- cross-posted to:
- outoftheloop@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- outoftheloop@lemmy.world
I’m not a hockey fan, so don’t know anything about the players or even team names. But i just saw i trending. Maybe these 2 teams are rivals, but im wondering why the refs are allowing them to fight. Unlike the NBA, refs always get into the middle to stop any punches but NHL is different. Its not cool for kids to watch, but I’m entertained LOL
You must log in or # to comment.
I am a huge hockey fan. Let’s go, Predators!
Yes, the fights are fun for fans, but they happen for a reason. Hockey is fast-paced and dangerous. Highly skilled players are targeted, and it’s not difficult to cheap shot a hit and put a valuable player on the injured reserve list. Enforcers are players whose main job is to bring a physical presence and protect their teammates. Fights most often happen as a response to a questionable hit. If you are the type of person who wants to rough up another player, you may think twice about it if that team has a big dude who will punch your face in for being dirty.
It’s also a morale thing. Sometimes when a team is getting pounded and underperforming, a fight will ignite and inspire the rest of the team to continue that energy. Sometimes teams simply hate each other due to rivalry or history, and their players are more likely to take offense to something.
Love it or hate it, it is a cultural norm in the game. The NHL made moves years ago to try to phase it out, but it seems lately to have come back with a vengeance. I’d personally rather see fighting than cheap-shotting, as injuries very rarely result from a fight.
Plus, if you really hate a player, it’s so satisfying seeing them get punched in the face.
Hockey: fighting is allowed
/thread
Well, you said it yourself, the NHL is not the NBA lol.
Context for why they fought in this game:
The red white and blue team is the New York Rangers. The red white and black team is the New Jersey Devils. They are indeed long time divisional rivals. The hatred is real. Also for context, the last time these two teams played, a Rangers player injured a Devils player with a nasty hit; he was challenged to a fight then but refused. So the tension had already built up.
Context for why they were allowed to fight:
Fighting has always been allowed in hockey. Big line brawls like this used to be more common even into the 2000s. They have become rare starting in the 2010s when the NHL meta shifted from “have dedicated face punchers fill out the bottom of the roster because they are scary to play against” to the new meta of “have skilled players even at the bottom of the roster because winning games is more important.”
If you’re wondering why the officials don’t break them up immediately, it’s a matter of practicality. There are only 4 on ice officials and there 10 angry dudes punching each other. Best to let them tire themselves out before intervening. Usually they will reach a point where they stop on their own. Also, the referees never break up scrums or fights even if there are only 2-3 guys fighting - this is so they can accurately pay attention to all of the infractions and make the proper penalty calls after it is all settled.
All of this is true, but it’s also allowed because the fans like the fights, which keeps them buying tickets.
That’s the core reason. The rest of the “practical” reasons you listed could be resolved if the owners really wanted the fights to stop. They dont.
On your point about practicality. I think a big point about not breaking up fights is that they are on ice, which is slippery, and they won’t have a good grip on the ground, and on skates so not the most solid footing. I’m not saying it’s impossible, I’m just saying it’s not a worthwhile risk when both hockey players have full gear vs. a ref with minimal gear.
Plus, the context of it being accepted as part of tradition weighs on why it’s not as heavily regulated. If they wanted to, officials can force teams to be disqualified or ban players. Another point is It is more profitable to allow fights. Unless players themselves argue to ban fights for their safety, this will likely stay legal. The fact is, the new meta of having a good team but able to rough up the opposing team is better than it was before. Also quite a bit more enjoyable too.
I’m not saying it’s impossible, I’m just saying it’s not a worthwhile risk when both hockey players have full gear vs. a ref with minimal gear.
This sounds reasonable, but no. Fights are successfully broken up all the time by the officials. It has gotten really irritating in the last 10 years how quickly they will jump in and separate players. Sometimes they will even jump in too soon, which results in a guy being held by an official but still getting punched by his opponent.
If you are confused by one of my other comments where I say “referees will never break up fights” it’s because the refs don’t break up fights, but the linesmen do. Refs: guys in striped shirts with an orange armband, linesmen: guys in striped shirts without.
Also everyone saying that the league wants more fighting clearly doesn’t follow the NHL. The NHL has been steadily introducing rules over the last decade specifically to decrease the amount of fighting because they are wary of a similar CTE (chronic traumatic encephaly, aka brain damage) controversy that has taken root in the NFL and the WWE and they are afraid of getting their asses sued into the ground.
I am highlighting a limitation. Also, I never saw them break up fights by being able to “carry” or restrain players away from each other like other sports. It’s much harder to do on the ice. A lot of times, the linesmen are mostly separating the players by strategically intercepting between the players’ line of sight by pushing in between the players. On top of that, the players have enough sense that they should not hurt an official, especially when it’s not advantageous back when it was the meta to have brawlers. However, there were moments when the players ignored the linesmen interception and kept going. Small example: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yDkNvuuENwo
Also, I’m not saying the league wants more fights. They want to control those fights because they are profitable for entertainment, IE the fans and surrounding community are entertained by the drama. Having a fight break out for no reason other than to cause harm was not fun or much for entertainment. However, talking smack or telling someone off for bad plays/manners is fun to see.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://m.piped.video/watch?v=yDkNvuuENwo
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Not a hockey fan either, but I’ve often asked this question of my friends that are. They all same the same thing: The fans enjoy and expect it. To me, it’s dumb. One team ends up a player (or two) down, and that’s when a lot fo the scoring happens. Ergo, you fight and you are more likely to lose. Pretty much any other sport in the world and you’re off the field of play, and often for a long period of time.
FWIW, this is also why I’m not a hockey fan…
One team ends up a player (or two) down, and that’s when a lot fo the scoring happens. Ergo, you fight and you are more likely to lose.
FWIW, this is also why I’m not a hockey fan…
I think you have a misconception about the rules. Hopefully if I clear this up, you may give hockey another shot.
One team ends up a player (or two) down, and that’s when a lot fo the scoring happens
True. In hockey this is called a power play. It’s a well known fact about hockey that most of the scoring in a game happens during the power play. Power plays are a common occurrence in every game as a result of standard penalties (ie not fighting) such as high sticking (hitting a player above the shoulders with your stick), hooking (using your stick to ‘hook’ a player to try and slow them down), slashing (using your stick to whack someone, usually across the hands), etc.
Ergo, you fight and you are more likely to lose.
False. When players fight, they are given equal concurrent penalties. Both of their teams remain at even strength and there is no power play.
True, but then you get that fantastic four on four play which is wildly more hectic and entertaining.
It doesn’t need a point, just like why is there a 3 point zone in basketball, or why does a football look like an egg and is played with the hands 99% of the time. I grew up playing hockey and the fighting is just tradition. You don’t watch it or play it so of course you don’t understand. I don’t play cricket and can’t understand why anyone would want to watch it but it’s the most popular sport in India.
Different strokes for different folks.
I mean if brawling in an NBA game is normal then I would not find it weird in NHL. Different sports have different rules. I get that but fighting in-game? This doesn’t happen in other sports (at least in NBA, football). If players started punching, refs (and/or the court security guard if necessary) will stop the fight right away.
Boxing, MMA, sumo wrestling, lots of sports have physical contact. From the beginning it was in hockey. Not the same for basketball. If hockey was invented today I can guarantee it wouldn’t have it now but it wasn’t. It was part of the rules from the beginning and the people who play and watch it don’t want it gone. To be honest I can’t stand to sit and watch an entire basketball game, too slow and boring for me.
Hell, the NBA used to have physical contact before it got boring.
It definitely doesn’t look like the same game I grew up watching. That’s for sure.
One thing that I didn’t see mentioned is that, unlike in other sports, the players are on ice. This makes it much more difficult to throw punches, and players can usually go back and forth without getting seriously injured.
Because in Hockey players have three deadly weapons on them and the thought process is that if you let them have fist fights you reduce players taking out their frustrations using their sticks or skates.
Makes sense
