No sign of the thread starter. ooooooooooooohhhh. CONSPIRACY! Wow those Canucks sure assasinate their opponents quick. Did you caught him at the border or something??
Why did you eradicate him so soon Mr. Canuck? He hasn't even spread the word yet. Oh well. I mean Oh Canada!!
Funny, as much as everyone seemingly hates fighting in hockey, they all cheer it on at the game.
I think everyone here is trying to be too politically correct. For one thing, hockey fighting has actually decreased. And with the decrease of fighting, cheap shots and illegal stickwork have increased. The instigator rule has messed up the game and left players unprotected. And contrary to popular opinion, the players don't fight to entertain the fans. The NHL doesn't encourage it. The players aren't out there thinking about getting more ratings by drawing in a bloodthirsty audience. They fight to protect each other. It's not about the fans, it's about keeping their teammates safe by enforcing the unwritten rules of hockey.
Quote has been trimmed
I enjoy fights. I'm also religous. I admit that sometimes I struggle with that, with the idea that while I'm supposed to "Love my neighbour" and "Turn the other cheek", I enjoy watching two guys pound each other. But ultimately I've come to the conclusion that hockey isn't like real life. Maybe that's why people enjoy watching a hockey fight - it's rebellious. It stands against the politically correct norms of today. It refuses to conform. And it's a wonderful cathartic - maybe it really is what keeps Canadians non-violent. It allows us to be the exact opposite of our peaceful stereotype. I can't help but take delight in the fact that Canadians are the toughest athletes in the world.
Maybe we like it because it seems so heroic. Someone putting himself on the line, willing to endure pain to...
Quote: Originally Posted by TrebI think everyone here is trying to be too politically correct. For one thing, hockey fighting has actually decreased. And with the decrease of fighting, cheap shots and illegal stickwork have increased. The instigator rule has messed up the game and left players unprotected. And contrary to popular opinion, the players don't fight to entertain the fans. The NHL doesn't encourage it. The players aren't out there thinking about getting more ratings by drawing in a bloodthirsty audience. They fight to protect each other. It's not about the fans, it's about keeping their teammates safe by enforcing the unwritten rules of hockey.I enjoy fights. I'm also religous. I admit that sometimes I struggle with that, with the idea that while I'm supposed to "Love my neighbour" and "Turn the other cheek", I enjoy watching two guys pound each other. But ultimately I've come to the conclusion that hockey isn't like real life. Maybe that's why people enjoy watching a hockey fight - it's rebellious. It stands against the politically correct norms of today. It refuses to conform. And it's a wonderful cathartic - maybe it really is what keeps Canadians non-violent. It allows us to be the exact opposite of our peaceful stereotype. I can't help but take delight in the fact that Canadians are the toughest athletes in the world.
Quote has been trimmed
Personally, I don't like fights in hockey. I always thought that the idea of hockey was skating and puck control. I much prefer watching women's hockey, it's actually better.
The current trend in hockey, which seems to be to attempt to end the careers of good players by either going after their eyes or their knees is disturbing. If I was a coach, and one of my players deliberately went after another player's knees, I think I'd send him home for the night. In no other "profession" except boxing is it common to deliberately try to end your opponents career by injuring them permanently.
The trend toward cheapshots is extremely disturbing. I honestly think that's because of the instigator rule - players no longer have to face the consequences of their actions.
Quote: Originally Posted by TrebPerhaps it is a case of violence begetting violence?The trend toward cheapshots is extremely disturbing. I honestly think that's because of the instigator rule - players no longer have to face the consequences of their actions.
I don't know your age, of course, but do you recall (or have you ever seen) the earlier hockey games, circa 60's? There was very little fighting but the hockey action itself was incredible... possibly because it was sustained, uninterrupted by incessant fighting.
I think hockey should be hockey without fighting, and people who want to see good brawls should watch boxing or, for the cheesy factor, wrestling, or, for live action, head out to a bar in the seedier part of town.
I have no problem agreeing to disagree, I just thought I'd add my opinion.Ok, your guys opinions are great, but some of you do not know what the instigator rule is. It was actually put in place to protect the spotlight players from being attacked. Here is the rule, straight from the NHL rule book:
"An instigator of an altercation shall be a player who by his actions or demeanor demonstrates any/some of the following criteria: distance traveled; gloves off first; first punch thrown; menacing attitude or posture; verbal instigation or threats; conduct in retaliation to a prior game incident."
Bascially unless both players say hell yeah to the fight, one of them is getting the instigator penalty. The NHL put this into effect after the increase of figthing in the 70s in hope that star players would not be getting attacked because they had skill.
