Todd Bertuzzi breaks Steve Moore's neck

[ISiddiqui]

Just because something isn't involved "in the flow o fthe game" doesn't mean it should be taken out. That's just nonsense.

Why is it nonsense... it destroys the 'part of the game' argument.

[Godzilla Blitz]

Originally Posted by sabotai

You need this because in hockey, the officials just can not see everything, and you can't add more. The game is just too fast.

This is a very interesting point. I hadn't thought of that before.

I wonder, though, if there aren't workarounds. What about adding officials off ice? Add one in each corner and a couple at center ice. Front row. With a light, buzzer, whistle, whatever, to stop play. Too expensive, I suppose.

Alternatively, I don't think the idea would be to see and call everything. The goal would be to catch enough infractions that committing the foul (the hack, the slash, etc.) is not a good percentage play. One the average punishment for the infraction outweighs the average benefit, the total number of infractions should decrease, reducing the problem as well.

The other thought is that I don't have a problem with the NHL fining players after the fact for egregious cheap shots, regardless of whether a penalty was called in game. Use the film and find the culprits. The NFL does it this way, and it seems to keep the violence under control.

And to add to Rexall's point, I've played a few contact sports, but found hockey to be the fastest, most intense sport I've ever played. I would agree that there is something in the nature of the game (the sticks, the speed, the cheap shots) that makes you want to pummel the guy you're playing against. Interestingly enough, I've been in four fights in my whole life, and two of them were while playing hockey. When you're going full speed, pumped up on adrenaline, and someone smashes you over the back of the head with a six-foot stick, I found it takes a hell of a lot of willpower not to turn around and smash the guy right back. So many times I did something to get revenge before my brain even registered me doing it. It's hard to explain if you haven't been there, but I do think there is some validity to the argument that hockey induces such violence. I have wondered, though, if it's not the message the pro game gives that leads to this tendency to want to use violence at all levels of the game. Kind of a chicken and egg argument. In other words, if fighting was tacitly condoned in pro football like it is in hockey, would I have reacted more violently to cheap shots while playing high school football?

Having said all that, I think that it is definitely feasible to get the "fight mentality" out of the pro game. College hockey doesn't have it. In college, if someone leveled one of our guys, we'd do our best to run the guy through the boards, but we'd do it within the rules, simply because fighting was not an option if you wanted to continue playing hockey. Ref missed the call? Tough shit. Score a goal to get revenge. In that regard I really enjoyed college hockey: the total focus of the game was on scoring goals and winning the game. You didn't have to worry about getting your ass kicked if you couldn't fight.

[sabotai]

In college, if someone leveled one of our guys, we'd do our best to run the guy through the boards, but we'd do it within the rules, simply because fighting was not an option if you wanted to continue playing hockey.

But doesn't trying to run someone through the boards pose a higher risk to serious injury than fighting?

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by sabotai

That makes no sense whatsoever. If kids can understand the reasons for checking, they can understand the reasons for fighting. Unless, of course, these parents are total idiots (which wouldn't surprise me)

Just because something isn't involved "in the flow o fthe game" doesn't mean it should be taken out. That's just nonsense.

It's not nonsense. If the consequences of fighting in hockey were such that they were a deterant, the game of hockey would suffer nothing. Let them bang and hit each other in the course of the game. A good solid hit is something to cheer for. Watching a couple of guys drop gloves and throw hooks at each other just doesn't cut it for entertainment. And honestly I don't take my daughter to hockey games because of the fighting garbage...Well that and honestly the "blood lust"(I'll borrow Isiddiqui's term) of the fans who cheer for it. And before you say that the fact that some low brows enjoy the fighting, you really do need to realize that those aren't the fans that hockey needs. Hockey needs to go mainstream, and to do it they have to clean up their act.

[rexallllsc]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

Hockey needs to go mainstream

Why?

[sabotai]

It's not nonsense. If the consequences of fighting in hockey were such that they were a deterant, the game of hockey would suffer nothing.

Except there would be more holding, more cheap shots, more players hacking at the knees of their opponents with their stick...eliminate fighting, and instead of two people having at it, you'll get one who takes their stick and gives a good cross-check in the back as retaliation for something (which only carries a 2 minute penalty) instead of fighting.

Let them bang and hit each other in the course of the game. A good solid hit is something to cheer for. Watching a couple of guys drop gloves and throw hooks at each other just doesn't cut it for entertainment.

For you.

And before you say that the fact that some low brows enjoy the fighting, you really do need to realize that those aren't the fans that hockey needs.

Oh, I'm low brow now? Because I find something entertaining that you don't? Fuck off.

[rexallllsc]

Originally Posted by sabotai

Except there would be more holding, more cheap shots, more players hacking at the knees of their opponents with their stick...eliminate fighting, and instead of two people having at it, you'll get one who takes their stick and gives a good cross-check in the back as retaliation for something (which only carries a 2 minute penalty) instead of fighting.

Anyone who has ever seen Euro league teams play, or played against them will vouch for this. Dudes are NASTY with those things.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by sabotai

Oh, I'm low brow now? Because I find something entertaining that you don't? Fuck off.

Come on you know you aren't a low brow. You actually enjoy the sport, you actually know the ins and the outs of it. The guys I'm talking about go to the games for the fights. Nice job of feigning indignation though. Not a tactic to be admired in a debate though, let alone a casual discourse like this.

[Karim]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

Let me respond to this with a personal story that somewhat relates to the Bertuzzi story (but on a way smaller scale).

I played a couple seasons in a very competitive floor hockey league. It sounds lame, but the talent level on the better teams (not mine, but the good ones) was very high. Anyways, being a relatively small league (8-10 teams I think), we played the same teams up to 4 or 5 times over a couple months. Naturally, every team has their a-hole, and familiarity breeds contempt, and well, near the end of the season play got pretty rough. The league, however, had a no fighting policy. Getting in a fight cost the player $25 and risked suspension or ejection from the league.

So anyways, in a close game near the end of the season the other teams a-hole elbows me in the face. No call. I look to the ref and complained, he claimed he didn't see it. Same shift, not even near the play, and DIRECTLY in front of the ref the guy elbows me HARD in the face again. No call. Now I'm pissed, but I can't drop 'em or else I'm done and paying money. So in a rage, I chase him into the corner (he's heading to the puck) and cross check him from behind into the boards. He went head-first, but was luckily uninjured. I got a 2 minute minor. I also didn't get elbowed in the face again.

After the game, I was completely horrified by what I'd done. We don't wear helmets, and I'd just hammered a guy from behind into the boards! But at the time, it seemed like the only way to let this guy know that I wasn't going to tolerate his crap. The ref certainly wasn't going to stop him.

Now, had fighting been merely a 5 minute major, I likely would have dropped them and tried to handle it that way. I don't know if I would have won the fight or not, but at least I would have sent my message in a way that at worst causes a bloody nose or a black eye.

Removing fighting from hockey will never solve incidents like what Bertuzzi did. And I will stand by my opinion that I think it would only cause them, or stick infractions or whatever, to increase.

Well said, Fidatelo. This is a good example on a smaller scale of why the instigator rule must be removed. I'd even go further and argue the unpopular opinion that fighting MUST be part of the game.

Maybe there is a flaw in hockey in that the referees simply cannot see everything. The game is too fast with too much motion that consistency in calls also becomes a problem. I've always thought with technology, maybe an off-ice official could help but that's another debate.

The league has always been a gate league and should abandon pandering for TV ratings. So a bunch of Americans dislike fighting and won't take their children to a game because of it. Fine. Not every sport is for everyone. Children and families are part of every game north of the border and we don't all grow up being thugs.

[Karim]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

I love violence in football and hockey for that matter. My position is that fighting shouldn't be tolerated in any sport that doesn't take place in a ring.

There's the problem right there. If you're FOR violence but AGAINST fighting, you're just asking for problems in hockey.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Karim

There's the problem right there. If you're FOR violence but AGAINST fighting, you're just asking for problems in hockey.

You can slash the back of someone's kneecap all you want just don't drop the gloves...

[Karim]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

You can slash the back of someone's kneecap all you want just don't drop the gloves...

Exactly. Several players are notorious for their willingness and ability to use the stick for infractions but unwilling to fight.

[sachmo71]

Originally Posted by rexallllsc

Really? Bertuzzi didn't get suspended? Legal hits are condoned. Fighting is condoned (take two to Tango!). Illegal hits and cheap shots are not.

But the argument was that in all sports, players can take revenge on other players to control the game. In hockey, the tolerance is much greater than in other sports.

The Bertuzzi example is in the extreme. We've now found that breaking someone's jaw, smashing them over the head with a stick, and breaking someone's neck in hockey will get you suspended for a long time, amongst other things. Beating someone to a pulp will only get you 5 minutes of feeling shame.

[bhlloy]

Glengoyne - I don't understand your argument. You love violence in hockey and football but don't think fighting has a place outside the ring. WTF?

Anyone who goes to a hockey match to watch a fight is a lowbrow? Do you watch boxing? Wrestling? I bet your daughter will see way more violence watching those sports on TV than she ever would at a hockey match...

[Fidatelo]

Here is a pretty interesting story on ESPN about the whole hockey culture. I found it interesting that he seems to prefer off-field violence by players as opposed to on-field violence (see his comments on NBA/NFL players).

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

Here is a pretty interesting story on ESPN about the whole hockey culture. I found it interesting that he seems to prefer off-field violence by players as opposed to on-field violence (see his comments on NBA/NFL players).

Interesting article, and he makes some decent points.

However... his whole "blame Canada" attitude is a joke. He rhymes off several prominent Canadian players who've been suspended, but conveniently shrugs off any American or European players. What about Derian Hatcher, arguably the dirtiest player in the league today? How about Ul Samuelsson ending Cam Neely's great career with a series of cheap shots? Gary Suter's vicious cross-check to Paul Kariya's head (not to mention his hit from behind on Gretzky in the World Cup)? Havlat's recent two-hander to Rechhi's head? Bure's elbow on Churla? The list goes on and on...

Of course there have been more Canadian suspensions than other countries. There are many, many more Canadian players.

[klayman]

The NHL's top five leaders in career penalty minutes -- Tiger Williams, Hunter, McSorley, Bob Probert and Domi -- are all products of the Canadian system and have committed the very acts the NHL says isn't a part of its game.

By the writer's same logic, the Top 5 leaders in career points scored -- Wayne Gretzky, Mark Messier, Gordie Howe, Ron Francis, and Marcel Dionne -- are all products of the Canadian system as well, and are the only players to actually get points in the NHL.

[druez]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

Interesting article, and he makes some decent points.

However... his whole "blame Canada" attitude is a joke. He rhymes off several prominent Canadian players who've been suspended, but conveniently shrugs off any American or European players. What about Derian Hatcher, arguably the dirtiest player in the league today? How about Ul Samuelsson ending Cam Neely's great career with a series of cheap shots? Gary Suter's vicious cross-check to Paul Kariya's head (not to mention his hit from behind on Gretzky in the World Cup)? Havlat's recent two-hander to Rechhi's head? Bure's elbow on Churla? The list goes on and on...

Of course there have been more Canadian suspensions than other countries. There are many, many more Canadian players.

Excellent point and I'm an American. Americans are just as willing to scrap as our northern friends. Its the Europeans that play a bit dirtier with the stick work, but won't square up.

[Maple Leafs]

Quick, someone check to see which nationality has committed the most fouls in the NBA. We better check to see if there's a cultural epidemic here.

[druez]

Originally Posted by klayman

By the writer's same logic, the Top 5 leaders in career points scored -- Wayne Gretzky, Mark Messier, Gordie Howe, Ron Francis, and Marcel Dionne -- are all products of the Canadian system as well, and are the only players to actually get points in the NHL.

Howe and Messier were some tough SOB's btw.

[ISiddiqui]

Why?

Because after the strike/lockout knocks out next season, the NHL is going to GREATLY struggle with breaking even.

Except there would be more holding, more cheap shots, more players hacking at the knees of their opponents with their stick...eliminate fighting, and instead of two people having at it, you'll get one who takes their stick and gives a good cross-check in the back as retaliation for something (which only carries a 2 minute penalty) instead of fighting.

Or you'll have players who'll try to show up cheat shot artists by scoring goals or making legal hits. How come in football, when someone makes a cheap shot, you don't see nearly as much 'retaliation'? Why is hockey so different? Why are cheap shots, basically, part of the game? Is it because the refs are unwilling to call things like obstruction and slashing?

[bhlloy]

In football, you don't have a stick and the players don't skate around and collide with each other at 80mph.

Plus, have you ever tried to fight in a football helmet and shoulderpads?

There are many other issues to consider, for example 30*82 hockey games a year compared to 32*16 football games, and lets not kid ourselves that cheap shots don't happen in other sports, they just don't manifest themselves in the same way. Plenty of NFL safeties have made their name as "hard-hitting", which basically means they cheap shot opposing recievers whenever given half the chance. This is applauded as a good play and you hear things like "well you won't see him looking to come over the middle again" Case in point - Brian Dawkins breaking Ike Hilliards jaw.

[druez]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Because after the strike/lockout knocks out next season, the NHL is going to GREATLY struggle with breaking even.



Or you'll have players who'll try to show up cheat shot artists by scoring goals or making legal hits. How come in football, when someone makes a cheap shot, you don't see nearly as much 'retaliation'? Why is hockey so different? Why are cheap shots, basically, part of the game? Is it because the refs are unwilling to call things like obstruction and slashing?

There are a ton of cheap shots that go on in football. Do you have any idea what goes on in the "pile". Or during a play? Late hits, facemasking, blow to the head etc...

[rexallllsc]

Originally Posted by sachmo71

The Bertuzzi example is in the extreme. We've now found that breaking someone's jaw, smashing them over the head with a stick, and breaking someone's neck in hockey will get you suspended for a long time, amongst other things. Beating someone to a pulp will only get you 5 minutes of feeling shame.

But it takes two to fight. They're both willing participants.

[rexallllsc]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Because after the strike/lockout knocks out next season, the NHL is going to GREATLY struggle with breaking even.

That doesn't mean they have to go mainstream. They're already having trouble breaking even since they'd gone "mainstream"...

[ISiddiqui]

There are a ton of cheap shots that go on in football. Do you have any idea what goes on in the "pile". Or during a play? Late hits, facemasking, blow to the head etc...

Is it anywhere NEAR the same level as hockey? Of course not.

That doesn't mean they have to go mainstream.

If they want to be successful, they do. Yes, yes, I know some of you want to return to having 6 teams, but that ain't the mark of a league's success.

[bhlloy]

If they want to be successful, they do. Yes, yes, I know some of you want to return to having 6 teams, but that ain't the mark of a league's success.

Define success. In the 80's there were less teams, the hockey being played was better and the league wasn't going bust. Since the league has tried to go mainstream and expand into mainstream markets the product has become diluted and the vast majority of teams are going bust because of the big market teams forcing wages and overheads up.

[rexallllsc]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

If they want to be successful, they do. Yes, yes, I know some of you want to return to having 6 teams, but that ain't the mark of a league's success.

That's like saying for a business to be successful, they have to be in the Fortune 500.

This league could've done fine w/0 expansion, yet they increased the size of the league by 1/3 over the last 15 years. This has diluted talent, and helped bring to fruiting the locks and traps that we see today (less talent -> more grinders -> systems for these grinders to minimize the talent gap).

The league need to get it's salaries in check, and give up the dream of being a top sport like Football, BBall, or Baseball. It's just not going to happen.

[bhlloy]

dola:

Quote:
There are a ton of cheap shots that go on in football. Do you have any idea what goes on in the "pile". Or during a play? Late hits, facemasking, blow to the head etc...


Is it anywhere NEAR the same level as hockey? Of course not.

I don't know actually - would be an interesting study. The number of big incidents in hockey the last couple of years has maybe got people thinking that there are more incidents than there actually are.

Plus as I said before there are 8 times the number of hockey games than football games a year.

Think about it... the last couple of years you have Sapp on Clifton, Dawkins on Hilliard, Romanowski on his teammates and opposing players alike, must be many many more. I'd say there's not a world of difference if you are honest. But it's sacrilege to say that football is anything other than a good ol' US pastime, where as hockey is a thugs game played by those wierdos from north of the border. Right?

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

Come on you know you aren't a low brow. You actually enjoy the sport, you actually know the ins and the outs of it. The guys I'm talking about go to the games for the fights. Nice job of feigning indignation though. Not a tactic to be admired in a debate though, let alone a casual discourse like this.

Sorry I took what you said totaly wrong. I thought you meant that anyone who likes the fights are low brow. But as soon as I look up what 'indignation' means, I'll tell you I wasn't feigning it.

How come in football, when someone makes a cheap shot, you don't see nearly as much 'retaliation'?

Whenever I see a cheap shot happen in football, I see the players on the other team looking to "get back him". When I played football, we had a saying. "Take his number". Which meant if you had a chance to get a shot on the guy (when you saw his number), take it. Example, in one game, the RB grabed a lineman's facemask and dragged him to the ground on a QB run to the other side. Ref totally missed it. They get up and a little scuffle occurs between several guys on both sides. Refs break it up and play continues. Us, as a team, "took the RB's number".

Later in the game, the RB went on out on a pass route...and our middle linebacker completely LEVELED him as he went up to catch the pass. They got their pass interference call, but we got our retaliation. That RB would not grab at the facemask of one of us again unless he liked getting destroyed like he did.

Retaliation happens in EVERY sport. Basketball, you get hacked when you take a shot, you hack him the next time. In baseball, a pitcher will bean a batter in retaliation. In football, an ILB will level an RB going for a pass as retaliation.

The reason hockey gets more attention for it's retaliation is because they accept it and talk about it being part of the culture. The other sports just whisper about it behind closed doors.

This is applauded as a good play and you hear things like "well you won't see him looking to come over the middle again" Case in point - Brian Dawkins breaking Ike Hilliards jaw.

And that hit by Dawkins was definatly an illigal shot. He put his head down and dove with his helmet. Clearly more dangers than a sucker punch from behind. But I didn't see Dawkins missing any games.

(Note: I am NOT saying that Bertuzzi should not be suspended for the rest of the season. Just to get that out of the way before someone took that the wrong way. )

Bottom line, for me, is that comparing hockey to football, baseball, basketball, etc. is comparing apples and organges. I just don't see how someone can say "It doesn't happen in sport A, why does it have to happen in sport B? Why are they different?" Because they ARE different. Hockey is a completely different game from football or baseball. They have different rules, different ways of dealing with thigs, etc. They are VERY different games, and require different solutions.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by sabotai

The reason hockey gets more attention for it's retaliation is because they accept it and talk about it being part of the culture. The other sports just whisper about it behind closed doors.

The more I think about it, the more I think you just captured the heart of this whole issue.