Thread: Any Hockey Fans Out There????

Originally Posted by BobH

Each to their own. One thing for sure is that if people keep paying for that, through the nose at current ticket prices, you will continue to get that.

Bob

Hockey is a rough game anyway even without intentional hitting. I think the hitting and rough stick play adds another dimension to the game. If a player thinks he's going to be hit or stick checked it can change the way they handle to puck and cause them to lose advantage. On the other hand, if you foul another player then you go on the penalty kill which is another skillset as is the power play. Generally the PP works against a team so they want to stay out of the box. So they have to balance how much force they use. Then there's the aspect of drawing penalties to gain the advantage. It's another series strategic layering. I don't like the rough play for the sake of it necessarily but more because of how it affects the play of the game.

Originally Posted by PaulFLUS

Hockey is a rough game anyway even without intentional hitting. I think the hitting and rough stick play adds another dimension to the game. If a player thinks he's going to be hit or stick checked it can change the way they handle to puck and cause them to lose advantage. On the other hand, if you foul another player then you go on the penalty kill which is another skillset as is the power play. Generally the PP works against a team so they want to stay out of the box. So they have to balance how much force they use. Then there's the aspect of drawing penalties to gain the advantage. It's another series strategic layering. I don't like the rough play for the sake of it necessarily but more because of how it affects the play of the game.

Why don't we just call the intentional hitting, rough stick play and outright Donny brooks what they are, criminal assault and charge them with it after arresting them. That would add another aspect to the "strategic layering" to consider.

Bob

Well you can't call that criminal assault for the same reason you can't in boxing. There are 2 willing participants who go into it knowing the chances and accepting the outcomes. I don't agree with you Bob but I understand what you mean. I have these same conversations with my brother in law. He feels that it is "permitted by the establishment but should be abolished." They tried to do away with the rough stuff and attendance and viewing went way down.

As I say I don't watch it for the fighting. I know some people do. However, if the players go into it knowing the penalty and excepting the consequences as well as the dangers and as long as the officials enforce the rules and don't let things get out of hand then let them play. If they don't want to accept those risks then they could always play another sport. That's my opinion. I know it's not everyone's. You may disagree. I know a lot of people do.

I don't know much about hockey, never played it even but I can't help thinking that some of the gloves off is staged to make it exciting to watch.

When American Wrestling started to show on British TV years ago, my eldest son who must have been about 6 at the time was absolutely convinced it was real. He definitely thought it was possible that they could do things to each other including hitting each other with a chair and not bleed, or pass out, not even limp

A bit of choreography goes a long way.