The fighting in women's hockey poll

[Eeyore]

Re: The fighting in women's hockey poll

I find hockey fights to be not only appalling but also boring. My ex-wife talked me into watching boxing for a while and, while I never overcame my distaste for it (and haven't watched a moment of it since she left) I could see how it might be exciting. As fights go, though, once you've put on a pair of skates and are on a slippery surface, the result is pretty pathetic. So fighting as a spectacle leaves me cold.

And the moral implications of the players that go out to start a fight in order to put a spark to a team that is flat are just disgusting. If the only way that a group of adults can think of to motivate themselves to work hard is to have one of them go out and punch someone in the face, they deserve to lose. That people buy into this logic, that it is somehow justifiable to try to beat someone up as a way to get yourself to play hard, chills me.

[Blackbeard]

Re: The fighting in women's hockey poll

And the moral implications of the players that go out to start a fight in order to put a spark to a team that is flat are just disgusting. If the only way that a group of adults can think of to motivate themselves to work hard is to have one of them go out and punch someone in the face, they deserve to lose. That people buy into this logic, that it is somehow justifiable to try to beat someone up as a way to get yourself to play hard, chills me.

Running people sort of falls into the same category. During a high school game my brother in law saw the other team's coach tap a kid on the bench and pointed out my nephew who was on the ice. The tapee hopped the boards and immediately followed instructions...with the puck in one end and my nephew in the neutral zone the young goon ran my nephew from behind, driving him into the boards head first, again, with neither player anywhere near the puck. The result was my nephew sustained a broken neck. You wouldn't want to wish the ensuing agony that his parents went through (not to mention my nephew) on anyone...sitting in the hospital waiting through hours of surgery not knowing what the outcome was going to be after being prepared by the surgeons that a positive outcome was real low percentage stuff.

The head surgeon finally surfaced and approached my brother in law and said "there's no need for you to ever buy any more tickets...you just won the lottery today". The procedure was a resounding success with my nephew "only" losing about 30% of a normal range of motion on one side.

So, these acts while being barbaric can also be criminal.

[Yaforsure]

Running people sort of falls into the same category. During a high school game my brother in law saw the other team's coach tap a kid on the bench and pointed out my nephew who was on the ice. The tapee hopped the boards and immediately followed instructions...with the puck in one end and my nephew in the neutral zone the young goon ran my nephew from behind, driving him into the boards head first, again, with neither player anywhere near the puck. The result was my nephew sustained a broken neck. You wouldn't want to wish the ensuing agony that his parents went through (not to mention my nephew) on anyone...sitting in the hospital waiting through hours of surgery not knowing what the outcome was going to be after being prepared by the surgeons that a positive outcome was real low percentage stuff.

The head surgeon finally surfaced and approached my brother in law and said "there's no need for you to ever buy any more tickets...you just won the lottery today". The procedure was a resounding success with my nephew "only" losing about 30% of a normal range of motion on one side.

So, these acts while being barbaric can also be criminal.

Fighting only shows that your talent or skill set is limited. For a coach "tap" a shoulder only shows his lack of coaching ability and educate himself in the sport. I can see if your backed Into a corner for sure defend yourself.

This guy should not be near a bench or for that matter amongst youth.

Lams always players with an edge but to take cheap shots is another thing. If they think intimidation is what's gonna help them, think again. At this level, if your afraid of your opponent, you prob should not be there.

[kwhrs1]

Re: The fighting in women's hockey poll

So let's define fighting. NHL gloves off is one game. NCAA D1 Women's is obviously a different game. Seriously if you can't tell the difference, stop typing. Hockey is a rough game. Played at the highest level or even at any serious level, there are some unwriten rules. Don't mess with our goalie. You're going to get some reprecussion, or you should if you do. Never liked chippy BS. But the best players always took care of their goalie. Think Darwitz and Wendall, not Lam's.

[northhockey]

Re: The fighting in women's hockey poll

My option is not posted in the list either. "Prefer that fighting not be part of the game, but there is nothing wrong with a tempers flared incident to stand up for your team mates and hard nosed physical hockey".

you guys crack me up honestly. so players sticking up for their own players is ok unless its the lams doing it. the lams, teammates, and coach all said the reason for the "altercation" at the ralph was sticking up for a teammate (even if you dont believe jenner's elbow made contact, they all did) they didn't go after her for no reason. they were up 4-1 and canada was playing rough.

[northhockey]

Re: The fighting in women's hockey poll

So let's define fighting. NHL gloves off is one game. NCAA D1 Women's is obviously a different game. Seriously if you can't tell the difference, stop typing. Hockey is a rough game. Played at the highest level or even at any serious level, there are some unwriten rules. Don't mess with our goalie. You're going to get some reprecussion, or you should if you do. Never liked chippy BS. But the best players always took care of their goalie. Think Darwitz and Wendall, not Lam's.

don't mess with a player you already took out for a season years ago, while down 4-1, or that unwritten rule might come into effect. the lams are tough and physical so they protected their teammate. who'd u think would do it?

[CrazyDave]

Re: The fighting in women's hockey poll

you guys crack me up honestly. so players sticking up for their own players is ok unless its the lams doing it. the lams, teammates, and coach all said the reason for the "altercation" at the ralph was sticking up for a teammate (even if you dont believe jenner's elbow made contact, they all did) they didn't go after her for no reason.

There's sticking up for a teammate and then there's retribution. The hit against the boards looked like the latter, regardless of who delivered it. I'll admit that there's a fine line -- like the whole debate about baseball batters being hit by pitches. That said, other Team USA players already had the opportunity to "stick up" for Pucci when she first got hit plus I've never seen a player "stick up" for a teammate in a women's game after the opponent has served a penalty for their infraction.

Additionally, IMO after watching the video several times, the fight was not instigated by the hit against the boards. While that did start a small scuffle, things didn't get out of hand until Monique inserted herself into the pile in the crease, which was completely separate, and started cross-checking Daoust.

[northhockey]

Re: The fighting in women's hockey poll

I've never seen a player "stick up" for a teammate in a women's game after the opponent has served a penalty for their infraction.

Because that hit was more dangerous than JLam's body check at the end of the game, plus being up 4-1, and that player's history....why not wait? and its only a 5 minute penalty for all involved. no risk to future games, so why not?

change the written rules or follow the unwritten. i rest my case!

[Eeyore]

Re: The fighting in women's hockey poll

Because that hit was more dangerous than JLam's body check at the end of the game . . .

This simply isn't true. The latter was much more dangerous given the location heading into the boards and the way Lamoureux extended her arms with a cross-check. It was a hit that cannot be justified under any circumstances. I don't care what Jenner had done previously, that was out of bounds.

[pokechecker]

Re: The fighting in women's hockey poll

This simply isn't true. The latter was much more dangerous given the location heading into the boards and the way Lamoureux extended her arms with a cross-check. It was a hit that cannot be justified under any circumstances. I don't care what Jenner had done previously, that was out of bounds.

when the Canuck horse collared Lamoureux from behind, a cheap shot in any league, you had to know there was gonna be retribution

in any event, in 2 days it will be:

The Brawl in St. Paul

[brookyone]

Re: The fighting in women's hockey poll

How I voted:

I enjoy women’s hockey because it emphasizes skill, if you want fighting, play/watch men’s hockey.

I can and do agree with this wholeheartedly:

It sets a bad example for younger players, fighting has no place in hockey.

...but as I personally believe removing the fighting and physical acts outside the rules from the men's game is a lost cause, well...went with what I still believe is achievable. Though the recent USA / Canada games are cultivating some doubt in my mind in that regard. Thought I'd get that on the record. I get the notion these games could fuel the proponents of adding legal checking to the game...and down the road a piece, the demise of the sports attributes that made me a fan in the first place. Hope not. Just a theory BTW.

Thought the US eye for an eye physical "strategy" cost them the outright regulation time W in St. Paul. Have to be smart about not initiating or instigating that stuff with a game on the line in Sochi...I think. Again, I have to wonder how non USA / Canadian officials might handle a game between these two opponents.

[mnpokecheck]

Re: The fighting in women's hockey poll

Do you think these games have been called to Olympic standards? I don't recall Olympic games allowing all the clutching and interference.

[brookyone]

Re: The fighting in women's hockey poll

Do you think these games have been called to Olympic standards? I don't recall Olympic games allowing all the clutching and interference.

No I don't. I mentioned previously recalling some overly strict enforcement in Olympic play. I remember one female official from I don't remember where...other than it was not the US or Canada who appeared very inexperienced...who threw her arm aloft anytime players so much as touched one another. That's the basis of my curiosity on the potential affect officiating would have on a game between the US and Canada.

I suspect that such inexperience will not be as evident in Sochi though. Would anticipate stricter enforcement...and that overly aggressive play will likely put you at a disadvantage, more readily...or often. Compared to these exhibitions anyway.

[WiscDC]

Re: The fighting in women's hockey poll

Hockey without fighting is like pancakes without maple syrup.

Absolutely not.

Women’s hockey is boring, but I like a good cat fight.

No, I go to almost every Wisconsin women's hockey game.

If it brings attention to women’s hockey, I can tolerate it.

I can tolerate it because these fights haven't been the result of a goon culture in which players start fights because they're losing or think that's just what they're supposed to do. Fights happen in sports, and a few happened in the USA-Canada series. As far as bringing attention to women's hockey...I accept that that is going to happen, but I'm not really on board with justifying it for that reason.

If you’re losing, then kick their *** so you have a better chance of winning next time.

That's pathetic. I hate the Penguins, and this attitude is one reason why. When hockey players do this, it diminishes the game they are playing to a joke.

It sets a bad example for younger players, fighting has no place in hockey.

It does set a bad example for younger players, and I think fighting has no more of a place in hockey than it does in other sports of its nature.

It’s OK for the men’s game, but it’s not ladylike and doesn’t belong in women’s hockey.

It's more likely in the men's game, because there's more hitting, and quite frankly, more testosterone. That said, I don't think whether or not it is "ladylike" is relevant.

I enjoy women’s hockey because it emphasizes skill, if you want fighting, play/watch men’s hockey.

I enjoy all hockey, and the difference is not all that great, especially in the core componenents that make it a game one would want to watch or play.

I have no idea, I’m still trying to figure out why they call it a Zamboni.

The first company that made ice resurfacers! And I do have some idea - it basically goes along with what I think about fighting in hockey in general, which I lightly touched on higher up in this comment.

Women play hockey?

Already eliminated that further up.

So...I chose none of them.

[Timothy A]

Re: The fighting in women's hockey poll

I don't like actual gloves & helmet off/let's square up and throw punches fighting in hockey. Boxing/martial arts are different sports and I don't care to see it in hockey at any level. I have never seen that in a women's game.

I actually don't mind them getting into a post whistle scrap once and a while, what I don't like is the physical play during play. All the checking and interference that is allowed (my perspective is seeing UW/wcha play) totally drains the game of flow/speed and takes skill out of the game. The women's game is a more pure version of my perception of hockey, though I love the men's game all the same less the fighting.