Breaking The First Rule Of Hockey's Fight Club...
by J.P. on Feb 6, 2009 11:00 AM EST
25 comments
Pugilism in pucks is a much discussed topic these days, and by all means feel free to share your thoughts in the comments to this post. But rather than dive into the issue head first (it is, after all, Friday), we'll dance around and glorify the fisticuffs a bit for now.
Inspired by Behindthenet's post on the top 25 fights over the past three seasons (as rated by you, the fans, at hockeyfights.com), here's a list of the top 10-rated Caps fights over that span (click on the combatants to go to the hockeyfights page for that bout):
And here's a look at that highest-rated fight over the past three seasons:
Agree or disagree - was that the "best" (whatever that means in this context) fight inolving a Cap in three years? What are your thoughts, more generally, on fighting in hockey?
0 recs |
25 comments
| Add comment
|
Email
Print
Comments
Whence the controversy?
Something about this just isn’t right. There was a horrible accidental death involving a minor leaguer this season, but this ‘fighting controversy’ seems to have appeared in the last few years – and I’m wondering what the source of the ‘outrage’ was/is.
The players certainly didn’t initiate it. The overwhelming majority of NHL fans, while they may argue over the merits of the instigator rule and resulting ‘staged’ fights, certainly aren’t clamoring to rid the sport of fighting. The league has more or less defended fighting as a regulated but accepted element of the game. So…
In this town, regardless of one’s personal politics, those of us who pay attention know when an issue is being pushed and a largely frivolous argument is being treated as something that arose from the grassroots, yet that isn’t the case. My antennae are twitching on this issue.
Reading THN is an exercise in being ridiculed and called a knuckle-dragger for enjoying the odd tilt in hockey. I suggest the inimitable Adam Proteau’s blog for a dose of Canadian uber-liberal sanctimony. Other than ’you’re just an English pig with no manners,’ the argument against fighting seems to lack a coherent and obvious logical starting point. Maybe it’s me, but it seems to have originated largely with a segment of the press rather than fans or players. Dunno.
by Cap74 on Feb 6, 2009 11:44 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
1) The poor guy who was killed wasn’t even a ‘minor leaguer’ he was in a senior league(Amateur) Those guys shouldn’t even allow body checking, let alone fighting. That incident seems to be the impetus behind the recent spat of anti=-fighting rhetoric we’ve been inundated with recently.
2) Geez, what if the poor guy had died as a result of a shoulder hit, would we be discussing ways to curb or end body checking in the NHL? Silly. Fighting is a great part of the game. It sells!
by Fauxrumors on Feb 6, 2009 1:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
1) The poor guy who was killed wasn’t even a ‘minor leaguer’ he was in a senior league(Amateur) Those guys shouldn’t even allow body checking, let alone fighting.
Which is why the league he was playing in at the time issued a game misconduct (and I believe a suspension) for fighting.
by David M. Getz on Feb 7, 2009 11:11 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Meh, Brash in a slight decision…personally, I enjoyed the Brash-Cote double dip from an otherwise forgettable game in PHI.
Fighting is good for the game. Hockey is one of the few sports where, in the span of a few moments, combatants get away with what otherwise would get them picked up for assault. Liberties are taken, and fighting is like the great athletic accounting system, unrivalled really in any other major team sport. Football you say? I’ll grant the violence is equal and superior at times, but the NFL retribution happens deep in a pile or in a tangle of legs away from sight most of the time. Hockey fights are public record, and, in my opinion, serve a purpose that goes beyond gratuitous violence.
That said, it sucks about that kid who died after a fight a few weeks ago. I have no problem enforcing helmet use if you’re gonna drop ’em, and you get penalized if you fight without one. No visors though—you should be assessed an additional deuce if you fight with one.
by bigonetimer on Feb 6, 2009 11:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Agreed on the Cote fight
Not very competitive, but I’d say that was the best from a Caps fans perspective.
by Jay Jay on Feb 6, 2009 4:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks JP
Also, thanks to JP and the other contributers and commenters here. This site is a cut above the similar ones in other cities. The statistical analyses and excellent discussions found here are very welcomed for a longtime fan who now doesn’t have to suffer the Canadian press. No offense to Canadians, but its nice to have a knowledgeable and resourceful Capitals-only site. The other sites seem fixated on inside jokes and quickly become the equivalent of four guys in a basement passing a bong around.
Thanks to JP for putting together something for the grown ups.
by Cap74 on Feb 6, 2009 11:55 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
Couldn’t agree more Caps74.
Now, could you please pass the doobie?
by marks4java on Feb 6, 2009 12:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks, 74.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Feb 6, 2009 12:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Its cliche to say, but its part of the game, bottom line. I don’t want to go back to the 70s and ridiculous bench clearing brawls, but I don’t want to see fighting eliminated entirely.
My personal favourite on that list? Erskine popping Lucic’s nose….awesome
Ron and Fez Noon to Three
by YvonLabresMoustache on Feb 6, 2009 12:09 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
"staged fights"
I’m pleased that this term has become such a critical part of the current debate. Well before the Sanderson tragedy, I found myself tiring of the pre-meditated, dance around each other like boxers for 30 seconds before throwing a punch, kind of bout.
Its ALWAYS embarrassing when having to explain its existence to new or aspiring hockey fans, and I find myself at a loss for crafting a good rationale for it — it’s usually met with a “ok, whatever you say” kind of reaction.
When I see a guy like Brashear — and God love him, he’s a great asset to our team — start to shimmy and shake his mitts in the face of a opponent’s meathead like Cote, I yawn. But when a guy like Brads, or Clark, or Laich, goes after someone, I know there’ll be fireworks.
Surely fighting cannot be “eliminated” from the game: it’s a tremendously violent sport, played at high-speed, in a confined space, and people will come to empassioned blows even with severe sanction (as they do in baseball and to a lesser extent, other sports).
But if the rules changed to where players were to be ejected from that game after a fight, I can’t say I wouldn’t welcome the change. People don’t smoke on airplanes anymore without a stiff fine.
Would that result in guys taking runs at a guy like Backstrom or Semin with impunity? That’s what the proponents of fighting say, but we’ll never know unless rules are changed.
by theredskate on Feb 6, 2009 12:25 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Unintended Consequences
Redskate,
Agreed about the staged fights and the difference between the ‘boxing match’ appraoch of Brash versus the heat-of-the-moment excitement of a middleweight dropping the gloves. A Dale Hunter, Darcy Tucker, or Francis Bouillon (five feet eight inches of Francophone fury) bout is absolutely part of the sport. Getting rid of those will get rid of fans.
The only problem I have with the argument to immediately eject and/or suspend players who fight is that it would surely lead to a rise in agitators who attempt to goad the opposition’s best players into fights. If a Jarko Ruutu type can yap and take enough liberties without refs looking to entice Ovechkin to punch him, he’s accomplished his mission by getting him off the ice for the game. There’s some of this now, of course, but it would increase a lot with your proposed rule change.
The staged fight is a direct result of the instigator rule. Get rid of that, and you’d see less of them.
by Cap74 on Feb 6, 2009 12:38 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
When I see a guy like Brashear — and God love him, he’s a great asset to our team
Is he? Are the Caps’ goalies and stars not being run? How many called and uncalled goaltender interference penalties have we seen lately (and really dating back to the Philly series).
I think a case can be made that the Caps would be better off with a true goon at half Donald’s price. At least a Godard, Orr, thug-du-jour knows what he’s out there to do and does it.
And for all the talk of how Donald can actually play the game, he has how many points on the season? Yes, he has more hockey skills than some of his goonier colleagues, but we’re just damning with faint praise – if fighting were outlawed, would Brash have a job? Nyet.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Feb 6, 2009 12:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Speaking of that Philly series, Brashear was cycling better than Lance Armstrong. Without him, that fourth line is half as effective, in my humble view.
by theredskate on Feb 6, 2009 1:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Is he? Are the Caps’ goalies and stars not being run? How many called and uncalled goaltender interference penalties have we seen lately (and really dating back to the Philly series).
I think issue is how many would the Caps be seeing if Brashear weren’t on the roster? If it were significantly more, he’s doing his job. As for the number with him on the roster versus without him on the roster….that’s just speculation at this point.
by David M. Getz on Feb 7, 2009 11:13 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
“Would that result in guys taking runs at a guy like Backstrom or Semin with impunity? That’s what the proponents of fighting say, but we’ll never know unless rules are changed.”
I don’t think so. I don’t see it happening in leagues that have banned fighting. And actual observation is better than speculation, isn’t it?
Pittsburgh Black And Gold -- So new, it still smells like paint!
by JustinM on Feb 6, 2009 12:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s a shame the Caps had to have such an active afternoon – they killed this post (which is filled with great discussion, btw).
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Feb 6, 2009 4:32 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think my favorite fight...
…has to be this one right here.
It happened right in front of me, first time I’d ever sat in the lower bowl.
by Murshawursha on Feb 6, 2009 6:39 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Definitely one of my favorite fight pictures ever.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Feb 6, 2009 7:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It's interesting to wonder if fighting is truely needed to preserve the integrity of the game.
I wonder how a game with as much emotion, speed, and hitting as professional football can remain moderately civil. A part of me thinks the NHL falls back on enforcers because the league leadership is too spineless to impose punishments in any standardized way for cheap play. It can be fun for the fans to watch an impromptu tussle, but I wonder how many of them are really impromptu. And nothing bothers me more than the fight after a good, but clean hit on a star.
by DCMariner on Feb 6, 2009 7:21 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think that if the NHL really wanted to eliminate fighting, they’d simply ban it. The game would survive. We have a culture of fighting in hockey that trickles all the way from the brass of teams down through some of the players, and on to the fans and those who cover the game for a living. That’s the biggest obstacle. If – and that’s a big if – the NHL sincerely is interested in curtailing fighting or eliminating it entirely, then they should simply do it. Given the NHL’s pussyfooting around the issue for decades, I have doubts they are truly committed to getting rid of it. The NHL has takes positive steps with this: things like the third man in rule and and suspension for those who leave the bench to fight.
But I’m fine with it either way. If they’re going to allow fighting, if they think it’s a part of the game, then don’t gum things up and make it difficult for the officials by including all sorts of caveats in the rules: different penalties for when a fight happens or how it happens, etc. On the other hand, if they really want to get rid of it, then simply do it. It’s not going to drive me away, and those who would be driven away by the elimination of fighting were missing out on all the other wonderful things that happen in a hockey game and were lost souls to begin with in the first place.
I just wish the NHL would take a side on this debate and act accordingly.
I have as many wins in a Capitals uniform as Michael Belhumeur does.
by marky narc on Feb 6, 2009 7:45 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
The problem is that the fighting debate is, at bottom, a battle about revenue. It is a battle between traditionalists who want the game to stay the way that it has always been and those wishing to bring the game into the mainstream.
While it is undeniable that a great number of hockey fans enjoy the fighting, I think a far greater number of potential fans stay away from the sport precisely because of the fighting. Sports that are successful appeal to the greatest number of people and that means, almost without exception, appealing to women and children as well as to guys. For example, football is far and away the most popular sport not because of all the guys that watch the games but because of the huge numbers of women that watch the games. And while there are of course women who enjoy boxing, the UFC, etc, my sense is that a far greater number of women don’t. And the women that don’t are not watching hockey though they are clearly watching football.
And the same goes for kids. I sit in Section 111 and often take my 4 year. We are close enough to the ice that the fights are often up close and my son finds them scary and disturbing, as does my wife. She is often reluctant to let me take my son precisely because the Donald might get into it with Cote. And I am leery of letting him watch an NHL game without constant supervision because of the fighting. I have no such concerns with football, baseball etc.
Me, I enjoy the fighting as much as the next guy and will surely watch all the youtube clips. But my wife won’t and I won’t allow my son to. And that is revealing.
The bottom line is that hockey will always be viewed as a marginal sport as long as it allows fighting. To the traditionalists, this may not be a bad thing- there is something to be said for the sometimes cult-like following hockey engenders. But if the NHL ever wants the TV deal it says it wants, if the NHL ever wants to supplant basketball and challenge baseball for overall popularity, if the NHL ever decides/figures out that there is more money in preventing fighting than in allowing it, there will be no more discussions about the rightful place fighting enjoys in the game. Fighting will be banned and the game will continue and grow. Whether it will be as enjoyable as before, we each will have to decide.
If it ain't broke, don't break it.
by ChrisAm on Feb 6, 2009 9:12 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Very interesting read. I have to say that I do disagree with one aspect of it: I don’t think hockey is going to be a marginal sport until fighting is removed for a couple of reasons. One is that I don’t regard hockey as a marginal sport as is, although it’s weaker than basketball, football, and baseball. The other is that I’m just not sure that many people are going to start watching hockey if fighting is banned because I just don’t think there are that many people out there who would say, “Well, I didn’t want anything to do with the NHL because there was fighting but now that it has been eliminated I’m going to go buy a five game ticket plan!” If you like a sport, you deal with what you regard as the undesirable aspects of it, the same way people deal with NFL players who dance around after 60% of the plays, baseball players who use steroids, or soccer players who dive sixteen times a game.
by David M. Getz on Feb 7, 2009 11:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well Said
Absolutely.
While it’s conceivable a middling fan could stop watching hockey because of fighting, banning it isn’t going to attract fans. Plus, fighting isn’t something that just appeared or greatly intensified in the past few years. In the 70’s and 80’s there were more fights and there seemed to be more line brawls even 5-10 years ago then there are today. I refer to my first post – this whole argument seems manufactured to me.
The difference between hockey and football (other than the hip-hop dance after a first down or sack – and honestly, I liked football/basketball more than hockey at one point and the culture drove me away) is that hockey is faster and men play with less padding and sticks. The game doesn’t pause every ten seconds. Fighting was made legal specifically to prevent dirty play that could could cause serious injury or death.
Hockey has its own culture. DMG is right, the fans accept this for better or worse. Soccer is the world’s most popular sport, but I can’t watch it. Its boring and I can’t stand whining, diving, and stupid choreographed dances when a goal is scored every 6 1/2 hours. But is is what it is and millions love it. You could change the sport to the degree that I might become a casual fan, but you’d lose far more real fans than it would be worth to get me to go to one game. The NHL can grow its fan base by proper marketing (its more than just Crosby!,) better TV exposure (coming up after Scottish caber-tossing on Versus…) and making Gary Bettman go away. Seriously altering the sport to attract your average NBA fan is suicide.
by Cap74 on Feb 9, 2009 4:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Chris,
Your points are well stated. I would suggest that women love hockey – there always seems to be a large percentage of female fans and couples at games I’ve seen in DC, Philly, and STL. My girlfriend has gone to a couple of games and is hooked.
I understand the fighting isn’t for some. Personally, I would have a problem taking my child to see an MLB game infested with steroid-aided cheaters or to watch the me-me-me culture of NFL football with its chest-pounding and end zone dances. To each their own. Arguments can be made against all sports, particularly when one must pay good money to take himself and his family.
For me, personally, what made me forever a hockey fan was meeting Capitals like Labre, Gartner and Hunter away from the rink. Each were humble, polite family men who played a tough warrior sport on the ice and handled themselves with class in the community. That was important for me to see as a young man, and stood in contrast to what I saw on the news about other sports.
Hope you and your family stick with hockey. Yes, it’s rough. But it has a code and a culture that, when followed and respected, make it the finest of all our professional team sports.
by Cap74 on Feb 9, 2009 4:21 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
On Facebook? Use Connect to join SB Nation. Share insights with fans and friends.- » Create a new SB Nation account
- » Already registered with SB Nation? Log in!
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Japers' Rink
Related FanShots on Japers' Rink
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
Southeast Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Washington
|
72 | 48 | 14 | 10 | 106 |
|
Atlanta
|
71 | 31 | 29 | 11 | 73 |
|
Carolina
|
71 | 30 | 33 | 8 | 68 |
|
Tampa Bay
|
71 | 28 | 31 | 12 | 68 |
|
Florida
|
70 | 28 | 31 | 11 | 67 |
(updated 3.21.2010 at 8:42 AM EDT)
The Vault
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Video: 'History Will Be Made' campaign debuts with Lemieux, Orr
- Saturday's Three Stars: Wings beat clock again; Rinne blanks Jackets
- NHL.com ready to open the Vault for classic games online
- Friday's Three Stars: Dubnyk finally gets 'W'; Nash nets 2
- Puck Previews: Sharks seek turnaround; anger, blame in Boston
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
