Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    didn't say you were dense BsLegion - wouldn't - the 'willfully' part denotes you know what you're doing
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    Oh Lord. BsLegion Oh, and crowls I watched the Kamker clip. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to infer? Kampfer hits a guy with a good clean hit and gets set upon by the other team's 'enforcer' (Conroy?) which draws a crowd (Miller?). Who is keeping whom 'honest' here? What am I supposed to deduce? That Kampfer did something wrong? That he should not have cleanly hit the opposing player to separate him from the puck? That clean hits need to be 'answered' to? That Miller's response will somehow reduce or limit Conroy's response to Kampfer's clean hit? And that all of that will somehow take the shape of a future deterrent? In my NHL, Miller and Conroy are out of the game, with Conroy receiving supplemental suspension - and the take away message would be that Kampfer's hit was a clean one to always be tolerated and encouraged, and that Conroy's response was the wrong one. And to a lesser degree so was Miller's.
    Posted by gord11


    It's Conboy, btw. And don't forget Tropp's role.

    This incident occurred in a non-fighting college game.  Can you think of how this incident might have gone differently if fighting was allowed?

    I answered your question, you have made no effort to answer mine.  If you eliminate fighting from the game, are there any potential trade-offs?  Is there any risk of increased serious injury, inclusive of concussions, by simply trading fighting for other forms of violent response? 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    the point that seems to be escaping you is simple....they do this of their own free will, and get compensated nicely for doing it.  should skydiving be banned, what about boxing (they like to hit each other in the head A LOT), and football? life is full of choices, like eat the cholesterol filled burger, or opt for the salad. deep inside you know the burger is not good for you, but you'll take the risk, knowing it may lead to heart problems. do you honestly think hockey players don't understand the risk of getting punched in the face? who are you to make that choice for them? they can CHOOSE to get punched in the head(with potential future risks) and collect a nice sum, doing something they love(play hockey)... OR, decide it's not worth the risk, and become a school teacher, take a hit in pay, and live a long and less-fulfilling(to them) life. they are all willing participants and are adults. stop telling us/them how to live a life. go ahead and do what you want to do, and let everyone else do the same.
     
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    I'm wracking my brain, Crowls2424, I give up - how would this incident have gone differently if fighting was allowed? Honestly what are you asking me?

    What i did notice is that everyone is wearing a cage, which kinda eliminates fighting in and of itself - an innovation I think the NHL should use - cages for everyone. There would be no worries about flying pucks or sticks or skates or fists.
    Because of the cages, this wasn't really a fight was it?
    Again, 'potential trade-offs'? There are always trade-offs there will always be 'violent responses', but why not err on the trade-off that is sanctioned, the one that is a little less wild-west, a little less..lawless? The players should not be policing the game in the heat of the moment.
    This is what you have the Referees for, it's what you've always had the Referees for: to police the game and reduce the likelihood of serious injury.

    Evolution's a funny thing, in time the game, like the humans who play it, would adapt to a hockey culture without fighting and vigilante justice. It will always be a game of risk and consequence.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    adkbeesfan, i'm not telling you nor anyone how to 'live a life'.

    I am a customer. I am voicing my opinion as a paying customer.
    It is my f*#king right!

    I love these players and this game. I want them to be as safe as they can be. There will always be willing participants to the game of hockey - even if they decided to play naked but for skates and had steak knives for stick blades - that does not mean the game could be made safer. It is up to the customers to voice their pleasure and/or displeasure. This is how the product is improved for everyone - customer and participant.

    With your post, how are you not telling me how to 'live a life'? How are you not trying to limit - as if you could - my freedom of speech? They're just words.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    you should do yourself a favor and read your last sentence. that kinda applies to everything in life. should motor vehicles be banned because 10,000 people die in fatal car crashes everyday? you know the risk, and you take it everyday. how is this any different to a hockey/football/any contact sport athlete? play chess if you're worried about getting hurt. there are options in life, these guys choose to play a fast, physical game where the next hit they take (not talking punch), could be their last. it's all about measuring risk vs. reward. why should you or any be the judge of that for someone else.  

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    adkbeesfan
    If you can lessen risk and make a sport safer, why wouldn't you? They apply that reasoning to NASCAR, to downhill skiing. They are always trying to make the environment safer for all. In hockey after a young girl was hit bit a flying puck, they didn't say to that young girl's family; "Hey you knew the risks when you walked in here." No. They put protective netting round every rink.

    When Max Pacioretty ran into the stanchion in the VERY unsafe Bell Centre up in Montreal, did they say to Pacioretty, "Hey man, you know the risks of playing this game."? No. The Bell Centre took some responsibility - as did the League - and looked at all stanchions between all benches to see if safety improvements could be made. In the case of the Bell Centre they were.

    Of course there are varying degrees of risk in all sports - depending on the customer, the amount of risk is usually the deciding factor in the level of their allure - for the participants, for the customers.

    The inherent risk of playing Professional Hockey is not mitigated by fighting. Fighting on ice - as on earth for time immenorial, does nothing except for those for whom it does something. It raises tension.

    In hockey, the shadowy vague and encoded role of fighting poses an unnecessary risk to those who do it. It is up to those they do it for - primarily us, the customers - to decide if it is necessary to our enjoyment, to the betterment and furthering of the product we enjoy. This customer says, it isn't.

    When I look at the potential toll of fighting on fighters weighed against the totality of the game itself, I say it is an aspect of risk in the game, like the protective netting and better placed and padded stanchions, that needs to be looked at.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    bottom line adkbeesfan and Gord11 you both have your opinion on the subject.
    It's a heated debate at the moment and none of us here can determine what's wrong and what's right. 
    I'm just waiting to hear what the players association has to say about this .
    In the end if the majority of the players don't want fighting then the owners (board of governors) have to really take this into consideration. 

    btw gord11 you should have started a new thread just on this subject.   
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/david-shoalts/nhl-wont-even-consider-banning-fights/article2262540/

    Fehr basically says "we'll talk about it with the players."  When do they typically have meetings?  All-Star break?

    What is interesting is that this whole issue might be moot anyways.  Several times over the past couple years when this (or the presence of Thornton on the team) has come up, there's been discussion that it seems like more and more teams are opting not to have designated enforcers.  According to the article, this might actually be true.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    get back to me when they found a way to make ice soft, as well as the boards, and have convinced the players they should only skate at half-speed. also start playing with a nerf puck, and those long floating pool doodles as sticks. the net should be made collapseable, as well as a speed limit for how hard you can shoot the puck. punches to the head are not the only concussion risk you see. as a matter of fact, it's near the bottom of the list of game to game dangers players face in a game. legal body checks are FAR MORE detrimental to a players health(head/neck/back injuries). not to mention that hard ice they skate on, and the puck that flies through the air at 100+ mph. if a soccer player(as previously mentioned) damages his brain by getting hit with a soccer ball, we can reasonably assume that every check in hockey is doing the same. remember you don't need to be struck in the head to get a concussion, it's the brain bouncing off the skull that causes a concussion. no contact should be allowed??? the game itself is inherently dangerous... they skate with 12 inch knife blades on their feet...enough said-  
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    gord, I like your term 'willfully dense" because I really do feel like that is how you are approaching other people's arguments.  I have twice tried to explain my position on this and you have twice totally and completed mis-interpreted what I was saying.  I think you are deliberately making your argument a little easier by mis-stating everyone else's.

    Or, maybe I am explaining myself poorly, which is certainly possible, but I don't think I have the energy to state my opinion over and over knowing you will likely misinterpret the whole thing.

    For the record, I agree that fighting shouldn't be added in other sports -- it isn't needed.  I'm not even a big fan of fighting in hockey.  I love college hockey.  I hate goons and the staged goon fights that happen in the NHL.  But I love the fierce battle that happens in hockey and I don't want that battle to be controlled by the refs or the league at every level.  I do think that if you take fighting out, other things creep into the game and I can't stand some antics you now see in other sports, but very rarely see in hockey (diving, faking, taunting, celebration dances, refs shaping everything that happens, etc.)  If you change the culture of hockey, I think you risk all of that.

    Practically every sport is based on the concept of battle or war.  Guard your goal, attack the defenses of the other team, victory and defeat.  Hockey, soccer, and football are all "battlefield" scenarios with even number of players and space and competing strategies to defeat the other side.  Of course the 'battle' is a game or a fantasy, but different sports have a range of how similar they are to a real battle, with lots of physical contact in football and hockey and practically none in soccer or basketball.  For my entertainment dollar I prefer a sport where the officials don't regulate all of the physical contact.  I prefer a combination of strategy and finesse, along with brute force and physical confrontation.  That is why I think hockey is more honest -- the rules allow for competition on more levels.  You need to be skilled and tough.  Fighting is a very small part of this, but it is part of the culture.

    You seem hellbent on insisting that the opinions of others are wrong.  I am telling you that I prefer a game where confrontation, intimidation, and even controlled violence are not totally regulated out by officials.  It is more real.  That game may have higher risks than some other sports, but if those risks are acceptable to the players, the league, and the fans, who are you to say everyone else is wrong?  I don't think hockey is barbaric and the injury rate is not significantly different than other sports.  We like it the way it is.  You want to regulate it for your sensibilities, because you think everyone else is wrong.  But the Bruins are sold out every night.  Let the free market reign!
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hanrahan1. Show Hanrahan1's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    This is easy. The NHL is played in the States and Canada. The States and Canada as nations play old time hockey. Fighting is a part of old time hockey. Therefore the status quo should continue.

    Or to put it another way, the hockey is arena is our version of the Colosseum. And we all know what happend to Rome after the games and Gladiators were stamped out.  
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from jaymiller. Show jaymiller's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    Campbell vs. Vitale THAT is a hockey fight. No buddy buddy ending there.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    The fight was secondary to Jack's call of it, which was totally and i do mean totally entertaining !!!

    http://www.hockeyfights.com/fights/107612
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    This is easy. The NHL is played in the States and Canada. The States and Canada as nations play old time hockey. Fighting is a part of old time hockey. Therefore the status quo should continue. Or to put it another way, the hockey is arena is our version of the Colosseum. And we all know what happend to Rome after the games and Gladiators were stamped out.  
    Posted by Hanrahan1

    they looked to curling for their entertainment?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from hangnail. Show hangnail's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    gord, I like your term 'willfully dense" because I really do feel like that is how you are approaching other people's arguments.  I have twice tried to explain my position on this and you have twice totally and completed mis-interpreted what I was saying.  I think you are deliberately making your argument a little easier by mis-stating everyone else's. Or, maybe I am explaining myself poorly, which is certainly possible, but I don't think I have the energy to state my opinion over and over knowing you will likely misinterpret the whole thing. For the record, I agree that fighting shouldn't be added in other sports -- it isn't needed.  I'm not even a big fan of fighting in hockey.  I love college hockey.  I hate goons and the staged goon fights that happen in the NHL.  But I love the fierce battle that happens in hockey and I don't want that battle to be controlled by the refs or the league at every level.  I do think that if you take fighting out, other things creep into the game and I can't stand some antics you now see in other sports, but very rarely see in hockey (diving, faking, taunting, celebration dances, refs shaping everything that happens, etc.)  If you change the culture of hockey, I think you risk all of that. Practically every sport is based on the concept of battle or war.  Guard your goal, attack the defenses of the other team, victory and defeat.  Hockey, soccer, and football are all "battlefield" scenarios with even number of players and space and competing strategies to defeat the other side.  Of course the 'battle' is a game or a fantasy, but different sports have a range of how similar they are to a real battle, with lots of physical contact in football and hockey and practically none in soccer or basketball.  For my entertainment dollar I prefer a sport where the officials don't regulate all of the physical contact.  I prefer a combination of strategy and finesse, along with brute force and physical confrontation.  That is why I think hockey is more honest -- the rules allow for competition on more levels.  You need to be skilled and tough.  Fighting is a very small part of this, but it is part of the culture. You seem hellbent on insisting that the opinions of others are wrong.  I am telling you that I prefer a game where confrontation, intimidation, and even controlled violence are not totally regulated out by officials.  It is more real.  That game may have higher risks than some other sports, but if those risks are acceptable to the players, the league, and the fans, who are you to say everyone else is wrong?  I don't think hockey is barbaric and the injury rate is not significantly different than other sports.  We like it the way it is.  You want to regulate it for your sensibilities, because you think everyone else is wrong.  But the Bruins are sold out every night.  Let the free market reign!
    Posted by Fletcher1


    That's a great post Fletch but I'm sure it will be ignored by it's intended target.  It makes too much sense for someone who doesn't want to hear any.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    This from the Globe n Mail article DrCC provided;

    "NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr did say he thinks the findings concerning Boogaard need to be taken seriously.

    'The findings released by Boston University to The New York Times regarding CTE found in Derek Boogaard’s brain, and the forthcoming medical journal article, should be seriously considered by everyone associated with the game,” Fehr said in a statement. “It is certainly important information that we will be discussing with the players.”

     

    This is how a leader speaks. A much different reaction than Bettman's. 


     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    This from the Globe n Mail article DrCC provided; "NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr did say he thinks the findings concerning Boogaard need to be taken seriously. 'The findings released by Boston University to The New York Times regarding CTE found in Derek Boogaard’s brain, and the forthcoming medical journal article, should be seriously considered by everyone associated with the game,” Fehr said in a statement. “It is certainly important information that we will be discussing with the players.”   This is how a leader speaks. A much different reaction than Bettman's.   
    Posted by gord11


    "This is how a leader speaks" -- that cracked me up.  I mean, this is total PR speak. 

    This should be taken seriously?  Of course it should!  Who in their right mind would disagree with that.  We're talking about the death of a 28-year old.  It's not exactly the Gettysburg address to say we should take a look at it.

    The devil is in the details.  That's where the hard work lies -- what to do about it.  Fehr offers nothing but a vague assurance that he will 'look into it' and 'discuss it'  Lofty stuff.  Perhaps the best thing to do is actually quite complicated, and not as clear as you think, and that's why nobody says anything of substance after glancing at a medical report.

    I hope they do look into it.  I hope they take it seriously.  I hope they eventually eliminate the role of guys like Boogaard in the NHL (goons).  I also hope they don't buy into a kneejerk response to change the culture of the game without very careful deliberation of pros and cons.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    This from the Globe n Mail article DrCC provided; "NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr did say he thinks the findings concerning Boogaard need to be taken seriously. 'The findings released by Boston University to The New York Times regarding CTE found in Derek Boogaard’s brain, and the forthcoming medical journal article, should be seriously considered by everyone associated with the game,” Fehr said in a statement. “It is certainly important information that we will be discussing with the players.”   This is how a leader speaks. A much different reaction than Bettman's.   
    Posted by gord11

    Your previous posts suggested he's leading a powerless union. Make up your mind. Do the players have a say or not? Don't bother answering as I am well aware that they do.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    gord, I like your term 'willfully dense" because I really do feel like that is how you are approaching other people's arguments.  I have twice tried to explain my position on this and you have twice totally and completed mis-interpreted what I was saying.  I think you are deliberately making your argument a little easier by mis-stating everyone else's. Or, maybe I am explaining myself poorly, which is certainly possible, but I don't think I have the energy to state my opinion over and over knowing you will likely misinterpret the whole thing. For the record, I agree that fighting shouldn't be added in other sports -- it isn't needed.  I'm not even a big fan of fighting in hockey.  I love college hockey.  I hate goons and the staged goon fights that happen in the NHL.  But I love the fierce battle that happens in hockey and I don't want that battle to be controlled by the refs or the league at every level.  I do think that if you take fighting out, other things creep into the game and I can't stand some antics you now see in other sports, but very rarely see in hockey (diving, faking, taunting, celebration dances, refs shaping everything that happens, etc.)  If you change the culture of hockey, I think you risk all of that. Practically every sport is based on the concept of battle or war.  Guard your goal, attack the defenses of the other team, victory and defeat.  Hockey, soccer, and football are all "battlefield" scenarios with even number of players and space and competing strategies to defeat the other side.  Of course the 'battle' is a game or a fantasy, but different sports have a range of how similar they are to a real battle, with lots of physical contact in football and hockey and practically none in soccer or basketball.  For my entertainment dollar I prefer a sport where the officials don't regulate all of the physical contact.  I prefer a combination of strategy and finesse, along with brute force and physical confrontation.  That is why I think hockey is more honest -- the rules allow for competition on more levels.  You need to be skilled and tough.  Fighting is a very small part of this, but it is part of the culture. You seem hellbent on insisting that the opinions of others are wrong.  I am telling you that I prefer a game where confrontation, intimidation, and even controlled violence are not totally regulated out by officials.  It is more real.  That game may have higher risks than some other sports, but if those risks are acceptable to the players, the league, and the fans, who are you to say everyone else is wrong?  I don't think hockey is barbaric and the injury rate is not significantly different than other sports.  We like it the way it is.  You want to regulate it for your sensibilities, because you think everyone else is wrong.  But the Bruins are sold out every night.  Let the free market reign!
    Posted by Fletcher1

    The exact point I'v made multiple times now Fletch. TV revenue is up in most markets and, as you said, the Bruins sell out every night yet here we are listening to 1 fan telling us how fighting is detrimental to the sport. I understand the squeaky wheel gets the grease but I certainly prefer that majority rules.....
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending : "This is how a leader speaks" -- that cracked me up.  I mean, this is total PR speak.  This should be taken seriously?  Of course it should!  Who in their right mind would disagree with that.  We're talking about the death of a 28-year old.  It's not exactly the Gettysburg address to say we should take a look at it. The devil is in the details.  That's where the hard work lies -- what to do about it.  Fehr offers nothing but a vague assurance that he will 'look into it' and 'discuss it'  Lofty stuff.  Perhaps the best thing to do is actually quite complicated, and not as clear as you think, and that's why nobody says anything of substance after glancing at a medical report. I hope they do look into it.  I hope they take it seriously.  I hope they eventually eliminate the role of guys like Boogaard in the NHL (goons).  I also hope they don't buy into a kneejerk response to change the culture of the game without very careful deliberation of pros and cons.
    Posted by Fletcher1


    Till the last meeting the players had they had no issue of policing themselves and did not want to ban fights.
    In the end if the majority of the players don't want fighting then the owners (board of governors) have to really take this into consideration. 
    Again as you specified " carefully deliberation of pros and cons "
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending : Till the last meeting the players had they had no issue of policing themselves and did not want to ban fights. In the end if the majority of the players don't want fighting then the owners (board of governors) have to really take this into consideration. 
    Posted by BsLegion

    Legion, 20 out of 20 players polled said they were in favour of fighting in the game.

    That last sentiment is shared by a number of McGrattan’s peers. A recent ESPN poll showed 20 of 20 NHLers said fighting shouldn’t be banned, a sentiment that’s been confirmed in previous player polls. Many NHLers understand and accept the inherent dangers in their jobs — all jobs, including enforcers — something Washington’s Brook Laich spoke bluntly about following the Jay Beagle-Arron Asham fight:

    “This is what we love to do,” he said. “Guys love to play, they love to compete, they want to be on the ice. How do you take that away from someone? We accept that there’s going to be dangers when we play this game. We know that every time we get dressed.

    “I don’t know, sometimes it just feels like we’re being babysat a little too much. We’re grown men and we should have a say in what we want to do.”

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    At least Donald Fehr is saying the right thing,
    that the findings regarding CTE in Derek Boogaard's brain should be seriously considered by everyone associated with the game.
    With more information and education on the subject, I think you might see those player poll numbers in favour of fighting begin to drop. These guys have families and futures to think about.

    With this comment from Fehr there is hope for the NHLPA afterall. An issue like this could be where it finds its mojo. Player safety and protection - if the UNION doesn't do it, Bettman certainly won't - these guys are just horses to him - "You feed em only so much so's they know they're hungry."

    Bettman sounds like the Mayor in 'Jaws' - "Oh, the beach will be open, Chief Brody!"
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    At least Donald Fehr is saying the right thing, that the findings regarding CTE in Derek Boogaard's brain should be seriously considered by everyone associated with the game. With more information and education on the subject, I think you might see those player poll numbers in favour of fighting begin to drop. These guys have families and futures to think about. With this comment from Fehr there is hope for the NHLPA afterall. An issue like this could be where it finds its mojo. Player safety and protection - if the UNION doesn't do it, Bettman certainly won't - these guys are just horses to him - "You feed em only so much so's they know they're hungry." Bettman sounds like the Mayor in 'Jaws' - "Oh, the beach will be open, Chief Brody!"
    Posted by gord11

    Sure, let's all discuss what might happen since it might fit into your agenda. No wait, let's instead allow men to make decisions for themselves instead of trying to act like we know what's better for them. How's that for a novel idea? I anxiously await your next stupid movie reference disguised as legitimate hockey talk.........
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    The one thing about the scientific method that was noticed by E.O. Wilson in his book Consilience, they lose the perspective of the larger picture.  Connections to other sciences are passed over willingly, like viewing CTE to fighting only. Let all North Americans look seriously at driving a car, extreme mountain climbing, UFC action, walking the roads of NYC as dangerous.  Howard Hughes would be proud.  I perfer to look at football, hockey, basketball, and baseball (beanings) as a part of the sport "many" enjoy.   In hockey, fighting should be limited, but not elimanted.  One plays hockey with a stick!  It is dangerous, but so is NASCAR.  End of the story on this thread as Gordo has flat lined.  
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    The one thing about the scientific method that was noticed by E.O. Wilson in his book Consilience, they lose the perspective of the larger picture.  Connections to other sciences are passed over willingly, like viewing CTE to fighting only. Let all North Americans look seriously at driving a car, extreme mountain climbing, UFC action, walking the roads of NYC as dangerous.  Howard Hughes would be proud.  I perfer to look at football, hockey, basketball, and baseball (beanings) as a part of the sport "many" enjoy.   In hockey, fighting should be limited, but not elimanted.  One plays hockey with a stick!  It is dangerous, but so is NASCAR.  End of the story on this thread as Gordo has flat lined.  
    Posted by islamorada


    I am thrilled to see this thread close on a E.O. Wilson reference.  Well done Isla!

    Bet he's a Bruins fan too.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share