Gordon Sawyer talks about banning fighting in hockey

[fcm]

Gordon Sawyer was a sports journalist based in Montreal for the CBC until 1998. After the CBC decided to release him, he became a political activist.

The text wasn't written in English so it is my own translation. It was written in the "comment" section, on the blog of a known sports journalist in Montreal, Mathias Brunet, who is making the promotion of banning fighting in hockey. In this post, he was talking about Johnny McGuire taking Jarred Tinordi out for two weeks after a fight.

It's the 23rd comment if you want the original.

Let's go.

The problem with the anti-fighting crusade is that it is a false debate. Anthropologically talking, it is impossible to abolish the fights through the maintenance of constant physical contacts (hitting on the boards, roughing in front of the net, etc). Indeed, trying to prevent a man to fight in a context of confrontation remains a losing war against human nature intrinsically.

This is the biological reality of the human being, and specifically its defensive and self-preservation reflex. These reflexes are instantly activated by the human brain at the slightest treat to the physical integrity of our person or of someone else's, regardless of the context. And this form of aggressive behavioral response, a heavily used hockey imperative by the fact that the robustness, stakeholder, but not prevalent in the sport, is often a negative surprise (aversive stimulus) at the puck carrier whose mind, busy with the stick handling as well as by the game play, does not prepare his body (which is relaxed at this moment) for a hit. At this moment, a powerful impact suddenly is applied in compliance (or not) with the parameters dictated by the rules. This is where the physical answer takes form, since almost 150 years of playing our national sport.

Some people would say it is not true, and make a (stupid) comparison with football. They argue that it is a physical sport, and there is no fighting. The difference between football and hockey is the following: in football, the ball-carrier runs and prepares himself to be layed out since it is the only way the other teams' defence can stop him.

It is true, though, that we could ban fighting. But not through keeping the sport physical. We would have a price to pay for that: taking out every bit of physical play. Do we want our sport to be played like ringette? Or like in a beer league? Obviously not. But it is anthropologically and biologically impossible to take fighting out of the game, and keep hitting into it. If you keep the physically play, there's always going to be retribution and self-preservation. If it's not with fighting, it'll be with hits targetting the head. For them who hate to see two men fighting in hockey, just tell yourself: this is the price to pay if we don't want to see more hits targetting the head.

My solution? Make the rink bigger, and the game will end up with less dirty contacts.

Gordon Sawyer,
Former commentator on Hockey Night in Canada

[HordiBrusk29]

He's absolutely right. It's pretty rare to see somebody in the media be spot on like this.

I've said it hundreds of times over the years. The only way you can effectively ban fighting in hockey is if you banned all physical contact. Needless to say at that point the sport would be dead. It wouldn't be hockey. And that is too much of a price to pay.

I sure hope they don't make the rink any bigger. I understand the reasoning as to why it may be more "safe" but I have no interest in watching hockey with less hitting. There is already less hitting than I'd prefer. Hockey isn't supposed to be safe. That is a large part of it's appeal.

[fcm]

Originally Posted by HordiBrusk29

I sure hope they don't make the rink any bigger. I understand the reasoning as to why it may be more "safe" but I have no interest in watching hockey with less hitting. There is already less hitting than I'd prefer. Hockey isn't supposed to be safe. That is a large part of it's appeal.

I am neutral on this issue. I don't think it'll lower the number of hits, but the players now skate faster and are bigger than in the old days. But this is a non-issue for me, I don't care if they do it or not.

[HordiBrusk29]

The less change the better, IMO. The league started to go down the ****ter after making rule change after rule change and it only got worse as the years went by. The game was a lot better when it was more simple.

[fcm]

Originally Posted by HordiBrusk29

The less change the better, IMO. The league started to go down the ****ter after making rule change after rule change and it only got worse as the years went by. The game was a lot better when it was more simple.

"The less change, the better" was correct when the game was good to see. Now that it has become crap, we need changes... these changes being: removing the instigator, get the red line back, allow players to hook a little bit...

[SyrCrunch11]

I feel like there are 500 more injuries due to dirty plays than the fights themselves, why does this topic keep coming up?

[bruiser11]

Nobody wants to see soccer on ice.

[BROKEN*ORBITAL]

I don't think the league wants to eliminate fighting, I think it's the fighters they want gone. I think the NHL is fine with two guys coming together during the play and dropping the gloves in the heat of the moment. But that's it. I don't think they want fighting of any kind beyond that.

Having a big fight or fights early to set a tone is unacceptable now. Having two guys fight in an attempt to shift/maintain momentum is unacceptable now. And end of game "messeage sending fights" are unacceptable now.

Those 3 forms of fighting are basically always performed by 4th line tough guys. Without those kinds of fights, guys like Godard, MacIntyre, Orr etc. have a depleted role. That's their job and it's what they do. But if the league is doing everything it can to eliminate that job, those guys are gone. And that's what we've seen.

The league wants fighting, but only by guys who are going to do it 5 or so times a year. I think they feel they can "justify" that to the bandwagon masses of anti-fighting media and fans by saying it's within the "parameters" of the game. It's the guys fighting 20, 30, times a year that they can't "validate" as apart of the game.

It's unfortunate because what the league needs to realize is that they don't have to validate anything to anyone. If people don't like what they're seeing, they can turn it off. But no. The NHL chose to turn it's back on the fans who loved the game in an attempt to appease a group of "fans" who hated it.

Just plain dumb.

[4thLineGoon]

Originally Posted by BROKEN*ORBITAL

I don't think the league wants to eliminate fighting, I think it's the fighters they want gone. I think the NHL is fine with two guys coming together during the play and dropping the gloves in the heat of the moment. But that's it. I don't think they want fighting of any kind beyond that.

Having a big fight or fights early to set a tone is unacceptable now. Having two guys fight in an attempt to shift/maintain momentum is unacceptable now. And end of game "messeage sending fights" are unacceptable now.

Those 3 forms of fighting are basically always performed by 4th line tough guys. Without those kinds of fights, guys like Godard, MacIntyre, Orr etc. have a depleted role. That's their job and it's what they do. But if the league is doing everything it can to eliminate that job, those guys are gone. And that's what we've seen.

The league wants fighting, but only by guys who are going to do it 5 or so times a year. I think they feel they can "justify" that to the bandwagon masses of anti-fighting media and fans by saying it's within the "parameters" of the game. It's the guys fighting 20, 30, times a year that they can't "validate" as apart of the game.

It's unfortunate because what the league needs to realize is that they don't have to validate anything to anyone. If people don't like what they're seeing, they can turn it off. But no. The NHL chose to turn it's back on the fans who loved the game in an attempt to appease a group of "fans" who hated it.

Just plain dumb.

Spot on. What they're too blind to realize though in the "essence of player safety" is that by leaving fighting to guys that don't do much of it, is that you're (In my non-medical common sense observation) INCREASING the odds of players getting hurt in a fight.

-This is where balance issues come in, INCREASING the odds of head as well as knee or ankle injuries from awkward falls.

-These players aren't as aware or abiding of the code that has kept things for the most part under control and as they'll be fighting out of raw emotion, far more likely to throw punches as a defenseless opponent on the ice, as well as endangering themselves and the linesmen by continuing altercations.

-You're still going to have a hierarchy of who "should" and "shouldn't" be fighting due to on-ice importance, contract issues, health issues etc, so at the end of the day, it will still be the bottom-six guys jumping in to protect the top-six guys, but it will look more like Philly-Pittsburgh, with people jumping all over each other rather than a good, honest squareoff. And by making less-skilled-skill-players do the fighting, the quality of fights goes down, making the product less enjoyable for fans.

Like the original post said, fights are always going to happen, look at the Euro leagues. It's harshly penalized but fights still occur, and usually they're a pretty ugly sight, characterized by the points I made above. As long as there are dirty plays and guys calling each other f*aggots and p*ssies, fights will happen and its best leaving it in the hands of professionals who know what they're doing. I don't know how a bunch of beer league wash-outs on a message board can figure that out but the league reps cannot.

[Captain Crunch28]

No but you can sure decrease the amounts of fights by making it a 10 minute penalty instead of 5. That's what'll happen but I pray that it never does.

[straka91]

Originally Posted by Captain Crunch28

No but you can sure decrease the amounts of fights by making it a 10 minute penalty instead of 5. That's what'll happen but I pray that it never does.

Almost every fight last season had the buttman package tagged on. Fights already have 17 minutes in penalties.

[Stevens Lindros]

Very intelligent argument.

[Captain Crunch28]

Originally Posted by straka91

Almost every fight last season had the buttman package tagged on. Fights already have 17 minutes in penalties.

Not quite...