Fighting In Hockey

[Mike]

3 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

is it whining and complaining or is it, free from the politics and consequences of speaking out, a way to try and effect change or educate other players and fans?

There are former players whining and complaining, and there are former players speaking out to try and have a positive impact.

I never stated otherwise.

I only have a problem with one of those. The problem is, there are far more complainers.

[The Unknown Poster]

No one here is in the game of hockey at this level so we can discuss it but we dont understand it like the players and others around the game do.

George Laroque:

Lots of hockey fans think that every tough guy loves the fighting part of his job. Nothing could be more wrong. I know them all, and throughout my career I’ve met only four guys who really loved to fight.

Every other tough guy in the league would rather do anything but fight on the ice. They would love to score tons of goals, become more and more talented, and earn bigger salaries, all the things hockey players dream of the moment they become hockey players. And I was one of those. I never enjoyed fighting.

I did it because it was my job and the only way for me to keep playing in the NHL. Period.

I could be injured, hurting everywhere — it didn’t matter. If I had to go, I simply had to. When my team was being dominated, I had to go. If my team was running up the score, I had to be ready to be jumped at any moment. In hockey, a lopsided score means there’s going to be trouble, and if there’s trouble, guys like me have to go to work. I remember a few times when I hoped the score would remain tight between the two teams just so that I could catch my breath. Even then, if one of the top players on my side was being harassed by an opponent, same thing, I had to go.

The state of stress it put me into was sometimes unbearable. I really believe that those permanent feelings of anxiety and stress, when you add them to the constant fear, are pretty rare in professional sports.

I really want the families of the three tough guys who died dramatically while this book was being written to accept my deepest and sincerest condolences.

Those guys did a tough job, a job they probably didn’t want to do most nights. No matter what anyone says about that job, it takes a lot of courage to always be accountable and to always stand up for your teammates, whether you feel like it or not.

When our soldiers come back from a dangerous mission abroad, more often than not they are left out in the cold. They experience psychological problems that often prevent them from being able to fully reintegrate into society and to find jobs. The stress they went through when they were doing their jobs often leads them to fall into drug and alcohol abuse.

Well, the same goes for some of the NHL tough guys after their careers — with a couple of huge differences, though. First, soldiers are national heroes defending and protecting their countries. And, second, they don’t get paid nearly as much as hockey players do.

So, yes, it is urgent we take some action to protect the NHL tough guys during and after their careers, but it is even more urgent we do the same for our true heroes.

[The Unknown Poster]

Here's a story on Derek Boogard from the National Post:

CHICAGO — The family of a National Hockey League player who died of an accidental overdose of pain medication and alcohol has filed a wrongful-death lawsuit against the NHL, blaming it for brain damage he suffered as an enforcer and for his addiction to prescription painkillers.

Derek Boogaard, who was found dead on May 13, 2011, at age 28, was posthumously diagnosed with chronic traumatic encephalopathy, a degenerative brain ailment that can be caused by repeated blows to the head, according to the 55-page lawsuit filed in Cook County Circuit Court late Friday.

“Prior to and during Derek Boogaard’s career, the NHL knew, or should have known, that the Enforcers/Fighters in the NHL had an increased risk of brain damage due to concussive and sub-concussive brain trauma and were particularly susceptible to addiction issues,” it says.

“To distill this to one sentence, you take a young man, you subject him to trauma, you give him pills for that trauma, he becomes addicted to those pills, you promise to treat him for that addiction, and you fail,” William Gibbs, attorney for the Boogaards, told The New York Times.

[The Unknown Poster]

5 minutes ago, sweep the leg said:

Whining and complaining.

So you know the intent and feelings of every hockey player?  How do you know this?

[Mike]

Perfect - two examples of complaining.

No offense to the late Derek Boogaard or his family, but if "the NHL knew, or should have known" then so should have Boogaard.

It's not exactly breaking news that getting punched in the head repeatedly can have a negative effect on a person.

[Mike]

2 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

So you know the intent and feelings of every hockey player?  How do you know this?

No matter the intent, when the approach to it is "the big bad NHL made us do this, even though they knew it was bad", it comes across as whining, not an effort to educate and create awareness.

[The Unknown Poster]

2 minutes ago, Mike said:

No matter the intent, when the approach to it is "the big bad NHL made us do this, even though they knew it was bad", it comes across as whining, not an effort to educate and create awareness.

You're making judgements about intent when you have no idea.  Never been in the position.  Never been in a scenario where its your career and making those choices.  Laroque's remarks certainly dont come across as whining.  Unless he's lying, he engaged the PA earlier in his career about steroids because of his fear of fighting guys on drugs.  So he "quietly" tried to make changes.  There is a culture in sports where you dont speak out.  I think people are not taking into account the pressure of that culture. 

Should we tell Laroque to shut up because he didn't quit and speak out way back when no one would have cared, no one would know who he was or why what he said mattered? 

Boogard is somewhat different in that its legalese and its going to come across differently.  But a link between the pressures of being an athlete, taking repeated blows to the head, getting hooked on painkillers, OD'ing or whatever?  I can buy that.  We've seen it many times in many sports (or entertainment).

[Noeller]

Instigator rule is the worst thing to happen to hockey, imo. 

Edited March 22, 2016 by Noeller

[Mike]

4 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

You're making judgements about intent when you have no idea.  Never been in the position.  Never been in a scenario where its your career and making those choices.  Laroque's remarks certainly dont come across as whining.  Unless he's lying, he engaged the PA earlier in his career about steroids because of his fear of fighting guys on drugs.  So he "quietly" tried to make changes.  There is a culture in sports where you dont speak out.  I think people are not taking into account the pressure of that culture. 

Should we tell Laroque to shut up because he didn't quit and speak out way back when no one would have cared, no one would know who he was or why what he said mattered? 

Boogard is somewhat different in that its legalese and its going to come across differently.  But a link between the pressures of being an athlete, taking repeated blows to the head, getting hooked on painkillers, OD'ing or whatever?  I can buy that.  We've seen it many times in many sports (or entertainment).

Classic TUP. I'm just going to see my way out of this conversation, I don't feel like discussing anything with someone who doesn't actually want to discuss it.

[StevetheClub]

While I agree with TUP that it oversimplifies a complex situation to say "they knew what they were getting themselves into so too bad for them", I think there are better arguments. That being said, I do think it's a systemic issue but I don't have the energy or time to get into that so I won't.

One, when I think of hockey at it's best, when it's appointment viewing and the rest of the world stops while I watch, I think of international tournaments and the playoffs. In both, I think, you see hockey the way it was meant to be played, with speed, skill, and little to no fighting. I want less fighting, I'd even be fine with no fighting, so I can watch more hockey like that.

Second, I firmly believe (biased, perhaps) Laroque when he says that the vast majority of fighters with they don't want to fight. I take that to mean that they would rather be in the league for their hockey skills rather than their fighting skills. I think that is very telling and indicates to me that hockey, at its purist, is about skating and stick-handling, goals and assists, and not what you do with your fists. For those of you in favour of fighting, I would be very interested in how you would define hockey IQ prior to this conversation if asked. I would be very surprised (though I could be wrong) that if unprompted, that fighting or references to it would be a part of your response.

All this being said, I do find fighting entertaining, but I think that's what it is: entertainment. I know some of you will argue fighting's place on that basis and that fine. It's not that it doesn't have any value - I know it can get a team and a crowd going (I'm not convinced it does anything to clean up the game) - it's just that I think I'm ready to watch real hockey and not something that needs fighting to make it more entertaining.

[mbrg]

4 hours ago, Mike said:

These fighters took on these roles largely because they willingly stepped up to accept them in the first place. It's not as if they were first round draft picks who mistakenly got assigned goon roles on their first day of training camp - these are the fringe guys who did what they needed to do to carve out a NHL career, they accepted the risks and felt that in the moment, it was worth it. Don't complain about it now. If you didn't like it, you shouldn't have done it. It's not as if they can realistically expect people to believe they didn't know the risks of getting punched in the head.

Years ago I played a season of senior with a guy who'd I'd had a chance to watch/coach when he was in his teens.  He was a skilled player who was fairly soft, shied away from contact as much as possible.  He got a tryout with the Winkler Flyers but couldn't crack their lineup as a rookie based on his skill.  That's the way it can go with those teams, not a lot of spots for rookies if there haven't been many vets move out from the prior season.  He was told outright, you're not going to get a spot on this roster unless it's as the role of enforcer.  I don't think he'd been in a fight in his life before that.  He wanted to play, that was his only in, so he said yes.  He got wailed on a lot at the beginning, but he kept stepping up cause that was his job.  He got better at fighting eventually, and as time passed he moved up from the 4th to the 3rd line.  I think he finished his career there as their 2nd line winger.  But fighting was his only in.

4 hours ago, Mike said:

It's not as if they can realistically expect people to believe they didn't know the risks of getting punched in the head.

It wasn't that long ago that the cure for getting punched in the head was sniffing smelling salts and getting back out there.   And if a guy flopped and flailed around on his way back to the bench, the arena would have a big laugh.  Commonplace stuff just 20 years ago.

[AtlanticRiderFan]

Slashes, headshots, glove punches, cross-checking, you name it. All of that will significantly increase if you ban fighting. I don't necessarily like the pure "enforcer" role, but I am ok with having players that can protect the stars. I think other talents should come with the fighting though.

Fighting should be limited, but it shouldn't be "banned".

Edited March 27, 2016 by AtlanticRiderFan

[Jimmy Pop]

On 3/27/2016 at 1:26 PM, AtlanticRiderFan said:

Slashes, headshots, glove punches, cross-checking, you name it. All of that will significantly increase if you ban fighting. I don't necessarily like the pure "enforcer" role, but I am ok with having players that can protect the stars. I think other talents should come with the fighting though.

Fighting should be limited, but it shouldn't be "banned".

This I don't get.  Is there any proven correlation to support this?  Furthermore, the idea of enforcers protecting star players seems like an outdated notion anyway.  Which enforcer is Pitt employing strictly to protect Crosby?  Or Tampa with Stamkos? How about the 20+-years-straight-in-the-playoffs Detroit Red Wings - simply an exception to your rule?

Fighting, at least in my lifetime watching hockey, certainly doesn't curtail any of the "chippy" things you mention. It's typically a response to the above mentioned actions. So not sure how a lack of fighting would increase occurrences of these acts,

[bearpants]

On 27/03/2016 at 1:26 PM, AtlanticRiderFan said:

Slashes, headshots, glove punches, cross-checking, you name it. All of that will significantly increase if you ban fighting. I don't necessarily like the pure "enforcer" role, but I am ok with having players that can protect the stars. I think other talents should come with the fighting though.

Fighting should be limited, but it shouldn't be "banned".

The same sad argument people keep trying to use... fighting doesn't slow these things down... multiple game suspensions, ie multiple game cheques, is what will prevent these types of cheap shots... the only thing fighting does now is provide a little extra excitement...

[Brandon]

So how come fighting is allowed in hockey but completely disallowed in  baseball, football, basketball, soccer, tennis, water polo ,  darts etc.....

The fighting should be cut out of the game ASAP it really doesn't do anything for the game. 

It's almost as ludicrous as X-Arm....  (youtube it...)

[The Unknown Poster]

2 minutes ago, Brandon said:

So how come fighting is allowed in hockey but completely disallowed in  baseball, football, basketball, soccer, tennis, water polo ,  darts etc.....

The fighting should be cut out of the game ASAP it really doesn't do anything for the game. 

It's almost as ludicrous as X-Arm....  (youtube it...)

Clearly all those other sports are awash in cheap shots, dirty hits and untalented goons who's sole job is to target star players.  They *need* fighting to clean up their sports.  A good bench clearing brawl in Water Polo would go a long way to cleaning it up.

Edited March 29, 2016 by The Unknown Poster

[bearpants]

2 hours ago, Brandon said:

It's almost as ludicrous as X-Arm....  (youtube it...)

I did... and wow, that "sport" takes ridiculous to a new level...