Midday Musings
by PPP on Jan 22, 2009 1:08 PM EST
Email
PrintI was flipping through the trusty old Google Reader and came across a few interesting tidbits that I thought might spur some hockey discussion. At least it's something to read before Chemmy puts the stopper in his flask and pumps out the latest edition of the Negative Nancy Notebook.
"We want our crowd to be as loud as it can be from the start of the game to the finish...we want the fans to cheer as loud as they can. We would love to have that on a nightly basis here. We get it some nights but, obviously, we would like it more nights. We have to do a better job of giving them some excitement but we hope they can bring some excitement and energy to this building as well."
Funny. If you put a fan's name to that and made it about the players you could accurately describe our disappointment at the Leafs' performances on home ice. It's a bit of a chicken or the egg situation except the answer is clear: Good play leads to good crowds. It's not the other way around. Or is it?
Hub Hockey found this video of Tim Thomas' Superman routine last night:
Puck Daddy loved the move although he should have done a "Pass/Fail" on the idea of the Leafs sending Brad May flying into the crease to teach Tim Thomas a thing or two about attempting to injure the Leafs' best player. Or having the Leafs take a free shot at him the next time he exits the friendly confines of his crease. Should goalies be fair game if they want to play defenceman, forward, or defensive end?
And finally, the Pope had this to say about any attempts to use Don Sanderson's tragic death as a tool to curb fighting in the NHL:
"First off, it's an important part of our game historically. It's not like I came into the NHL five years ago. I see no reason to change that. That's No. 1.
To me, fighting is the mechanism that allows players to regulate the level of violence in the game ... There are already a number of players in our league who flaunt the system. Fighting brings accountability to that ... To me, there is a growing rat factor in our league right now. You know who those players are. I don't have to name them. But do you want to turn the league over to them?
Personally, I think that it makes sense to try to do things like ensure players don't take their helmets off during a fight or that dirty moves like Frankie Soup Cube's attempted body slam of Brad May are punished severely. I don't see a need to curb it and it certainly doesn't do anything to keep the rats in control because an eye for an eye is a crazy policy which never works and the rats are rats because they run away from being held accountable.
As for fighting's place in hockey, the scripted stuff is bunk but if two guys want to go at it in the heat of the moment then by all means scrap. Helmets that stay on might dissuade some guys because of the possibility of breaking their hands but there is no need to take fighting out of hockey.
The counterargument is that fighting disappears in the playoffs (really?) which isn't really true. What disappears is the stupid kind of fighting. We still saw Iginla fight Lecavalier in the 2004 Final. As for international tournaments, of course fighting goes down. It just makes sense since all of the other teams are European. If Canada played a tough country like Scotland or New Zealand you can bet your ass they'd put fighters in the lineup but against Sweden? Your thoughts?
39 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
good stuff...
i’m of the mindset that, although I don’t mind a good hockey fight, I can’t see the game being worse for wear should it be penalized more severly or banned outright.
i understand the whole “sending a message” and “protecting our skilled guys” arguments, but if there were more consistent penalties handed out for the league when something like this happens, then it lessens the need for “enforcers” and it lessens the ice time for those who can’t play a good clean game.
Hockey is a fast sport, and I don’t expect the refs to get it right every game. I do expect that the league and the players union should have a more vested interest in the protection of the players. it should start with more serious consequences when injuries occur, attempt to injure or not.
"We’re looking forward to building the type of team the Rangers are able to buy."
The Left Coast Lock
by blurr1974 on Jan 22, 2009 1:21 PM EST reply actions
I'd agree
with Blurr. Most of the fights I see now are unnecesery (woah, my spelling is bad today) and aren’t entertaining. I don’t think I’d like for them to be banned completely, instances like Iggy and Lecavalier really show the passion for the game and I like to see that. Same with the Iggy/Mitchell fight earlier this season. But I’d rather have there be more consistent calls on dirty hits, and consequences for the rats rather than take out fighting.
by Karina on Jan 22, 2009 1:30 PM EST up reply actions
Consistency
Is key. The way I see it, a lot of guys fight or pick fights because there’s no consistency on discipline in the league (thank you Bettman and Campbell) so they’re willing to play the odds.
"God's in His heaven. All's right with the world." - Robert Browning (1812-1889)
Discipline
It’s definitely the biggest factor in curbing the rats. There is no doubt about that.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
The most popular hockey clips on youtube, by far, are the fights. Find an old hockey fight clip and read through the comments — see how many people say something along the lines of “Man, I wish hockey was still like this.” Or ask a long-time fan how they feel about the newer fighting rules.
I really don’t think you can dispute that fans want fighting. Hardcore fans, casual fans, new fans, potential fans… it really seems like most fans wants to see it. Not all. But most, and maybe overwhelmingly so.
The NHL reduced fighting as a marketing decsion, pure and simple. It wasn’t about safety, at least back then. They believed that fighting was keeping the game from growing, and that it could be reduced without impacting the existing fanbase. In hindsight, it appears that both assumptions were wrong.
I know it seems tasteless to talk about fighting as a marketing issue, especially given recent events, but it’s not realistic to pretend it’s not. The NHL is a league that has seen it’s entertainment value drop drastically during the Bettman era, and ratings have followed suit. They need to treat very carefully if they’re thinking of removing an element of the game that most fans wish there was more of.
Down Goes Brown - Unapologetically nostalgic for the past. Brutally realistic about the present. Grudgingly optimistic about the future.
by Down Goes Brown on Jan 22, 2009 1:33 PM EST reply actions
i have to disagree...
the reason the NHL lost market share is due to ESPN dropping them in the US. Fighting or not, can’t watch a game if you can’t find it.
yes, the league is still going strong in Canada, but when you lock out a population of 300M people from being able to easily find and see your product, your numbers are gonna take a dip.
"We’re looking forward to building the type of team the Rangers are able to buy."
The Left Coast Lock
by blurr1974 on Jan 22, 2009 1:37 PM EST up reply actions
ESPN is part of it. But ESPN didn’t drop the NHL just to be mean, they did it because the game wasn’t growing.
Pick up a copy of SI today vs ten years ago. Hockey feels like an afterthought now.
Down Goes Brown - Unapologetically nostalgic for the past. Brutally realistic about the present. Grudgingly optimistic about the future.
by Down Goes Brown on Jan 22, 2009 1:40 PM EST up reply actions
that would be due to the first lockout, which crushed the momentum gained from the Rangers Cup win in 94, coupled with the rise to prominence of basketball and the NBA.
The league still had fighting in all it’s glory after the first lockout. it wasn’t helping to “grow the game”
"We’re looking forward to building the type of team the Rangers are able to buy."
The Left Coast Lock
by blurr1974 on Jan 22, 2009 1:43 PM EST up reply actions
They also had trapping and boring slogfests. The problem with the NHL is that they refuse to acknowledge the problems that are hurting the league.
It was never the way that penalties were called or that fighting was turning people away. It was that hockey, after the first lockout, was becoming boring. Instead of taking a look at the game critically and realizing that the size and speed of players was making the ice seem even smaller than it was they decided to try a bunch of gimmicks (shootouts, glowing pucks, repeated crackdowns, beveled posts) instead of changing something structural.
Almost all (if not all) of the buildings in the NHL are new since 1993. If they had instituted larger ice surfaces as a start they would have almost all of the league done by now. Yes, European hockey can be boring with the larger ice but they also have crappier players. Imagine Ovechkin or Crosby with a few extra feet of space.
Or, they could have done the really forward thinking thing which they can still do at anytime and reward winning (3 points for a win) and make hockey 4-on-4 all of the time.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
i don’t see them going to 4 on 4 anytime soon. all their focus is in adjusting the nets to allow more goals in, rather than adjusting the game to allow more skill.
as far as larger ice surfaces, well, we all know the reason that isn’t happening. Fewer seats.
If they change the surface size, all the rinks have to do it at once. to retrofit some of these arenas means the loss of hundreds of seats, that are premium prices.
"We’re looking forward to building the type of team the Rangers are able to buy."
The Left Coast Lock
by blurr1974 on Jan 22, 2009 1:54 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, the chance has passed for the league to be forward thinking and adjust the new buildings for the larger ice before they get built.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
The funny thing with increasing the ice surface is, while it would take out some seats, it would make more of them premium/at the glass seats. Can’t see them minding that.
If this league ever goes 4-on-4, I honestly may be done. 4-on-4 is exciting for a few minutes — it’s nice because it’s a novelty, there’s more space, etc. — but my god give me 5-on-5 with a center and some more options out there any day. 4-on-4 descends into roller hockey home run passes; square v. square; I couldn’t watch it for 60 minutes.
I honestly think the game is in good shape now. Bigger ice and fewer “obstruction” calls would be ideal (those go hand-in-hand in my book), but it’s important that they finally started calling the rules the way Mario and Hull complained they should be calling them the whole time. I’m all for requiring players to be able to skate — rather than just hook and hold - their way into the league. Even if they’ve gone too far now, it sure beats mid’90s slogging hockey.
Lighthouse Hockey: an SB Nation New York Islanders blog with hip issues.
I honestly think the game is in good shape now.
Could use a few minor tweaks here and there but I agree in general. I would like to see no-touch icing, get rid of shootouts for god’s sake and up the number of points for a win to 3.
"God's in His heaven. All's right with the world." - Robert Browning (1812-1889)
The game used to be 6 skaters on 6 skaters and before that 7 on 7. The game has to adapt to the changing physical realities of the sport.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
I understand that and totally agree, but I don’t believe in a continuum that means our giant cyborg descendants will have to play 3-on-3.
I never saw 6-on-6 nor 7-on-7, but I’ve seen enough of 4-on-4 at the pro and junior level to know I prefer the game I’ve grown attached to (5-on-5), with either strict obstruction enforcement or bigger ice surfaces to make sure it’s not clogged up. Not saying 4-on-4 wouldn’t be more popular for all I know; just saying that’s not how I like my coffee.
Lighthouse Hockey: an SB Nation New York Islanders blog with hip issues.
[Btw, don’t know what happened with the strikethrough in my comment. Unintentional.]
Lighthouse Hockey: an SB Nation New York Islanders blog with hip issues.
Looks like
You went a little too gung-ho with it!
"God's in His heaven. All's right with the world." - Robert Browning (1812-1889)
It’s like a drug that will never get out of my system once it’s in :)
Lighthouse Hockey: an SB Nation New York Islanders blog with hip issues.
The league still had fighting in all it’s glory after the first lockout.
Not true. The instigator rule came into effect in 1992. Other rules like third-man-in and automatic suspensions for bench-clearing brawls cam in during the 80s.
Down Goes Brown - Unapologetically nostalgic for the past. Brutally realistic about the present. Grudgingly optimistic about the future.
by Down Goes Brown on Jan 22, 2009 2:57 PM EST up reply actions
I like a good fight if it is spontaneous and has some purpose. Scripted fights like the one linked are about the players, not the team. I also believe if the NHL had a more consistant, severe penalty policy for hits that injure or attempt to injure some of the goonery would stop regardless of any change in the rules on fighting. The other aspect of all this I don’t like is the thought that the organization can legislate behavior of the participants. They are grown men, they know the dangers and consequences of fighting and they have a choice to engage in the activity or not.
Who the HELL stole my Pop-Tarts?
they do have a choice. they also have to choose between making half a million a year and riding in chartered jets to swanky hotels. or making far less riding a bus and staying in motel 6…
don’t blame them for following the money
"We’re looking forward to building the type of team the Rangers are able to buy."
The Left Coast Lock
by blurr1974 on Jan 22, 2009 1:56 PM EST up reply actions
I don't blame them
for following the money. But then they shouldn’t blame someone else when they get hurt. It is ultimately up to the players themselves. The thought that we the fans or Bettman knows what is best for them is crazy.
Who the HELL stole my Pop-Tarts?
Maybe the ACC would be louder if you kicked out the fucking suits and let real fans in.
Just a thought.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
As the loudest person in recorded history I will graciously accept complimentary season tickets in the lower bowl in exchange for yelling.
Pension Plan Puppets*
* Blog contains less than 2% puppet content by weight.
It’s just another way to blame the fans for the team’s suckitude.
Hey, have you guys ever watched a Detroit game? That place is goddamn near empty some nights and the team still beats some ass. So STFU about your whining about lack of fan noise, Stajan!
by LeafFanInVan on Jan 22, 2009 2:32 PM EST up reply actions
i call bullshit
first of all, the volume of fans at the ACC (and most arenas) is directly proportional to the amount of booze consumed. mon-wed – not much. thurs – litlle looser. fri-sat – it’s go time. i’ve been to games at the ACC on Tuesday nights, and i’m definitley not in the same frame of mind as I am on the weekend. it’s just how it is.
2nd of all, i don’t think income, or what you wear to work, dictates your ability to like hockey. all these barbs at “the suits” are just as bad as the narrow-minded and insecure “toronto sucks” stuff you hear from the rest of the country.
as for the “real fans” that everyone talks about up in the upper bowl (where i watch 90% of the games from when i go)… are these the fans that yell fucking SHOOT every time a player has the puck, even when it is physically impossible to do so? or the guy who told me at my last game that kaberle “has been horrible his whole career” ? if these are the real fans, then i’m not a real fan.
and if you’re wondering why the platinums are always empty at the start of a period… many of the platinum seats are associated with a platinum “box” (owned by a company) that has a bar, hostess, couches, and a big TV. so in between periods, they retire back to their box, usually with food and drinks provided by their company. so they’re never in jeopardy of missing any action… if the period starts, they just wait for the first stoppage in play and head in. i had the chance to use one of these about 5 or 6 years ago (i used to work for a bank that owned one). it was awesome, i highly recommend it.
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
“suits” refers more to those that wear suits and spend their entire time on their blackberries. They may not be in jeopardy of missing any action but if that’s the kind of experience they want then head to a bar or stay home.
Finally, yes, some of the real fans in the upper deck are idiots but at least if they are yelling something it seems like they care.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
bah
we can’t complain about people irrationally disparaging Toronto based on stereotypes, then do the same thing to “the suits” just because there’s a few assholes who pay more attention to their bberry and their sushi. considering the on-ice product the last couple of years, i’m sure more than a few of the mopes in the upper bowl were wishing they had a blackberry to look at too.
and we can’t complain about the mouth-breathers calling in to the post-game show and embarrassing leaf fans everywhere, but then applaud them for their drunken and ill-informed boorishness at home games because it makes us seem ‘more passionate’ or whatever.
basically i’m just sick of the whole discussion around the atmosphere at the ACC. that’s the least of our worries. the last game i went to was leafs-isle on a monday night i think, and it was a pretty bad game, really boring first period. i was outside in between periods and some guy asked me “if the crowd was this lame for all the games” and i was like “what the fuck do you expect? it’s monday night and 2 shit teams just played a miserable 20 minutes. i should be funneling my $7 heineken and starting a fight or something? jesus.”
sorry. little bit of friday night red wine ranting.
basically i’m just sick of the whole discussion around the atmosphere at the ACC. that’s the least of our worries.
Bingo. Someone should tell Stajan that.
we can’t complain about people irrationally disparaging Toronto based on stereotypes, then do the same thing to "the suits" just because there’s a few assholes who pay more attention to their bberry and their sushi.
We should start calling you E or Suit (If you don’t watch Entourage that won’t make sense) ;)
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
Fighting
Not a coherent argument, just some unrelated points:
1. If it’s the players job to cut down the ‘rat’ factor by fighting each other, then what the point of having officials? As far as I know, hockey’s the only sport in which there’s some expectation for the players to police themselves. This lets the officials and league off the hook.
2. If fighting is ‘part of the game’, why is it penalized? By penalizing it, you’re acknowledging it as aberrant and unwelcome behavior; even more so than slashing, tripping, elbowing, etc., as the penalties are longer. However, if the NHL really wanted to get rid of fighting (or slashing, tripping, elbowing, etc.), it’d be pretty easy: make the penalties harsher, and take away any incentive from the players and coaches. I think the real problem is that the NHL wants it both ways — they want the excitement and revenue that comes from fighting, but they don’t want to be seen as condoning it.
3. With a few rare exceptions, hockey fights are bad fights. All the equipment gets in the way, players clutch and grab to avoid getting hit and end up lying down on the ice hugging each. For the most part (and, admittedly, there are exceptions – Wendel Clark, I’m looking at you), hockey fighting is sham fighting – it’s a show for the crowd and your teammates. You want a good fight, watch boxing. Hockey fights are a bit more like wrestling, not quite so homo-erotic, though. I’m not saying hockey players aren’t tough, I’m just saying I’ve seen better fights.
4. I’d take a good body check over a good fight any day of the week.
5. Still not sure if I’m pro or anti fighting, and I’m pretty sure that’s true of Bettman, too.
hockey fighting is sham fighting – it’s a show for the crowd and your teammates.
This is an important point that people like Burke never mention. I’m not saying it therefore makes fighting pointless, but there’s definitely a subconscious/psychological thing going on with fighting that is outside of the purportedly pure role Burke ascribes to it. I mean, Burke’s teams were tough, but they also had some players (ahem, Pronger) who got away with some seriously dirt stuff and were rarely “held accountable” by opponents. In fact, the league had to hold him “accountable,” and had they done a better job of it (more serious suspensions), you wouldn’t have to worry about Pronger pulling it again.
I’d take a good body check over a good fight any day of the week.
Frankly, me too. I get up from my seat just like the rest of us for fights, but I can’t help feeling I’m at a surreal unreality circus show, particularly when the fight quickly becomes a sham. Bodychecks, on the other hand, are things of beauty, that serve a during-play game function, and also incorporate the subtext of intimidation that fighting supposedly takes care of.
I’m uncertain whether fighting should be left alone or be further discouraged. But I am certain it’s a complex issue, and a lot of the game’s leaders don’t honestly mention those complexities when they’re making their case.
Lighthouse Hockey: an SB Nation New York Islanders blog with hip issues.
One more.
6. Watching hulking big men pound the shit out of each other for my entertainment makes me feel uncomfortable.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Pension Plan Puppets
Related FanShots on Pension Plan Puppets
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- The Chicago Blackhawks’ losing streak is bad for everybody
- According to NHL, here’s why Dominic Moore escaped suspension for Fedotenko hit
- How Mats Sundin’s no-trade clause controversy made fans reconsider loyalty in NHL
- Nordiques Nation invades Hockey Day in Canada
- Youth hockey coach, parents clash over alleged tirade over 9-year old’s 200th goal puck
Latest stories and headlines from NHL.com
- Tulupov's first lifts Oklahoma City Barons to 2-1 win over Abbotsford Heat
- Brossoit 24 saves, Rachinski three goals as the Oil Kings blank the Cougars 5-0
- OHL Roundup: A look at Saturday's games
- Mckechnie scores twice as the Hurricanes defeat the Raiders 4-1
- Czerwonka scores two goals to lead the Ice over the Blades 5-2
SBNation.com Recent Stories
StatCounter
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
