Not to go too far off-topic here, but it would be trivial for the league to prevent fighting; just impose real penalties, like ejection from the game and/or suspension from future games. That’s how most other professional sports work, and, not surprisingly, there aren’t typically fights during the game in those sports (even in physically aggressive ones like football and basketball.) I don’t see why one would expect the implementation of such a rule in hockey to result in anything different.
Whether or not you think that ice hockey without fighting would have a “dramatically slash[ed]” entertainment value, is, I suppose, a matter of opinion.
Whether or not you think that ice hockey without fighting would have a “dramatically slash[ed]” entertainment value, is, I suppose, a matter of opinion.
I didn’t say that fighting is entertaining, but that fighting maintains safety, and many unrelated safety measures would reduce entertainment.
it would be trivial for the league to prevent fighting
Less fighting is probably a means, yes? The end is well-being and safety?
That’s how most other professional sports work
It’s how most hockey leagues and tournaments work, allowing for even better comparisons.
There was no norm to stop the conflict with a one-on-one fight ended by referees after the parties were tired, nor a secondary one for the conflict to be between all members on the court paired off 5v5, so it went straight to a bench clearing brawl.
Assuming nuclear arsenals were universal and impossible to disarm, I would be wary of extremist conventional arms control.
Not to go too far off-topic here, but it would be trivial for the league to prevent fighting; just impose real penalties, like ejection from the game and/or suspension from future games. That’s how most other professional sports work, and, not surprisingly, there aren’t typically fights during the game in those sports (even in physically aggressive ones like football and basketball.) I don’t see why one would expect the implementation of such a rule in hockey to result in anything different.
Whether or not you think that ice hockey without fighting would have a “dramatically slash[ed]” entertainment value, is, I suppose, a matter of opinion.
I didn’t say that fighting is entertaining, but that fighting maintains safety, and many unrelated safety measures would reduce entertainment.
Less fighting is probably a means, yes? The end is well-being and safety?
It’s how most hockey leagues and tournaments work, allowing for even better comparisons.
Got it, I think I misunderstood your position about fighting and safety. I get your point now. Thanks!
In the news...it’s not often that a link to icanhascheezburger.com is appropriate and on topic at LW. So let’s savor the moment!
There was no norm to stop the conflict with a one-on-one fight ended by referees after the parties were tired, nor a secondary one for the conflict to be between all members on the court paired off 5v5, so it went straight to a bench clearing brawl.
Assuming nuclear arsenals were universal and impossible to disarm, I would be wary of extremist conventional arms control.