Playoff Fighting?

[ClydeLee]

Reasons why it should remain intact:


1. Retaliation/ Self-Policing: Fighting is justified in retaliation for cheap shots and agitation.
2. Deterrence Effect: By allowing fighting, the overall level of violence, instigation, or cheap play is reduced.
3. Penalty Draw: Fighting or agitation by threatening fighting can be used strategically to induce the opposing team to commit a penalty.
4. Outgrowth of Physical/Aggressive Play: Fighting is an occasional, though expected, consequence of the physical play that is necessary to hockey.

The problem is this ideas are just not true. 1 might be true, if you didn't say Justified, it does it but who determines if it's justified? The league, and not all leagues view it the same as the NHL

2. The point in bringing up old issues, like there was tons of, is to acknowledge how the deterrence effect isn't real. There would be more cheap shots with less fighting in the league if that was the case and with leagues that eliminated fighting, there would be more violence there and that's not the case. This idea is just wrong.
3. Yes this exists, but it equally exists with baiting guys without fighting as well, just doing the little slashes that drives a guy to slash you back harder when the Refs are looking. It's not something that's seriously needed paired with fighting it's there without that.
4. Fighting isn't necessary it's taken out by auto suspensions or having refs break it up when it begins with no adjustments to the effects of how violence work in younger leagues like the NCAA hockey or other euro leagues that have done so. It's not some unknown scenario as other leagues have tested things out before it happens, that's basically how it goes for every rule change the NHL does, it's always tested elsewhere first.

 

[Ton]

Idk who you are, IHN guy I'm guessing? Haven't seen you post much. But anyways, I like you.

Yes sir. I've been on hiatus since, but I should be back for good now.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

Yes sir. I've been on hiatus since, but I should be back for good now.

Oh great.

 

[DMelt36]

Dont we already see the officials controlling games more than we ever have? If they arent controlling the flow they are def missing a lot of offsides in this era. Probably too busy looking out for little hacks and interference to even bother looking for basic rules like offsides. Too many rules in the rule book now have officials missing the basics.

I think the league has better equipped them to dissolve fuses these days, the fight instigator rule as the chief weapon in their arsenal. (An admitted awful fucking one, that goddam rule is terrible).

 

[BlackHawkPaul]

Dont we already see the officials controlling games more than we ever have? If they arent controlling the flow they are def missing a lot of offsides in this era. Probably too busy looking out for little hacks and interference to even bother looking for basic rules like offsides. Too many rules in the rule book now have officials missing the basics.

More officials and less done on the ice.
When the second ref was brought in the thought was to curb all of the "out of sight" issues.
Look how much it's helped with another set of eyes on the ice.
Plus Frank can't play 3 Blind Mice anymore.

 

[MaryChristine]

Hawks are loaded with guys that could turn me *** if i ever had the choice. Stupid genetics didnt allow **** pleasure though in my life. Or God was looking out for me. What ever...all i know is if i were *** i would have half the team tattoed on my ass.

 

[Sunbiz1]

Dont we already see the officials controlling games more than we ever have? If they arent controlling the flow they are def missing a lot of offsides in this era. Probably too busy looking out for little hacks and interference to even bother looking for basic rules like offsides. Too many rules in the rule book now have officials missing the basics.

The NFL and NBA have already fallen victim to over-officiating, do we as hockey fans really want the same to happen to our beloved sport?.

Fighting is part of player self-policing, remove it and those 1 goal OT wins will become a lot more controversial...plus as you mentioned place more burden on refs.

 

[HeHateMe]

The NFL and NBA have already fallen victim to over-officiating, do we as hockey fans really want the same to happen to our beloved sport?.

Fighting is part of player self-policing, remove it and those 1 goal OT wins will become a lot more controversial...plus as you mentioned place more burden on refs.

I don't think they should be allowed to bite eachother though. That is just nasty.

 

[DMelt36]

The NFL and NBA have already fallen victim to over-officiating, do we as hockey fans really want the same to happen to our beloved sport?.

Fighting is part of player self-policing, remove it and those 1 goal OT wins will become a lot more controversial...plus as you mentioned place more burden on refs.

I still want to know what mythological world you live in where this is actually true.

 

[ClydeLee]

The NFL and NBA have already fallen victim to over-officiating, do we as hockey fans really want the same to happen to our beloved sport?.

Fighting is part of player self-policing, remove it and those 1 goal OT wins will become a lot more controversial...plus as you mentioned place more burden on refs.

Is it really? People complain about how the league is at a low point in goals scored again compared to the last 3-5 seasons it is dropping, and what else is dropping, Refs calling penalties. The penalties in the past 2 seasons have been called significantly less than previously which leads to less PP time for stars to score a lot more PP goals. It's a particular assumption that the league is overofficaited or other sports are overofficaited and not actually just officiated BADLY.

Is there a self policing problem in the NCAA or many Euro professional leagues? How is an overtime game controversial without fighting, you mean like nearly every OT game in the NHL postseason beyond round 1?

 

[DMelt36]

Is it really? People complain about how the league is at a low point in goals scored again compared to the last 3-5 seasons it is dropping, and what else is dropping, Refs calling penalties. The penalties in the past 2 seasons have been called significantly less than previously which leads to less PP time for stars to score a lot more PP goals. It's a particular assumption that the league is overofficaited or other sports are overofficaited and not actually just officiated BADLY.

Is there a self policing problem in the NCAA or many Euro professional leagues?

Can't say that I watch a ton of Euro leagues, but the stereotype has always been that the idea of fighting in hockey is a purely North American (ESPECIALLY Canadian) philosophy. So I doubt they have a self-policing "problem" because they likely just don't fight all that much.

 

[Sunbiz1]

The problem is this ideas are just not true. 1 might be true, if you didn't say Justified, it does it but who determines if it's justified? The league, and not all leagues view it the same as the NHL

2. The point in bringing up old issues, like there was tons of, is to acknowledge how the deterrence effect isn't real. There would be more cheap shots with less fighting in the league if that was the case and with leagues that eliminated fighting, there would be more violence there and that's not the case. This idea is just wrong.
3. Yes this exists, but it equally exists with baiting guys without fighting as well, just doing the little slashes that drives a guy to slash you back harder when the Refs are looking. It's not something that's seriously needed paired with fighting it's there without that.
4. Fighting isn't necessary it's taken out by auto suspensions or having refs break it up when it begins with no adjustments to the effects of how violence work in younger leagues like the NCAA hockey or other euro leagues that have done so. It's not some unknown scenario as other leagues have tested things out before it happens, that's basically how it goes for every rule change the NHL does, it's always tested elsewhere first.

Why fix something that isn't broken?...I don't want Olympic hockey in the NHL.

It makes some intuitive sense that players would be less likely to instigate or agitate if they knew a “goon” was going to be coming after them. So it might be true that by the NHL being open to some minor fighting, it reduces the overall level of violence in the game. This is true even if fighting is rare. It can be just the goon-threat that prevents the initial instigation from occurring or getting out of hand.

 

[fatbeard]

I've been on topic the whole thread until FistTimer and flatbread came in here to troll me.

Shouldn't you be starting an ironic thread about how Stan Blowman's failures have ruined the Hawks?

 

[DMelt36]

Why fix something that isn't broken?...I don't want Olympic hockey in the NHL.

It makes some intuitive sense that players would be less likely to instigate or agitate if they knew a “goon” was going to be coming after them. So it might be true that by the NHL being open to some minor fighting, it reduces the overall level of violence in the game. This is true even if fighting is rare. It can be just the goon-threat that prevents the initial instigation from occurring or getting out of hand.

No, it is not true.

 

[ClydeLee]

Why fix something that isn't broken?...I don't want Olympic hockey in the NHL.

It makes some intuitive sense that players would be less likely to instigate or agitate if they knew a “goon” was going to be coming after them. So it might be true that by the NHL being open to some minor fighting, it reduces the overall level of violence in the game. This is true even if fighting is rare. It can be just the goon-threat that prevents the initial instigation from occurring or getting out of hand.

You don't think vast things are broken with the league? Especially fighting systems and goon type players being at high injury risk? The entire punishment and rules situation is busted.

That it makes sense argument has been made for years with no avail as constant upon constant years of that not having any result exists. And actual non fighting situations or leagues in hockey don't really fluctuate. It doesn't lessen nor raise cheat hits in years following results. Guys like Matt Cookie or Raffi Torres don't change their game whether it's just the 1st line of Colorado out there or the likes of John Scott or Brandon Bolig. It's just a, well it seems so but really not because the problem isn't pre-mediated thinking out who is on the ice and if I can get away with a shot now issues. It's guys just reacting on spot more often, and guys who do that so frequently like Cooke ought to really be punished more like taken seriously out a season by suspsendion. Because having a guy fight him for 30 seconds doesn't do shit to them. It never has been an actual deterrent based on history of guys talking about their cheap hits.

 

[LordKOTL]

Brandon Bollig was right next to Raffi Torres on the ice when he nearly murdered Marian Hossa. Fighting doesn't control shit.

You must not have saw what happened. Bollig tried to engage. Torres Turtled. Torres got zilch. The 'hawks had to kill of 7 mins. That's not a Fighting issue, that was an epic fale of everyone charged with player safety. The Ref's didn't handle it (and quite frankly should have been fired for not handling it), and Bollig got hit hard with PIMs--which in that scenario the 'hawks were screwed either way. The 25 games (which Count Von Buttman reduced) didn't really enter into it.

Now, in the days of guys like Probert, Torres would have gotten pummeled whether he turtled or not--or whether or not the linesman tried to hold Probert back.

IMHO the league can't have it both ways--either they're serious and they start throwing the book at guys who play cheap and get rid of fighting, or they don't penalize guys for trying to protect their players from cheap play when the officials won't.

 

[Ares]

I was talking about Sharp with someone the other day.

Piece of advice for Sharp: Don't let the door hit you or Bickell on the way out... both are done, IMO.

 

[The Hawk]

I liked how Shaw stood up to that goon trying to rough up Kane. And actually Shaw got the better of it because that guy had sore ribs afterwards. Shaw has had a great play-off run particularly with Bickell missing in action.

 

[TCD]

I liked how Shaw stood up to that goon trying to rough up Kane. And actually Shaw got the better of it because that guy had sore ribs afterwards. Shaw has had a great play-off run particularly with Bickell missing in action.

Shaw is playoff built there is no doubt about it and hes actually a good skater. He takes way too many penalties though but that goes with the territory for sure. Bickells fine hes in the wrong system even though he has been able to produce in it in the past. Bickell would fit well on a team like the kings...not suggesting he is going there that team has cap issues itself. But a system like LA would be good for Bickell. He just seems out of place on the hawks sometimes sticks out like a soar thumb.

 

[ClydeLee]

I've never had a problem with Shaws penalties... because he regularly draws more penalties than he takes. Statistically it just shows up that way and benefits the team more by having his role filled. I felt Bickell had his best playoff games when teams would try to force the Hawks to play a different game other than their own style. And his style helped flourish with it but the Hawks have been mainly fast break heavy all playoffs and he at least mainly hadn't slowed them down at all.