who gives a **** what other leagues do?
this is the nhl.. the top league.. for men.. there is fighting.. there should be fighting..
fighting has other purposes then just taking cheapshots out.. it does that.. it can also set the tone for a game.. can swing momentum in the favor of your team win or lose..
geez i think ranger fans should be the ones who have seen it with their own eyes.. 2011 rangers led the league in fighting majors.. Every game teams knew they literally had to fight to win.. when you have a few guys on the team no one will **** with.. it makes everyone a few inches bigger.
now teams come in and its a field day, a vacation, creating their own personal memories in the garden..
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-p...erwhelming-opposition-fighting-175557533.html
Hmm here I was thinking Mirror Master was a comic book villian.... Am I alone in my opinion?
I say we go even further !
Two pistols, 10 paces, turn and fire !
NHL duels ! The 1800's had it right![]()
Anton Inbedkov: Shall we say pistols at dawn?
Boris Grushenko: Well, we can say it. I don't know what it means, but we can say it.
People who aren't ethnocentric and understand that there's plenty to be learned from other cultures? The elimination of the two-line pass largely came from seeing how the lack of the rule made for a more fluid, open game in European leagues. You'd be hard-pressed to find many people who think that change was a bad one.
What ridiculous, misogynistic, barbaric logic. This is professional sports in the 21st century, not lion fighting in Ancient Greece. I'd like to think we've developed as a society to the point that one doesn't have to resort to gooning around just to prove his "manliness." Ryan Callahan takes all sorts of ridiculous abuse every single game. He played last season with all sorts of ****ed up shoulder issues. He shouldn't have to defend himself against some meathead whose only contribution is thuggery just because he made a hard, yet clean hit on a player.
You are aware that there can be a middle ground, right? The world doesn't work in absolutes. I have no problem with two guys deciding to fight in the context of the game so long as they're doing so with a mutual understanding and respect. The McGrattan & McIlrath fight was a perfect example of this. The fight was a natural development within the game, and they both mutually agreed to drop the gloves rather than just attacking each other like savages. Then, once it was clear that McIlrath was tiring, McGrattan let up, gave him a pat on the back, and skated away. This is fine with me. What's not fine with me is the idea that McIlrath should be OBLIGATED to fight McGrattan just because McGrattan feels like it's time for Dylan to show off his manliness to the world.
The 2011 Rangers also led the league in Winter Classic victories, former members of the 2004 Stanley Cup winning Lightning, and players born in Minnesota. Using your logic, we could equally attribute the team's success to one of those things. According to hockeyfights.com, the teams currently leading in fights this season are the Maple Leafs, Flyers, Sabres, and Blue Jackets. Toronto is barely clinging to a playoff spot. The other three suck. Meanwhile, the Blackhawks, Ducks, and Sharks are in the bottom half of the league in fights. Yet they're three of the best teams in the NHL. How do you account for this exactly?
And this probably has a lot more to do with the fact that nobody on this team can score, our defensive coverage is inconsistent, and Hank isn't at his best. Or we could just chalk it up to fighting despite the fact that the Rangers are a respectable 11th in the NHL in that department, with Derek Dorsett tied for the league lead.
Hockey is a sport where guys are on blades, carry spears, and have the the license to assault one another.
I don't get why all these emos whine and cry about the physicality of the game.
There are leagues that don't have fighting. There are leagues that don't hitting. It's either over in Europe, Amateur or women's leagues. Go watch that and be entertained if you are so anti-fighting.
Sick and tired of reading a bunch of emos try and sound as if they are intellectually superior.
Didn't we have this debate, ad nauseam, recently? If I recall it did not end well for those that previously lacked an understanding of fighting's rightful place and impact within the NHL.
Seem like pretty good reasons.Really? I've seen plenty of people attempt to tackle the whole "fighting has a rightful place and impact within the NHL" thing in this thread and so far the best we can come up with is:
1. PJ Stock totally believes it
2. Everyone who doesn't like fighting is a big vagina who should watch figure skating
3. The 2011-2012 Rangers fought a lot!!!!
Show me the evidence for it. If it's so convincingly obvious then it shouldn't take you very long to pile on the evidence given all the information and statistics the internet provides us with.
Really? I've seen plenty of people attempt to tackle the whole "fighting has a rightful place and impact within the NHL" thing in this thread and so far the best we can come up with is:
1. PJ Stock totally believes it
2. Everyone who doesn't like fighting is a big vagina who should watch figure skating
3. The 2011-2012 Rangers fought a lot!!!!
Show me the evidence for it. If it's so convincingly obvious then it shouldn't take you very long to pile on the evidence given all the information and statistics the internet provides us with.
Didn't we have this debate, ad nauseam, recently? If I recall it did not end well for those that previously lacked an understanding of fighting's rightful place and impact within the NHL.
Didn't we have this debate, ad nauseam, recently? If I recall it did not end well for those that previously lacked an understanding of fighting's rightful place and impact within the NHL.
Didn't we have this debate, ad nauseam, recently? If I recall it did not end well for those that previously lacked an understanding of fighting's rightful place and impact within the NHL.
Please. Enough with this evidence nonsense. You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true.Show me the evidence for it. If it's so convincingly obvious then it shouldn't take you very long to pile on the evidence given all the information and statistics the internet provides us with.
If that's the purpose, fighting has failed miserably.The real reason fighting should be part of the game is to keep guys like Orpik and others from running around and taking cheap shots at opponents.
The real reason fighting should be part of the game is to keep guys like Orpik and others from running around and taking cheap shots at opponents.
In the "old days", a player knew if he took a cheap shot at someone, he was going to have to answer for it. Player also knew that HE was going to have to defend himself and not turtle like a wuss. Too many times getting an ass kicking kept a cheap shot artist from continually doing it (unless his team had another goon that would do his fighting for him.)
Now, what stops an Orpik from laying a cheap shot on a guy? The refs and Shanny? A couple thousand bucks? Heck, the cheap shot artist's team might even end up with a power play because the victim's team retaliated! It's kind of like thinking the police are going to save you from criminals. By the time you call them, you're already a victim, or you're dead. Allow the victims to protect themselves, the criminals think twice before attacking people.
But then again, I'm sure the people who want fighting banned think the game is so much safer with full face shields, even though it enables players to carry sticks higher and higher each year.
Please. Enough with this evidence nonsense. You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true.
Though seriously, has anyone provided a reasonable explanation as to why Boston, who supposedly can police themselves, have had to have the league stand up for them more than any other NHL team in terms of total suspensions and games suspended? Or why in seven of the last eight seasons, the bottom 10 teams in terms of fighting majors have outperformed the top 10 teams in the standings seven times?
Really? I've seen plenty of people attempt to tackle the whole "fighting has a rightful place and impact within the NHL" thing in this thread and so far the best we can come up with is:
1. PJ Stock totally believes it
2. Everyone who doesn't like fighting is a big vagina who should watch figure skating
3. The 2011-2012 Rangers fought a lot!!!!
Show me the evidence for it. If it's so convincingly obvious then it shouldn't take you very long to pile on the evidence given all the information and statistics the internet provides us with.
The real reason fighting should be part of the game is to keep guys like Orpik and others from running around and taking cheap shots at opponents.
In the "old days", a player knew if he took a cheap shot at someone, he was going to have to answer for it. Player also knew that HE was going to have to defend himself and not turtle like a wuss. Too many times getting an ass kicking kept a cheap shot artist from continually doing it (unless his team had another goon that would do his fighting for him.)
Now, what stops an Orpik from laying a cheap shot on a guy? The refs and Shanny? A couple thousand bucks? Heck, the cheap shot artist's team might even end up with a power play because the victim's team retaliated! It's kind of like thinking the police are going to save you from criminals. By the time you call them, you're already a victim, or you're dead. Allow the victims to protect themselves, the criminals think twice before attacking people.
But then again, I'm sure the people who want fighting banned think the game is so much safer with full face shields, even though it enables players to carry sticks higher and higher each year.
Maybe because Colin Campbell's son plays on the team?
Actually, I think it's because not only can they police themselves, they're extremely dirty and get other teams to lay nasty illegal hits on their guys.
And on the contrary, why does Pittsburgh seem to always get the low end of the suspension numbers when one of their guys commits an infraction?
wut.Maybe because Colin Campbell's son plays on the team?
Actually, I think it's because not only can they police themselves, they're extremely dirty and get other teams to lay nasty illegal hits on their guys.
And on the contrary, why does Pittsburgh seem to always get the low end of the suspension numbers when one of their guys commits an infraction?
Please. Enough with this evidence nonsense. You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true.
Though seriously, has anyone provided a reasonable explanation as to why Boston, who supposedly can police themselves, have had to have the league stand up for them more than any other NHL team in terms of total suspensions and games suspended? Or why in seven of the last eight seasons, the bottom 10 teams in terms of fighting majors have outperformed the top 10 teams in the standings seven times?