Wade Belak found dead - from calgary sun

[sbb122]

i will fight anyone against fighting in this thread...

 

[DevilishWon]

Headlines

Don't know if you saw this. It's unconfirmed but thye say he hange himself

 

[juliansteed]

Beyond the increase in training specificity and skill among fighters, which lead to increased head trauma directly imposed by fighting, there have been a lot of medical advancements in recent years, which means more medications, which means more effects from medications.

In recent years in particular, a slew of new painkilling and antidepressant formulas have been developed and distributed to the public. Sure, they've been tested and approved before their release, but how much do we really know about them until they've been used by a bunch of people over a span of a few years? Well, not much, really. When it comes to drugs, science is predictive for sure, but not perfectly so, especially given the differences between the individuals taking them.

I guarantee today's enforcers are on more and different medications than yesteryear's. Let's also consider that most painkillers act either on the central nervous system or directly on the brain. So what's changed over the decades? A lot.

I think fighting should be eliminated from hockey altogether for a number of reasons. One is that we know more about head injuries. The second is that, as players get stronger, fights get more dangerous. And the third is the evolution of pharmaceutics. The latter two have amplified the ill effects of fighting on the hockey player's psyche. The former allows us to be aware of both that and the effects of head injuries on a person's long-term mental and physical state. When those factors are combined, I think there's no way fighting can be condoned moving forward.

I've never really seen the benefit (aside from entertainment) nor harm in fighting being part of hockey, so I was always cool with the status quo since I found it entertaining. I'm starting to rethink that but am still on the fence somewhat since I don't think I know enough to give an educated opinion.

That being said, if I was anti-fighting I would add another point as to why fighting today is different from the past. The whole "players policing themselves" argument might have applied in the past when there was 1 ref, and games were broadcasted by radio or with 1 or 2 cameras, but now with 2 refs and cameras on every player following their every move it's pretty much nonesense. Players can't actually expect to get away with anything anymore whether they have to fight or not. So they might not get a penalty. They can still be pretty sure there will be a suspension, fine, and criticism from the media, fans, and other players.

 

[juliansteed]

I think there are in some ways, but I haven't really heard a good one for pro-fighting in this thread. I've heard it's always been in hockey and "pussification" so far. Those aren't great arguments to me.

I'd love to see some stats on injuries and serious injuries pre- and post-enforcer. That would be interesting to see. Also, a look at games missed pre- and post-instigator rule. I think both sides of this debate largely agree that is a dumb rule.

I'm actually the opposite and realize I'm in the minority. I actually think the instigator rule is a good rule whether you like fighting or not. Unless you are referring to the game misconducts and the automatic suspension after X number of instigator penalties. Those should options that can be handed out on a case by case basis with most cases probably not requiring a game misconduct and certainly not a suspension.

The 2 minute minor is fine with me though, but I sense I'm in the minority thinking that too. I've never actually had anyone explain to me what is so wrong with it. By having an instigator rule you control fighting and minimize the role of the goon. As far as I can tell it seems to be the most misunderstood rule in hockey. Or maybe I'm the one who misunderstands it. I rarely see it called and the few times I have seen it called, it seemed very appropriate to me. The 1st example that comes to mind and the one that made me start liking the rule was when I was watching a junior game and a relatively small player laid out a larger player with a huge, clean, open-ice hit. A much larger teammate of the receiver of the hit then jumped the guy who threw the hit and forced him to defend himself despite the fact the guy clearly wasn't a fighter. As big as the hit was, there was no mistaking it for an illegal/dirty hit. The guy who came to the "defense" of his teammate (if you consider retaliating against a clean play defending him) was given an instigator penalty which I thought was well-deserved. Why should players be allowed to jump players at any given time and force them to defend themselves and sit in the box with them for 5 minutes, simply because they did something a guy on the other team didn't like? What's next? Skilled players having to fight goons for scoring a goal? This isn't the wild west. I think there needs to be some sort of order when it comes to fighting and when you have one guy forcing an unwilling opponent to defend himself an instigator penalty should be called. If you want to stick up for a star player on the receving end of a clean hit then fine, but just know that it will come at a cost. Situations like these or maybe less extreme Bertuzzi type situations are the only times I've seen it called. I've never seen it called when there were 2 willing participants or even when its a retaliation to a dirty play. Maybe some of you have? Maybe I just haven't seen it called enough times but I'd like to know why it's so dumb but I wouldn't mind if someone could help explain it to me and maybe even provide actual examples of when it was called in a dumb way. But even then it might not mean the rule itself is dumb but just how the ref called it. Or maybe people think that my example shows how dumb the rule is. Am I being unreasonable for thinking that players shouldn't be forced to defend themselves at any given time for no apparent reason and then serve the same penalty as their attacker?

 

[juliansteed]

The staged fights (or at least pure enforcers) can be eliminated, IMO, the following way:

Players must have a certain amount of TOI for every fighting major. Something in the order of 40 minutes (you'd have to look at how much is appropriate) of ice time per fighting major. If they incur a fighting major without this TOI banked (would have to be averaged out) over a suitable time frame, the team is fined and the player is suspended.

There would still be some fights but no more guys who play 4 minutes a game having staged bouts.

Guys like Chris Neil, Bieksa, Clarkson, etc. would still have jobs and would get in the odd scrap.

Guys like Parros, Colton Orr and Dracy Hordichuk could be out there mowing my lawn as we speak.

I think that is a really good idea Kenny! That would eliminate a lot of the problems people have with fighting and the potential long-term effects of doing it so regularly, while still keeping it as part of the game for those who do enjoy it.

 

[elocomotive]

That being said, if I was anti-fighting I would add another point as to why fighting today is different from the past. The whole "players policing themselves" argument might have applied in the past when there was 1 ref, and games were broadcasted by radio or with 1 or 2 cameras, but now with 2 refs and cameras on every player following their every move it's pretty much nonesense. Players can't actually expect to get away with anything anymore whether they have to fight or not. So they might not get a penalty. They can still be pretty sure there will be a suspension, fine, and criticism from the media, fans, and other players.

I agree with your point, except that while everyone sees exactly what happened in some of these terrible instances, the players are NOT sure there will be a suspension b/c they are rarely given and are almost always minimal when given out, even for repeat offenders. Regardless of how you feel about fighting, THAT needs to change. And I agree with you (Awaz), it should be a priority on the cheap shots and I think they tie together in terms of the suspensions. Maybe certain fight situations (Gilles) need to be looked at in the same light some of the Cooke-type hits are.

Enforcers and cheap shot retribution aside, I'm REALLY sick of seeing fights after clean, good hits. That seems way up to me in recent years. Even if I don't agree with it, I understand retaliation for the cheap or dirty hits. The fights over a perfectly legal hit are ridiculous.

In any case - good thread and thoughts. Can't respond to lots of thoughts I'd like to (too many of them), but some really good stuff in the last couple pages. Big ups to Awaz, Jstew, julian, and 46 in particular for some very detailed and thoughtful posts.

 

[Automattic]

I agree with your point, except that while everyone sees exactly what happened in some of these terrible instances, the players are NOT sure there will be a suspension b/c they are rarely given and are almost always minimal when given out, even for repeat offenders. Regardless of how you feel about fighting, THAT needs to change. And I agree with you (Awaz), it should be a priority on the cheap shots and I think they tie together in terms of the suspensions. Maybe certain fight situations (Gilles) need to be looked at in the same light some of the Cooke-type hits are.

Enforcers and cheap shot retribution aside, I'm REALLY sick of seeing fights after clean, good hits. That seems way up to me in recent years. Even if I don't agree with it, I understand retaliation for the cheap or dirty hits. The fights over a perfectly legal hit are ridiculous.

In any case - good thread and thoughts. Can't respond to lots of thoughts I'd like to (too many of them), but some really good stuff in the last couple pages. Big ups to Awaz, Jstew, julian, and 46 in particular for some very detailed and thoughtful posts.

Don't worry, I'll get around to making a detailed and thoughtful post one of these days.

I'm surprised nobody mentioned the spark a good 'ol knuckleduster can bring a team. I've seen teams squander 3 goal leads after Kocur destroyed somebody at center ice. And countless interviews of teammates crediting a guy for giving his team the jump they needed. In the rules? No. Part of the game? Fortunately for me, it is.

 

[dare2be]

Don't worry, I'll get around to making a detailed and thoughtful post one of these days.

I'm surprised nobody mentioned the spark a good 'ol knuckleduster can bring a team. I've seen teams squander 3 goal leads after Kocur destroyed somebody at center ice. And countless interviews of teammates crediting a guy for giving his team the jump they needed. In the rules? No. Part of the game? Fortunately for me, it is.

Flyer fans think that is a myth.

 

[Automattic]

Flyer fans think that is a myth.

Chris Pronger is a myth.

 

[elocomotive]

Don't worry, I'll get around to making a detailed and thoughtful post one of these days.

Yeah, maybe if you sober up!!

 

[awaz]

Flyer fans think that is a myth.

oh you watch yourself... we dont need to get into that again..

 

[JustAsking]

I'm going way out on a limb here (and stereotyping)... but I think it takes a certain type of player to become an enfrocer in the NHL. Most enforcers were probably skilled in younger days, but had to "alter" their game into a fighting role as the competition out grew their skill. I compare these folks to soft core **** actresses, maybe had some acting skill at one point, liked the attention you received because of it, and will do what you have to get that feeling. Or there are enforcers that probably were always enforcers and never really had any skill. They are like hard core **** actresses... they don;t care how they get teh money and fame they just want it. Either way, the person is not in a healthy mind set. They put the need of money and fame before their health. Once their careers are over, no more fame and probably no more money. And because of the health risks, probably on some sort of drug(s), which is also to blame in all of this... so, an unhealthy mind on drugs probably won't lead to anything good.

I really have no idea what I'm talking about....

 

[jstewismybastardson]

I'm going way out on a limb here (and stereotyping)... but I think it takes a certain type of player to become an enfrocer in the NHL. Most enforcers were probably skilled in younger days, but had to "alter" their game into a fighting role as the competition out grew their skill. I compare these folks to soft core **** actresses, maybe had some acting skill at one point, liked the attention you received because of it, and will do what you have to get that feeling. Or there are enforcers that probably were always enforcers and never really had any skill. They are like hard core **** actresses... they don;t care how they get teh money and fame they just want it. Either way, the person is not in a healthy mind set. They put the need of money and fame before their health. Once their careers are over, no more fame and probably no more money. And because of the health risks, probably on some sort of drug(s), which is also to blame in all of this... so, an unhealthy mind on drugs probably won't lead to anything good.

I really have no idea what I'm talking about....

shite ... after reading that, Im worried theyll be shutting down hockey pretty soon over an HIV scare

 

[KennyBanyeah]

shite ... after reading that, Im worried theyll be shutting down hockey pretty soon over an HIV scare

Sean "sloppy seconds" Avery says hi. :bj:

 

[mattola]

posting too many of these of late

Lu: Memories of Wade Belak, a man of contradictions

 

[elocomotive]

shite ... after reading that, Im worried theyll be shutting down hockey pretty soon over an HIV scare

Are you talking about his analogy and this?

 

[jstewismybastardson]

Are you talking about his analogy and this?

yep

 

[mattola]

Wade Belaks mom talks to CBC

http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/Sports/Top_Stories/1237510081/ID=2115306887

 

[mattola]

Wade Belaks mom talks to CBC

CBC.ca Player

holy fuck this is heartbreaking. he had Depression confirmed by his mother.

 

[jstewismybastardson]

TSN/Globes Dave Naylor throws the CHL under the bus

"There isnt a country in the world where people pay to go watch a sport where 16,17 & 18 year olds bare knuckle fight"