and it's time the owners and GM's went that way....it would also eliminate the need of wasting a salary on a guy who just is on the team as a fighter and frees up a space for another skill player.

Answer 10

The great game of hockey is refined enough.

Having a guy just for fighting is senseless. But if an NHL team thinks they need him to win, then more power to them. Personally, I'd like to see more Brendan Shanahan/Gordie Howe-types in the NHL (guys who can not only light up the score board but bash someone's brains in as well)

What I'm saying is this: teams should not focus on fighting as a means to an end but fighting/enforcing still is needed in the NHL.