I recently came across an article on a Sports site where an alleged writer (Al Strachan) proceeded to present a variety of 'arguments' against fighting in pro hockey. He then spends the rest of the article debunking these 'arguments' to make that point that there is a place for fighting in pro hockey.
Upon reading the article (titled 'Tips for winning the fighting argument'), it became clear to me that many of his so-called 'arguments' against NHL brawling were strawmen at best, and patently false at worst.
Evidently Mr. Strachan is more interested in fighting rather than the game of hockey.
Below are the supposed "arguments", his reactions, and why it's wrong But before I do, I had to insert one quote from his article that needs and immediate response -
"Still the members of the ballet-on-ice brigade emerged in full force and, as even Don Cherry was forced to concede, appear to be winning the battle. " The game of hockey is a sport. Ballet is entertainment for some. Kind of like pro wrestling is entertainment for others. I'd say ballet has more in common with pro wrestling than hockey, as they are both staged for entertainment purposes.
Evidently Mr. Strachan seems to confuse the two. And Don Cherry is no authority on the subject - How many Stanley Cups did he win?
But anyways, on I go ...
1.
" · "I don't want my children to watch a game in which I have to tell them that fighting is acceptable."
First of all, most fights are a response to a perceived wrong. Do you really want your kid to turn the other cheek to everyone he meets in life who tries to take advantage of him and his friends?
More importantly, this is professional sport. If your kid watches NASCAR, does he expect to drive bumper-to-bumper at 200 mph down a city street? If he watches wrestling, does he expect to be allowed to deliver forearm shivers and body slams? Professional sports operate under a specific set of rules.
Response:
Note the word ‘perceived’ wrong. According to Al, if I were a professional hockey player, and someone roughs me up, I should go after them and beat their ass. Or vice-versa. I figure a better response to such people who challenge one to a fight in a hockey game is to answer them by putting the puck in his team’s net. It’s called scoring goals. Apparently that’s really how a team wins the contest known as a hockey game.
And in a professional sport run by say the National Hockey League, athletes are typically paid to do just that – win the game. And evidently, if a team wins enough games, they eventually will draw more fans (something about people liking a winner), and thereby more revenue.
BTW- it IS important to tell kids who watch fighting in hockey that it is wrong. More importantly, explain to them why it’s not winning the game, and how that a waste of time, especially theirs.
2.
" · "That fight last week probably cost Todd Fedoruk his career."
If it weren't for fighting, Fedoruk wouldn't have had a career.
Response:
Which basically means he should never have been allowed on the ice with other players. I have an idea, since all these goons do is fight, why not just take their sticks, skates, and gloves away? They can still stand around on the ice, while all the other players actually play the game I pay money to see.
3.
" · "Hockey is the only sport that allows fighting."
It's also the only sport that uses a puck. Baseball is the only one that uses bases. Each sport has its own peculiarities and fighting has always been a part of hockey.
Response:
This is a sad attempt to equate the tools used in the game (i.e. a puck for hockey, bases for baseball) with fighting. By that argument, slavery should still be around be around in America. I can see people like him making that argument –
'Each civilization has its own peculiarities and slavery has always been a part of it.'
Except see, slavery was wrong. It treats one person as less than another. That’s why enough people thought it should be eliminated from society. Heck it tore this country apart for some years.
4.
" · "The NHL Players' Association should step in to curb fighting in order to prevent injuries to its members."
The fighters are PA members, too. How can the PA follow a course of action that would deprive them of their jobs?
Response:
Very circular. Because fighting is so ingrained in hockey, the goon is now considered a part of the game (according to Al). That means it's a job, one the NHLPA has to defend.
This is the heart of the issue I have with views from people like Al, and people who support fighting in NHL hockey. Have you ever wondered why you don't see too many fights in Olympic Games matches, or for that matter the Canada Cup? Perhaps it's because those players, coaches, trainers, sponsors, and fans are more interesting in dedicating their time, energies, and resources to winning things like Olympic Gold Medals, or the Canada Cup for playing hockey.
5.
" · "This is 2007. These barbaric acts belong in the past."
Then watch figure skating. There's no constitutional requirement to watch hockey. The people who attend games, and the people who play the game, are overwhelmingly in favor of keeping fighting.
The fact is that the vast majority of people who complain about fighting in hockey don't watch the games. Furthermore, there's no evidence that they'd watch if fighting were eliminated.
Response:
Figure skating doesn’t involve sticks, a puck, a net, and teams trying to win by putting pucks into each other team’s nets. It’s called hockey Al, look into it.
I note that he seems to be implying by the figure skating comments that people who don't believe in that point should watch figure skating instead of his brand of hockey.
I've never advocated removing bodychecks, or players grinding for a puck. What I object to is the intentional runs at the head, the high sticking. What is a fight, other than a set of intentional blows to the head?
Perhaps that’s why hockey attendance has been in decline the last few years. If people had to tune in to bench-clearing brawls in football, baseball, and basketball, it may draw some attention on ESPN, but after awhile, people who pay an arm and a leg to see it will either start demanding a refund for not getting to see sport being played, or they will simply not come back.
6.
" · "Too many fights are staged. They're not part of the game, just two guys who agree to go after each other."
There's some truth to that. But hockey is, above all, entertainment. When the fights — even the staged fights — occur, the rink comes alive. Fans love it. These two guys are willing co-combatants.
What's the problem?
Response:
Wow, notice how Al conceded a very major point. Yeah it's staged. Kind of like when watching managers in baseball come out of the dugout and kick dust in the umpire's face over a disputed call. All high-drama, accomplishes nothing but a diversion from the game.
And people who get fired up from that? I have a theory they'd also get fired up by a great body-check, a fantastic save, or an amazing goal.
Hockey is a sport. The NHL is a business. People pay money to see a hockey game, not boxers on ice. When I see a ‘gathering of the clan’ as Dick Irwin described it, it’s a waste of my money and time.
7.
" · "Too many players are getting hurt in hockey fights."
The problem is much more complex than that. Too many players are getting hurt. Period. Some of it has to do with equipment. Some of it has to do with the fact that hockey is a high-contact sport and injuries are inevitable.
The game is such these days that a lot of players don't care whether there's a puck on the ice or not
They're just out there to run other players. And they're causing injuries.
In an earlier era, those players would have been held accountable. But with the instigator rule, and the low-scoring games that put a premium on power plays, they're left alone. If the league scraps the instigator rule and keeps the fighters, those guys would think twice. And there would be fewer injuries.
Response:
I like how Al tries to equate injuries with fighting. Indeed his straw statement sets up his diatribe about injuries. What is that based on? Note there's a lot of words in that rant, but no facts, stats or evidence to back up his assertions.
I would summerize his views on fighting in the NHL by editing one of his comments -
The game is such these days that a lot of fans like Al don't care whether there's a puck on the ice or not
One last comment from Al -
In the long run, fighting doesn't cause injuries; it prevents them.
No Al, in the long run, not stopping fighting will spell a permanent decline of NHL popularity.
