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

    And you, islamorada are padding your sample group - "Ted Ferguson" is two former players - I can only assume you mean "John" and "Lindsay", one of which is yes, thankfully very much alive, while the other is quite dead.

    I thought I was making my point clear - speculative as it is -  I believe many more athletes' families, including those of Pro Hockey players, will donate their son's, brother's father's brains to science. Perhaps even the players you mentioned, islamorada.
    The picture will fill in, I'm sure of it. Until then we are marking time - and brain cells not our own. It'd be nice if Bettman wasn't the last one to get the picture
     
  2. 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:
    [QUOTE]You spent all day on that one, dezaruchi? Wow. I'm getting the impression that you don't read. You skim and reply. But you are right about one thing; I am confused. By you. I don't quite know how to untangle your post - it is, literally a bunch of gobbledy-guck - So insecure, so emotional, so protective, so all-over-the-place, talking more about my apparent affront to the sacred integrity of 'the thread' etc (hint: it is always a tell when a guy hides, overly behind procedure and policy.) I'm keeping it pretty real, pretty clear. I don't think the NHL will be able to operate forever without a comprehensive and preventative policy toward headshots and concussions resulting from fistfights on the ice. Science, the march of time and common sense will demand it. It's just my opinion, i don't remember giving a sh*t if i swayed anyone to that opinion, i don't remember caring if I was agreed with - frankly, i didn't expect it. Sorry, dezaruchi, but if this is important to you - and I think it is - with posts like your last one, it is obvious to everyone that - agree or disagree with what I'm saying - my debate with you has already been won. Or at least it's obvious to everyone, that if I lost this debate, it wasn't to you. Remember, dezaruchi, just because you don't understand something it doesn't mean it's un-understandable. I mean, really, you don't see the 'Big Tobacco' comparison? Anybody? A little help here... Anyway, it's simple. Just answer the questions and we can call it a day; Would there be fewer concussions, less brain damage in NHL hockey if fighting were penalized to the point of marginalization? Yes or no? And do you care about players becoming concussed, becoming brain damaged? Still waiting for your buddy 'NAS's answers to a simple question; "Why isn't fighting in hockey a lie? What does fighting do?"... cricket...cricket..
    Posted by gord11[/QUOTE]
    For God sake you simpleton NO. What is it you're not getting? It's been said by many here ad nauseam that eliminating fighting would lead to more concussions. You clearly don't know or watch hockey as evidenced by your posts. There has been no proven direct link between fighting in hockey and brain damage. A smart guy like you should know the difference between theory and fact but, not surprisingly, it appears you don't. Regarding your inability to decipher my last post, I can't really help you there. Sorry I took so long getting back to you as I've started a new job. I wish I hadn't kept you waiting as I can clearly see you spent the day anxiously in wait. Once again, sorry to let you down. Oh, and lastly......go F@ck yourself. Nobody cares to be enlightened by a pink hat who doesn't watch the games.

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

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    [QUOTE]Wrong, BsLegion, wrong and willfully dense. Besides, DrCC, unwittingly has already acknowledged what I'm saying; that if you eliminate fighting, there would be 100 fewer shots to the head.
    Posted by gord11[/QUOTE]
    Missed the part in my post about noise, huh?  If those 100 shots fewer to the head are taken from 1,000 total that include non-fight collisions, would it make a noticeable difference?  Enough to make a change that the players themselves currently oppose?

    Until it is demonstrated that fighting has an impact on the health of players that is distinguishable from the impact of simply playing the game, you can't argue that fighting needs to be removed to protect players' health.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from hangnail. Show hangnail's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    Bettmans view.  This article should settle things.

    http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=605081
     
  5. 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:
    [QUOTE]Bettmans view.  This article should settle things. http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=605081
    Posted by hangnail[/QUOTE]
    Nope. I've already provided that link only to hear that Bettman doesn't know the game as well as Gordo either.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Macfact. Show Macfact's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    Gord I think it is admirable and with respect I say that scientific study is appropriate on any measure that protects players from any sport from becoming damaged for life. But I take as afront to as do a lot of posters who have valued Dez as insightful, thought provoking and many times the ambassador on these boards with a long history of respecting and encouraging multiple opinons on any given topic. As I don't take you as the ranting lunatic type that I see from some like Tukka whatever the heck he is I am appealing to your good and logical nature to implore you to stick with your facts and finding and allow others to have their own opinion and cheap shots at someone we all respect and would stand up for on or off the ice like Dez are unwarranted to say the least. 
    As for your arguments and some of what I have gleaned I disagree with eliminating fighting from Hockey. My stand may be an emotional one admittedly and I may not be riddled with facts as Dez, Fletch and Bookboy are many of the times and they fight their own battles well enough but I believe the issue you are concerned with lies elsewhere. I would like to see a statical study that shows that fighting is the culprit. Boxing is far worse but yet people pay to see boxers bludgen themselves for sport. Your beloved soccer which I played at a high level has caused more head injuries of any sport I have ever played and the cheap and dirty play, the play acting and the viciousness is far worse than in hockey with no padding. If you eliminate hockey fights it will turn into WWF and they will find another way to injure players far worse. And my stand is that the diving on the ice if you increase the penalities will slow the game to a screaching hault. Yes emotion is literal. I cannot stand the head shots and I think the suspensions for these type of hits should be for 7 to 10 games and send a message. I think boarding and stick play should be cracked down on but eliminating fighting is not the answer. It is not just for entertainment and if you ask any old timer they will tell you the same.
     
  7. 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:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending : Nope. I've already provided that link only to hear that Bettman doesn't know the game as well as Gordo either.
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]

    Sorry dez, I missed that post...enjoying the back and forth on this one though!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    John Ferguson, sorry, Ted was and old friend of mine.  And you are telling me that CTE is only related to fighting becasue of Derek Boogaard? Simple but not a wide sampling.  More simply put, you need do testing on alive people for CTE.  Yet you used a dead person.  The onces I mentioned were fighters and they are walking around.  Godwin's Law!  Look that up!
     
  9. 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:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending : Sorry dez, I missed that post...enjoying the back and forth on this one though!
    Posted by hangnail[/QUOTE]
    No need to apologize. I was just being a dink to illustrate the point.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chef09. Show Chef09's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    Because fighting is more easy to identify/quantify: gloves come off- people punch- it is the easy thing to change. It's probably more difficult to quantify the cumulative effects of CTE in headshots,big hits and overall dirty play .It will probably be difficult to tell whether the absence of fighting increases the amount of dirty play , until it actually happens.
     I can see the logic: we want head injuries gone so why let people punch each other in the head. I get that but . . . what if cumulative damage increases after fighting is taken out because of more frequent dirty play? Like the instigator rule you will never get the fighting put back in. Guys are bigger, and hit harder with fists and body checks- have the athletes strength,weight, momentum and overall power outstripped the body's ability to take that degree of punishment? What if the helmets are better in a few years, will the cumulative effect of the hits be lessened to the point that the CTE will not show up as often in fighters and non- fighters alike?  If they do decide to stop fighting it will probably be because of the liability issue.
    How many dangerous things should then be taken out of the game? If Chara hits you with a 105 mph slapper in the face -visor or not, you are probably dead (I'm not making light of this) Anything short of a cage won't save you if it hits the wrong place.So- Chara can't raise the puck anymore? What's next?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    Need to be dead for CTE testing islamorada. 

    Ok, dezaruchi, I guess you're right, I don't know the rules of engagement here...

    I didn't realize that the first person to say; "Go f*#k yourself!"  wins.

    Fighting in the game can't be supported, can't be sustained the way it is. I think everyone knows this, I think everyone knows its' time is coming - which would explain some of the vehemence of the opposition here. 

     
  12. 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:
    [QUOTE]Need to be dead for CTE testing islamorada.  Ok, dezaruchi, I guess you're right, I don't know the rules of engagement here... I didn't realize that the first person to say; "Go f*#k yourself!"  wins. Fighting in the game can't be supported, can't be sustained the way it is. I think everyone knows this, I think everyone knows its' time is coming - which would explain some of the vehemence of the opposition here. 
    Posted by gord11[/QUOTE]

    Funny, you're the only one with this opinion, yet you say "everyone" has it.  Exactly who are these "everyones" you speak of?
     
  13. 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:
    [QUOTE]Need to be dead for CTE testing islamorada.  Ok, dezaruchi, I guess you're right, I don't know the rules of engagement here... I didn't realize that the first person to say; "Go f*#k yourself!"  wins. Fighting in the game can't be supported, can't be sustained the way it is. I think everyone knows this, I think everyone knows its' time is coming - which would explain some of the vehemence of the opposition here. 
    Posted by gord11[/QUOTE]

    Just have to agree to disagree. 

    Your position as I understand it: Eliminating fights reduces punches to the head, thus fewer concussions. Seems logical and reasonable to understand.

    What is the trade-off?  If eliminating fighting results in an increase in other egregious activity on the ice, then how are you better off? Isn't there a risk that concussions may in fact increase? How do you effectively quantify that?

    Are you a Bruins fan, Gord?  Have you ever heard of Steven Kampfer?  Ever seen this clip from an NCAA (no fighting allowed in that league) game between Michigan and Michigan State?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fI-sYE1DsMs

    Do you want to see more of this?

    Look, hockey is a physical game played by grown-ups that understand the risks.  I am just not convinced that eliminating fighting leaves the game in a safer or better place.  Of course, we could always petition the commish to dress everyone in NERF and play the game slippers on JELL-O if that works better for you.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    Gordo, the medical community is not going to definitively say CTE was caused by fighting unless that medical community can prove some one has CTE alive.  Why? you need to test the ones who did fight who are still walking around!  Until then, to say fighting is the sole cause of CTE is short sighted by the mere fact you are not getting enough of a wide sampling to do the study.  Can that be any clearer!  

    If one falls off a bike consistently and hits one's head then presumedly a medical team could say that person may have CTE, but not definitively! So, fighting should be limited, but not eliminated from the sport of hockey.  
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

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

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    islamorada, I have never said that fighting is the sole cause of CTE. Never did. But it is obviously a contributing factor and it is an easy contributing factor to eliminate - IF - the NHL is serious about protecting ALL of its players.

    There will be more brains donated and studied,  There will be more and more CTE, you must know that? It's just human nature to want to 'know'. We're human beings, there will be too much of a hunger for science, for knowledge. There just will be.
    Bettman and the likes of some of you, can close ranks after every publication of every study, ask for more data, for more brains, but for how long? Sooner or later the connection will be made and proven

    I wonder what Shawn Thornton's thinking as he goes out to fight tonight after reading about Derek Boogaard and CTE (etc, backwards). Then again, I'm guessing he doesn't read this stuff. It's probably better that way. Like Bettman, it would only make his job harder.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    Oh! And because its' been asked so often and to the extent that it makes some kind of a difference to some - in the name of anonymous transparency - Yes, I am huge Bruins fan and I see almost every game. I have seen, literally thousands of games. Does that make me a heckuva guy?
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from adkbeesfan. Show adkbeesfan's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    two very simple questions for you gord... how many "fighters" have been sidelined this year for concussions sustained during a fight? diagnosed concussions- with legitimate time missed? how many "hockey players" have been sidelined this year for concussions sustained during an on-ice collision(legal or illegal)? go ahead and look it up and get back to me on that one. if you claim your beef is with solely with concussions, not fighting, then all contact should be banned in the game. the league is doing a great job trying to rid itself of dirty hits, yes, but concussions will always be part of the game as long as it a contact sport. these are grown men playing a physical game that has inherent risks, and guess what, they get compensated quite well to take those risks.
     
  19. 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:
    [QUOTE]Wrong, BsLegion, wrong and willfully dense.Besides, DrCC, unwittingly has already acknowledged what I'm saying; that if you eliminate fighting, there would be 100 fewer shots to the head.
    Posted by gord11[/QUOTE]

    I'm so glad you're the intelligent one on this board . Funny how you only come out posting all your righteous "mumbo jumbo" to coincide with the article from the New York Times . Why don't you go join your friends there, hold hands and all agree with each other. For the record it's you whom initiated insults here.
    Did you know there was a study done in Switzerland , maybe 10 years ago,  on how heading a ball in soccer consistently causes the killing of brain cells ?  The media probably buried this story because it won't sell papers.   Hockey fight issue does sell papers.
    This is the part that I don't like and all the sheep that follow like yourself. It's an issue that has been talked about often (if you come on here on this board) even before your beloved New York newspaper.
    One thing for sure where I do agree with you any head shot will cause dead brain cells thus brain damage. There will be a day (agree with you again) in my lifetime that fights will be banned although the concussions and injuries due to dirty play will not decrease .

    p.s. just because a fighter does not get a concussion it does not mean the blows to the head he sustains don't cause damage, it does.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    C'mon adkbeesfan, how many fighters report their concussions? Did you read the Boogaard piece? They lose their jobs if they can't do them. That's the truly galling thing about this - the callous cruel nature of the 'job' - a job that no one would dare define in a contract for liability reasons - these guys are tasked to fight and when they can't do it, or they lose too many fights or someone
    younger and stronger will do it for cheaper, they're out.  It might be the most cut-throat 'job' in all of sports. The Faustian nature of it makes it all the more unsavoury - 'Hey kid, want to live your dream, be in the NHL? Fight until you can't fight anymore.'
    These 'Enforcers' have to work twice as hard to get a tenth as far for the least amount of money. Why? To keep the game 'honest'? For our amusement? C'mon, a five year old from Mars would find that objectionable.

    My 'beef' is not 'solely with concussions' - it is with unnecessary ones, it is with the concussions and brain damage stemming from a 'part of the game' that isn't a 'part of the game'.

    Yes, the League has and will continue to tackle the concussion problem - the ones that stem from incidental and intentional contact - they will institute rules against different types of hits and strengthen those rules with hefty suspensions for reckless abnd dangerous play as they are doing already, they will tinker with the equipment (I read a guy who has a 10$ solution; a neckpiece that limits just a little bloodflow to the head, creating more fluid in the skullcase for the brain to sit in, hence reducing the brain's 'sloshing around' and bashing into the sides of the skull.)
    I have no doubt they will make the game safer.

    But, they can't do all this AND ignore the impacts of sorta-unsanctioned fist-fighting. It is counter-intuitive. It's illogical. The League knows this. Everybody knows this. I don't even think the League is arguing otherwise. They are avoiding the argument. They are hiding from it - in plain sight. This is what bugs me.

    The penalties for fighting need to be more severe and in line with other major team sports.

    The NHL should get out in front of this and show some courage. And if doing it to do 'the right thing' isn't enough, these guys (the BoG) should be smart enough to see that the reward ($) for such courage could be huge. 
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending


    "Did you know there was a study done in Switzerland , maybe 10 years ago,  on how heading a ball in soccer consistently causes the killing of brain cells ?"

    Ergo, thus we conclude BsLegion, if fighting were 'allowed' in soccer, there would be that many more dead brain cells than just the ones killed from heading the ball and from the other usual and normal aspects of playing the game.
     
  22. 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:
    [QUOTE]Oh! And because its' been asked so often and to the extent that it makes some kind of a difference to some - in the name of anonymous transparency - Yes, I am huge Bruins fan and I see almost every game. I have seen, literally thousands of games. Does that make me a heckuva guy?
    Posted by gord11[/QUOTE]

    ah you're forgiven . Only a Bruins fan can call me dense.
     
  23. 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:
    [QUOTE]"Did you know there was a study done in Switzerland , maybe 10 years ago,  on how heading a ball in soccer consistently causes the killing of brain cells ?" Ergo,thus we conclude BsLegion, if fighting were 'allowed' in soccer, there would be that many more dead brain cells than just the ones killed from heading the ball and from the other usual and normal aspects of playing the game.
    Posted by gord11[/QUOTE]


    LOL it's Eureka !
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending

    In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Another Hockey Fight, another wussy ending : LOL it's Eureka !
    Posted by BsLegion[/QUOTE]
    Of course!  The future of hockey will be guys strapped in motion-capture rigs that will allow real-time rendering of holograms of them out on the 'ice' that follow their every move!  No more concussions!  They could even keep fighting, and add brass knuckles!
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from gord11. Show gord11's posts

    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.
     

Share