On Tuesday night the puck finally dropped to kick start the first 82 game NHL season in two years! After so much anticipation and excitement, fans could finally get to see the latest version of their team take to the ice! Once the final buzzer of the evening was sound, all the talk was to be about the Leafs big win over the Habs, Grabovski’s four point debut with the Caps, or Jacob Trouba’s outstanding NHL debut. However, these all became secondary topics; as the primary talk was regarding fighting in hockey. In the third period in Montreal; as Colton Orr was falling to the ice during his second fight of the game against George Parros, he grabbed Parros’ sweater, pulling him forward and face first into the ice. The arena went quiet as Parros lay motionless on the ice while a concerned Orr waved his hands to get the medical staff on the scene quickly. In that instant, everything that had or was to take place that evening in the NHL, became overshadowed by the debate over fighting in the NHL. The debate of whether fighting should or shouldn’t be in the NHL often pops up, especially after events like this. Below you can read my somewhat long winded thoughts on this debate.
When I thought about this, the first question I asked myself was “Would I still watch if there was no fighting?” The answer to this question is yes! I love this game and the fighting is not what drew me to it nor is it what has me tuning in game in and game out. Does this mean I don’t enjoy fighting? Certainly not! When a fight breaks out, I want to see it! This tends to be human nature; not a butt remains in a seat at an arena during a fight. I guess for the same reason that millions tune into the UFC on a Saturday night. The human nature is to enjoy violence in some way shape or form, I can’t explain it, I’m sure there are studies that prove it, and that’s that. It may very well be one of the biggest problems in society today, but I believe it to be true. Does this mean we enjoyed seeing what happened to George Parros on Tuesday night? Not at all, I doubt there is a person out there who wasn’t sick to their stomach after they witnessed Parros hit the ice and not move a muscle. Though, just seconds prior to that most people didn’t blink an eye as the two men squared off toe to toe. Therefore, in terms of entertainment value, fighting is not a necessity but it adds to the excitement.
After that question was answered, my next question was what I thought about the injuries associated with fighting? Truth is, hockey is a physical sport, it’s a dangerous sport and injuries will happen. No matter how good the equipment is or improves over time; with the speed and size of the players on the ice, injury is unavoidable. This is the case in all sports; every athlete is aware of the risks associated with their chosen sport. Every race car driver is aware of the risk he or she is taking once they get behind the wheel; obviously it’s a risk they accept. These risks are present in most of the major sports leagues in one facet or another. Whether you have a 90 mile/hr fast ball coming at you or a 275 lb linebacker; the risks are clear and injury will happen, regardless of the measures taken. Professional sports leagues can and have done their best to create the safest possible environment for its players but injuries will still happen. As mentioned previously, these athletes are aware of the risks involved and hockey players are no exception. There are enforcers who regularly drop the gloves, gritty guys who occasionally drop the gloves and players who rarely if ever drop the gloves. Regardless of which of the three categories a player may fall into, fighting is 95% of the time, a choice. An enforcer maybe more prepared and willing to fight but at any given time in a game, a situation could arise leading any player into a scrap. It’s relatively simple; if a player is willing to fight, he’ll probably fight, if a player isn’t willing, he probably won’t. The choice is theirs.
While obviously under the category of injury, concussions are so heavily discussed in hockey that they deserve to be brought up separately. Over the past 10 or so years, the topic of concussions has perhaps been the number 2 topic in sport after performance enhancing drugs. Concussions have been caused by everything from body checks to slides in baseball and everything in between. With the speed and physicality of hockey, the seriousness of concussions has been a very hot topic and always tends to pop up in the arguments against fighting as well. While, I do certainly acknowledge the seriousness of concussions in sport, I believe that there is a greater likelihood of a concussion occurring during play than during fights. There are multiple ways a player can suffer such a head injury over the course of the game including: an intentional collision, an unintentional collision, a puck or stick to the head, etc.. Also, i’m not certain I buy into the fact that concussions have only really come about over the past 10 or so years. I think it would be more correct to say that the past 10 years have been the coming out party for concussions. Sure, the game is much faster than it was 50 years ago but the protective equipment is miles and miles ahead of where it was back then (for what protective equipment even existed). Likewise, the rules of the game have changed to protect the players and player safety in 2013 is far beyond player safety in 1963. In my opinion, concussions happened 50 years just as they do today! The differences between the two could easily be contributed to the amazing growth in science and technology. In 1963, a headache and nausea after a game, was well, a headache and nausea. In 2013, a headache and nausea after a game is a concussion that may even be labeled more specifically based on other symptoms. Similarly, in 1963, a player injured in a fight may have had his picture on the sports page of the local newspaper the next morning. In 2013, a player injured in a fight is within seconds “trending” on twitter, brought up in facebook posts, and seen nationally on sports newscasts. Add to this the fact that 50 years ago there were probably 120 players in the league, yet today that number is closer to 600 and perhaps the player to concussion ratios would be similar. There may not be more concussions today, just more focus on them.
Finally, I asked myself what affect a fighting ban would have on the game itself. I found myself agreeing with the argument used by hockey purists and old time hockey fans, the belief that fighting in the game keeps players honest. A game without fighting is also a game without having to answer the bell for breaking one of hockey’s many codes. Fighting in hockey is a way of players policing the game themselves; a policing that often cannot be fully accomplished by officials or league executives. As odd as it may sound, in the real world, sometimes authorities are not able to handle a situation and people must take it into their own hands. Often times in school, the teacher’s means of handling a situation does not deal with the problem and the students must take it into their own hands. Likewise, perhaps the method of police in a neighborhood doesn’t take care of an issue and the members of the community must find their own way to deal with it. Hockey is no different; whether it’s a missed call or a two minute penalty just not being enough, fighting helps prevent players from taking liberties. Every team has a player that may be considered dirty and cross the line from time to time. A two minute penalty is more than worth it if an opposing superstar is shaken up or even knocked out of a game by a questionable play. A questionable play that may not happen if the player committing the act knew he would have to answer the call of a tough guy for the act. Without fighting, you will see a noticeable increase in stick work and questionable hits simply because players are not afraid of two minutes in the sin bin, as opposed to actually having to fight to hone up for their actions. Perhaps, a great recent example of this would be from the 2013 World Hockey Championships. With Sweden playing Canada, Alex Edler recklessly stuck his knee out for a hit on Eric Staal. Edler, a player not known to be a fighter showed no respect for his opponent and made the dirty hit knowing there would be no on-ice consequences as there is no fighting in international hockey. It is highly unlikely that Edler would have pulled the same stunt during an NHL game because not only would he be penalized but he would also be challenged by some of Staal’s Hurricane teammates! In fact, Edler still may very well have to answer the bell for that hit when the two teams faceoff this season. Imagine this leaving the “faces” of the game such as Crosby and Ovechkin vulnerable to predatory plays that could put their careers in danger. Looking back, perhaps the longevity and healthy career of the greatest player of all time could be contributed to the fact he had Dave Semenko and Marty McSorely watching his back during a good portion of his career. In the NHL, millions of dollars are paid to players who are expected to win at all costs, winning is everything and players will do anything to win, fighting helps put a limit on that anything.
In conclusion, it’s not hard to see where I stand in this debate. I can understand where the arguments against fighting come from, but one can also make a fairly strong case as to why fighting should stay in the game. At the end of the day, the only opinions that matter are those of the players themselves. It shouldn’t be the fans, Colin Campbell, Gary Bettman, or the general managers who decide, it should be the guys that actually play the game and face the risks. I believe, for all the reasons stated above and more besides; a high percentage of the players themselves would vote to keep fighting in hockey. I myself, would still watch hockey if fighting was no more, but I have an understanding and appreciation for the need of fighting in the game. One former NHLer may have best put it into words by saying “it’s not the fight that’s important, it’s the threat of the fight that keeps guys honest.”
Follow me on Twitter @poleary19
PS love feedback or discussion!
O'Leary's Outlook 