Quote:
Originally Posted by Fidatelo
I don't know how to dispute that although I don't recall him ever changing myself. That said, you're telling me a half-season suspension couldn't have accomplished the same thing?
I just don't see why people feel that fighting is somehow this be-all/end-all of deterrents. Shouldn't vigilante justice apply to the rest of life if this is so effective? Why has society said that the deterrent for assaulting someone on the street is jail time, but the deterrent for assaulting someone on the ice rink is a retaliatory assault?
The bottom line is you can change human behavior in many ways. Does beating someone up work sometimes? Sure. But there are other methods, and I don't get why hockey can't grow up and use them. Especially when the argument seems to always be "well it worked great 40 years ago!". Well guess what, it's not 1970 anymore, get out of the past.
|
I am pretty much on the fence in regards to fighting in the NHL. In the past, when I was much younger (back when the NJ Devils were relevant, Zach Parise was just a twinkle in his mama's eye, and college football didn't need a system to determine which teams were good), I believed that fighting was a great part of the game. I am not so sure about that anymore. I totally get your argument about why other sports don't allow it, and the more I thought about this the more I became confused as to why the NHL has fighting and no other leagues allow it (outside of rugby and European soccer).
Claude Lemieux was a complete piece of shit who played to injure other players, and finally was called out on it when McCarty rearranged his face. With that being said, a season-long ban for his actions probably would have resulted in the same thing: no more Lemieux.