Fighting has to go

[Bruisebros2426]

i'm pretty sure i didn't call you stupid. but it's tempting when you write:



blatantly not true lol. that's not a purpose, that's engrained culture. there. is. no. purpose. to. fighting. in. 2021.



this goes back to "read before you post" because this has already been addressed, multiple times. hitting serves a purpose, to separate a man from the puck. the purpose of fighting, according to you, is the players like it. you realize how ridiculous that sounds, right?



that's terrific, truly an intellectual counterpoint if i've ever seen one. there's a reason no other sports tolerate fighting like the nhl, but i guess if you don't give a shit that doesn't warrant consideration. well done, gold star. you win!

The purpose of fighting would be to hold someone accountable for running a goalie, captain, rookie, whatever. If players were dicking around throwing punches and taking themselves off the ice for 5 minutes for literally no point, why would anyone support it? "Engrained culture" is bullshit, it's a lengthy penalty to serve for a player with a spot on an NHL hockey team for it to have no purpose at all. Honestly ridiculous.

Hitting and fighting are both potentially hazardous aspects of the game. If you gave a shit about player safety and CTE as much as you're LARPing to, you'd be advocating for hits to be taken out of the game as well. But hitting serves a purpose TO YOU, so it can stay. You don't like fighting, and despite the overwhelming majority of players who actually play in the league openly supporting it's presence in the game, YOU don't think it serves a purpose so it's dangerous and needs to go.

You have to see how ridiculous this is. But difference of opinion. C'est la vie.

 

[Beau Knows]

Goalie sure but a female skater would suffer many broken bones playing against grown men.

So goalies are allowed, but skaters are cancelled because they might get hurt?

 

[NeelyWasAWarrior]

Who are you referring to as "they?"

As a reader, it is hard to follow an argument with broad pronoun usage. It is easier for each side to understand each other when definitions are clear.

cancel culture crazy people that’s who.

 

[RxPens]

Goalie sure but a female skater would suffer many broken bones playing against grown men.

Unless I have missed the study, I have not seen evidence that a 'female' bone is weaker and lore likely to break than a 'male' bone.

 

[NeelyWasAWarrior]

It's less about toxic masculinity and more about protecting players from unnecessary head trauma. But you go off, queen. Fight da power!

why drive and get into an accident when you can stay home. These are grown men not kids.

why not ban boxing and ufc. Why stop?

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

Unless I have missed the study, I have not seen evidence that a 'female' bone is weaker and lore likely to break than a 'male' bone.

in general, female bodies are smaller than male bodies
if a smaller female got hit by a larger male, there could be a serious incident

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

It's less about toxic masculinity and more about protecting players from unnecessary head trauma. But you go off, queen. Fight da power!

ban hits then if we are serious about head trauma

 

[NeelyWasAWarrior]

Unless I have missed the study, I have not seen evidence that a 'female' bone is weaker and lore likely to break than a 'male' bone.

wow lol just wow. You do realize female bones are more brittle and less dense right?

cmon man.

 

[Luminiferous]

Fighting has no place in Hockey, just like hockey has no place on earth. So yeah, get rid of it.

 

[NeelyWasAWarrior]

So goalies are allowed, but skaters are cancelled because they might get hurt?

you got it!

 

[RxPens]

wow lol just wow. You do realize female bones are more brittle and less dense right?

cmon man.

As people age this is certainly true, but not a lot of differences among the peak athletic years (ages 20-30). In fact, recent studies have shown that race plays as much of a role in bone strength as sex does. African women have bones that are as dense as Caucasian men of the same age.

 

[Beau Knows]

you got it!

So if there was ever a women who would be good enough to make an NHL team and want to try, you'd cancel her? Isn't that cancel culture?

 

[NeelyWasAWarrior]

As people age this is certainly true, but not a lot of differences among the peak athletic years (ages 20-30). In fact, recent studies have shown that race plays as much of a role in bone strength as sex does. African women have bones that are as dense as Caucasian men of the same age.

ok what about muscle mass and the ability to add that onto their frames?

anybody advocating females and males to play alongside each other in a physical sport is on some serious stuff.

 

[NeelyWasAWarrior]

So if there was ever a women who would be good enough to make an NHL team and want to try, you'd cancel her? Isn't that cancel culture?

no because there’s no women that are actually in the league.

 

[Beau Knows]

no because there’s no women that are actually in the league.

Right, so what are you worried about?

It's not fighting or hitting (which you slippery-sloped into the argument) that are keeping women out of the NHL. It's the disparity in athletic ability and skill, there's simply no woman who is capable of playing in the NHL even with fighting and hitting out of the league. The Canadian women's Olympic team plays matches against teenage boys...and they lose.

The idea that there's some conspiracy to take out fighting, so that they will later take out hitting, all so that women will eventually make it into the NHL is just absurd.

 

[NeelyWasAWarrior]

Right, so what are you worried about?

It's not fighting or hitting (which you slippery-sloped into the argument) that are keeping women out of the NHL. It's the disparity in athletic ability and skill, there's simply no woman who is capable of playing in the NHL even with fighting and hitting out of the league. The Canadian women's Olympic team plays matches against teenage boys...and they lose.

The idea that there's some conspiracy to take out fighting, so that they will later take out hitting, all so that women will eventually make it into the NHL is just absurd.

generally the same people in favor of taking out fighting for so called safety reasons will also be inclined to have hitting removed for the same reasons. Inclusion of females is a byproduct of getting rid of the first two but in general those in favor of getting rid of fighting and hitting are the same types that want women playing alongside men to prove their social agenda.

 

[Beau Knows]

generally the same people in favor of taking out fighting for so called safety reasons will also be inclined to have hitting removed for the same reasons. Inclusion of females is a byproduct of getting rid of the first two but in general those in favor of getting rid of fighting and hitting are the same types that want women playing alongside men to prove their social agenda.

Again - even removing hitting wouldn't get women into the NHL, there just aren't any that are good enough. So you can rest easy knowing that women aren't going to be playing in the NHL anytime soon if fighting is banned and hitting somehow goes with it too for some reason.

 

[RxPens]

ok what about muscle mass and the ability to add that onto their frames?

anybody advocating females and males to play alongside each other in a physical sport is on some serious stuff.

There is absolutely differences in muscle mass and frame development and distribution, without question.

I am not advocating for "females and males to play alongside each other in a physical sport," I was simply correcting information so that everyone can have a factual discussion.

One last point on the injury discussion. it has been shown that when adjusted for the number of players actively on the ice and involved in the play, the rate of injuries for goaltenders is no different than that of position players. Presumably, a female that has the skill required to play the game at an NHL level would be able to do so at any position, regardless of risk for injury. Having said that, I agree that the skills required to be in the NHL may be more suited to the goaltender position, as it relies more heavily on physical tools that vary less among the sexes.

 

[MBH]

Fans complaining about toxic masculinity?
Now I've seen everything.
The Woke circus never ends.

 

[MBH]

There were 13 goals in Tampa's 7-6 overtime win over Detroit.
The loudest that arena got is when Larkin punched Joseph in the face and, for a split second, it looked like mayhem might break out.
Playing on the edge of mayhem is what makes the NHL so damn exciting compared to other sports.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

so your position is as long as it's entertaining to the fans, it has to be kept in? think carefully before you answer

I think adults should be allowed to make decisions and carry responsibility for whatever decisions they make. So long as they are informed and consenting, I think the rest of society should mind their own business and stop trying to foist their beliefs on the rest.

Was that "careful" enough for you?

 

[vandymeer13]

Unless I have missed the study, I have not seen evidence that a 'female' bone is weaker and lore likely to break than a 'male' bone.

It's common sense. It's one of the reason they don't have hitting in womens hockey.

 

[PK Cronin]

let's learn what arbitrary means. apply that same standard to players being forced to wear helmets. if the majority of players wanted helmets to be optional, would you support that? i'll pay you the compliment of assuming you wouldn't. why not? who is being arbitrary now?

I would have zero problems with players choosing not to wear helmets because it's none of my business if someone else wants to engage in risky behavior. So no, I'm not being arbitrary at all.

Here's the definition from Merriam-Webster in case you needed a little help:

based on or determined by individual preference or convenience rather than by necessity or the intrinsic nature of something

it is exactly the same as laws. if we were smart enough to not speed because it's dangerous, we wouldn't need speed limits. if players were smart enough to not throw blindside hits to the head, we wouldn't need to make that a penalty. laws, government regulations, rules etc are there to protect people too stupid to protect themselves. are you really advocating some kind of lawless thunderdome?

Yeah, that's not something I believe in at all.

You think you're smarter than they are so you want to enforce rules you want. I think that the players should decide what they want, whether that means fighting or no fighting. They don't need me, you, or anyone else to protect them, so long as they have all the necessary information available to make the decision.

weird logical fallacy, i don't get to decide anything and i didn't say otherwise. i'm voicing my opinion on a hockey message board.

You're free to give your opinion, it's just a bad opinion.

why can't grown men, voluntarily driving a car, decide whether or not they want to go 100 mph in a 65?

They can and do. Does your car not get up to 100 mph?

I think adults should be allowed to make decisions and carry responsibility for whatever decisions they make. So long as they are informed and consenting, I think the rest of society should mind their own business and stop trying to foist their beliefs on the rest.

Was that "careful" enough for you?

 

[nbwingsfan]

Wait would you actually complain if a woman was good enough to make the NHL? There's no rule against it, so you'd be calling for her to be cancelled...

No woman will ever be close to good enough to play in the NHL. Especially if there’s contact

 

[nbwingsfan]

let's learn what arbitrary means. apply that same standard to players being forced to wear helmets. if the majority of players wanted helmets to be optional, would you support that? i'll pay you the compliment of assuming you wouldn't. why not? who is being arbitrary now?

it is exactly the same as laws. if we were smart enough to not speed because it's dangerous, we wouldn't need speed limits. if players were smart enough to not throw blindside hits to the head, we wouldn't need to make that a penalty. laws, government regulations, rules etc are there to protect people too stupid to protect themselves. are you really advocating some kind of lawless thunderdome?



weird logical fallacy, i don't get to decide anything and i didn't say otherwise. i'm voicing my opinion on a hockey message board.



why can't grown men, voluntarily driving a car, decide whether or not they want to go 100 mph in a 65?

The car argument makes no sense. You can’t go 100 because he’s dangerous to everyone else. You can’t tell a guy you don’t want to go 100 because it’s dangerous to you. You can tell a player you don’t want to fight. Not remotely the same thing