More Fighting In Hockey

Earlier this year I wrote about fighting in hockey.

This past weekend the Pittsburgh Penguins and Boston Bruins met up in what became a fairly rough match up.
It started with James Neal kneeing Brad Marchant in the head (Marchant was laying on the ice) in what was, in my opinion, clearly an intentional motion.
After that, we saw the Bruins' Shawn Thornton punch Brooks Orpik and continue to punch him as he lay on the ice. Apparently Orpik was knocked out, though that seems to be something that is still in question as he was able to travel with the team and was conscious when he arrived at the hospital. Regardless of how bad the injury was, that is not the point. Thank goodness he is ok.
To add to that Loui Eriksson suffered a concussion from a hit that Brooks Orpik laid on him and Chris Kelly suffered a broken ankle at the hands of Pascal Dupuis.

Clearly this game was a mess.

I won't go on my rant about getting rid of fighting in hockey. I did that in my previous post. What I want to point out is the lack of consequences.
If you look at the box score for that game 12 penalties were given out. So that says to me that the referees were trying to get control and couldn't. I can't really blame the refs in this situation. All they could do is start calling every little thing and that would not help matters. So where does that leave it? Brennan Shannahan and the NHL department for Player Safety.

James Neal was given a 5 game suspension. Apparently that is the maximum a player can receive for an over-the-phone hearing. In my opinion, that's bullshit. His intent, which normally is next to impossible to determine, was quite clear. He wanted to hit Marchant, I doubt anyone can dispute that.
So that raises the next question: why was this only an over-the-phone hearing? I don't know what the factor is that changes a phone hearing to a hearing in person. I'm not sure that the NHL does either, as I can not find a clear definition. I do see a simple solution though: If the phone is the main issue preventing this from having a longer suspension all you need to do is call the player and say "this is going to require a face to face meeting". Problem solved. This isn't James Neal's first suspension. This was clearly intentional. He should get at least 25 games in my mind. If it was me, I'd tell him to take the rest of the season off.

Shawn Thornton is scheduled to meet with the NHL on Friday (December 13) and he will have his suspension decided at that time. I will say this to Shawn's credit he really seemed sincerely apologetic in the post game interviews. It was refreshing versus the usual typical response that is vague and tries to chalk it up to being "part of the game" or "the heat of the moment".
That being said, Shawn must accept that what he did was wrong. Not only a violation of the rules within the sport but also wrong in the context of society as a whole. If I went out and punched out somebody like that in the street then I would be in jail. This happened during a hockey game so he won't be in jail (which is a whole other topic for another day) but the suspension should be heavy. If I were a betting man I'd guess the NHL will give him between 5 and 10 games. If it were me, much like with James Neal, I'd say take a year off. Come back next season.

Some may say that's harsh. I say this: If you don't start making it clear that you want this crap out of the game then this crap will stay in the game. Sending a strong message out to the entire league by sending these players home for the year would do exactly that.
To boot, the salaries that these players loose should be donated to a foundation that does research pertaining to concussions and their effects on the brain. Make the money help counter the damage the player is contributing to.

That's my 2 cents.

Fighting In Hockey

Clearly this is the topic of the day in the NHL world. It's not a new topic, it seems to come up every time a serious injury takes place. Last night that injury occurred during the Leafs/Canadians game when Colton Orr and George Parros got into their second fight of the night.

A concussion was the result of this fight. Clearly (in my opinion) Orr did not do this on purpose. It was a mistake, a "fight gone wrong". Now Parros (who thankfully was released from hospital this morning) is not sure when/if he can come back to play. Parros is a Princeton educated man, this is a potential waste of what is (dare is even say possibly "was") clearly an above average mind.

I've had a strong opinion on this topic for some time now. Fighting in hockey is, in my opinion, no longer necessary. The notion that each team carries a player or two who plays minimal minutes and does not have the same abilities or skills as the other players on the ice is insane. Of course these players are going to get hurt. Besides the fact that they punch at each other for a living, they also can't skate at the same pace and as a result end up hurting themselves and other players when trying to land a proper body check.

Now don't get me wrong. I understand that hockey is a physical sport and I do not suggest that we take body contact out of hockey. Hitting a player properly in order to remove them from the puck is just as much a part of the game as a proper tackle is in football. I also understand that hockey is a face paced game that involved quick thinking and as a result there are a lot of "gut reactions". So sometimes when you play a sport and you want to win you will feel more emotional. Sometimes that emotion is anger and you'll want to fight. I accept that.

So where does that leave the fighting issue? Well, first of all, because of the emotions, you can't stop it all together. Just like you can't stop people from doing crimes. So just like that guy who steals a candy bar (my point being it's not the end of the world if it happens once in a while but it is still a crime) you develop rules to minimize the potential of fights happening. Much like the person who steals a candy bar knows that if they are caught there is a potential to go to jail, the people who choose to fight need to know they are going to have to "do their time".

It's simple use an escalating scale. 1 fight is 10 minute major and an ejection from the game. Fight number 2 is another 10 minute major and an ejection plus an additional game. From there you get 2 additional games, then 4, then 8 and so on. Essentially, if you really want to fight, that's fine but you better make it worth it because your team will suffer.

This should eliminate all these "fake" fights that the 2 enforcers get into in an attempt to "change the momentum of the game". That's my opinion on what should be done.

Don't get the point of this post confused though. This is not a prediction. I realize that the NHL sees fights as part of the entertainment value and they will probably not change a thing. Personally, I've been to plenty of hockey games in my time and I've seen how the crowd gets when there is a fight. I don't participate. I stay sitting and don't clap. I don't find it entertaining. It's not boxing, it's not UFC, it's not wrestling. There's no "sweet science", it's 2 guys clutching at jerseys and landing the odd punch. That's it.

It's 2013 not 1913. Goalies wear masks, players wear helmets. We've evolved from a large, heavy chunk of wood as a stick to a lightweight material. Jerseys are no longer big wool sweaters, they are microfiber, repel sweat and, weigh less. Players now have to wear visors. Why is fighting still tolerated?