Grimson: "The game has passed by" Cherry

[Number 5]

I'm not sure if I see much of a difference between the Phaneuf hit on Da Costa - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sdDZunmjZ8, and the Stevens hit on Lindros - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVeqzYgTELk
I still don't have a problem with the Stevens hit. IMO both are clean open ice hits.

Except that Stevens clearly raises his elbow up to hit Lindros' head, intentionally. The left arm is raised, and extended, to ensure it hits the head, and not just raised to work with the body on the hit. (the 0:12 second mark of the clip you linked to shows it nicely.)

Beyond that, they're nearly identical hits.

 

[Kin]

I'm not sure if I see much of a difference between the Phaneuf hit on Da Costa - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sdDZunmjZ8, and the Stevens hit on Lindros - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVeqzYgTELk
I still don't have a problem with the Stevens hit. IMO both are clean open ice hits.

No, no. You have to answer three riddles to cross my bridge.

 

[Madferret]

I'm not sure if I see much of a difference between the Phaneuf hit on Da Costa - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sdDZunmjZ8, and the Stevens hit on Lindros - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVeqzYgTELk
I still don't have a problem with the Stevens hit. IMO both are clean open ice hits.

Except that Stevens clearly raises his elbow up to hit Lindros' head, intentionally. The left arm is raised, and extended, to ensure it hits the head, and not just raised to work with the body on the hit.

Beyond that, they're nearly identical hits.

Lindros loses the handle on the puck and slightly leans down while reaching for it...I don't think Stevens had his head as his target when he lined him up.

Back, and to the left. Back, and to the left.

 

[Bullfrog]

I'm not sure if I see much of a difference between the Phaneuf hit on Da Costa - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sdDZunmjZ8, and the Stevens hit on Lindros - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVeqzYgTELk
I still don't have a problem with the Stevens hit. IMO both are clean open ice hits.

One was to the chest, the other to the head. 1st is clean, 2nd is not.

 

[Madferret]

I'm not sure if I see much of a difference between the Phaneuf hit on Da Costa - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sdDZunmjZ8, and the Stevens hit on Lindros - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVeqzYgTELk
I still don't have a problem with the Stevens hit. IMO both are clean open ice hits.

One was to the chest, the other to the head. 1st is clean, 2nd is not.

It was deemed a legal hit at the time though wasn't it?

 

[bustaheims]

Lindros loses the handle on the puck and slightly leans down while reaching for it...I don't think Stevens had his head as his target when he lined him up.

Back, and to the left. Back, and to the left.

Either way, Stevens clearly leads with his forearm/elbow, which he has raised to roughly the height of where Lindros's head was when Stevens actively delivered the hit, whereas Phaneuf leads with his shoulder.

 

[Corn Flake]

I don't have a problem with consenting adults fighting.

I don't either. Maybe that is why I love watching MMA so much. But in MMA you have weight classes, you have rules to protect fighters, and you have a ref that will stop a fight when it is called for.

Hockey is quite different.

There is this whole weird "Honour system" perpetuated by monkeys like Don Cherry whereby a guy who is not a fighter or not in the same weight class as another guy has to participate or he will look like a gutless puke (Cherry words). You also have guys like Luke Schenn who can fight if/when he knows its time for a fight that get ko'd by a guy like Neil before he even knows what is going on.

I like fighting too. And when too guys of similar size and strength want to square off and they bot know from the start what is at stake then I am okay with that. Unfortunately hockey has too many examples where it is not like that and I freaking hate it. I hated seeing Schenn get beat up before he knew what he was into, I hated in the pre-season when Sestito beat up on Lupul even after he was down and beaten and he is clearly much bigger than Lupul.

I am glad that there is this kind of talk and that a day might come when most of it is gone.

Don't really agree.  Generally that really isn't true with fighting in hockey.  NHL is not really plagued with big guys beating up little guys all the time.  You see it very rarely in a scrum or a brawl that breaks out but mostly its goons vs. goons, middleweights vs. middleweights, etc. 

is it a "code"?  well I guess so but again I don't think we typically see non-fighters getting dragged out to scrap. That happened once upon a time, but far more in the 70's and 80's than it has in the 90's or 00's.  I would suggest that pre-instigator rule it was more common. (something Cherry hates of course)

Schenn vs. Neil... Schenn has engaged Neil more than once since his first year.  It was his choice in all times except maybe the last one. Luke isn't a very good fighter but will put himself in that position. He's actually lucky he hasn't had more than a broken nose.

Sestito on Lupul - again a somewhat isolated thing.

I think the biggest problem is the size and strength of guys fighting on blades, standing on a sheet of ice is the biggest danger.  In the case of Orr, he was clocked twice last year but I believe his head hitting the ice was the cause of the real damage.  That, and recognizing what getting pounded to the head does to you are the two issues.

But yes... those who support MMA and love it I really don't get how you can be against hockey fights but in favor of that... in a general sense.

 

[Number 5]

Lindros loses the handle on the puck and slightly leans down while reaching for it...I don't think Stevens had his head as his target when he lined him up.

Back, and to the left. Back, and to the left.

Either way, Stevens clearly leads with his forearm/elbow, which he has raised to roughly the height of where Lindros's head was when Stevens actively delivered the hit, whereas Phaneuf leads with his shoulder.

I will grant  you that any decision regarding the legality of the hit has to take Lindros' movement immediately prior to the hit into account, but Stevens clearly isn't aiming to put his shoulder into Eric's chest.

 

[caver]

Lindros loses the handle on the puck and slightly leans down while reaching for it...I don't think Stevens had his head as his target when he lined him up.

Back, and to the left. Back, and to the left.

 

Either way, Stevens clearly leads with his forearm/elbow, which he has raised to roughly the height of where Lindros's head was when Stevens actively delivered the hit, whereas Phaneuf leads with his shoulder.

and Lindros was just back from a concussion. While there is no way that Lindros should have been on the ice in that condition; that Stevens hit was one of the most heartless things I've seen in the NHL.

 

[Bullfrog]

I'm not sure if I see much of a difference between the Phaneuf hit on Da Costa - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sdDZunmjZ8, and the Stevens hit on Lindros - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVeqzYgTELk
I still don't have a problem with the Stevens hit. IMO both are clean open ice hits.

One was to the chest, the other to the head. 1st is clean, 2nd is not.

It was deemed a legal hit at the time though wasn't it?

I assume so. Though that has no bearing on my opinion of the hit. I also am not concerned if it was his forearm, elbow, or shoulder; it's the target and maliciousness that's my concern.

 

[bustaheims]

It was deemed a legal hit at the time though wasn't it?

I assume so. Though that has no bearing on my opinion of the hit. I also am not concerned if it was his forearm, elbow, or shoulder; it's the target and maliciousness that's my concern.

It would almost certainly lead to a lengthy suspension if it were to happen this season.

 

[Britishbulldog]

I think the biggest problem is the size and strength of guys fighting on blades, standing on a sheet of ice is the biggest danger.  In the case of Orr, he was clocked twice last year but I believe his head hitting the ice was the cause of the real damage.  That, and recognizing what getting pounded to the head does to you are the two issues.

Parros drove Orr's head into the ice at the end
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01noGhbjhdQ

I don't know if you realize he did it to the kid Brandon Mashinter as well
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHQVYSzG3C8

 

[moon111]

Fighting isn't going anywhere.  It's too popular.  The league knows it's making money from it.  Otherwise they could make the punishment big enough they'd eliminate it.  If these three players don't like fighting, sue Bettman, the league, and the owners... they're the ones condoning it.  Cherry is just a quick rant once/week that is meaningless.

 

[hockeyfan1]

Good article explaining a few things...

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2011/10/14/spector_column_fighting/

The dichotomies are getting harder and harder to figure out. Even for those of us who have never minded our hockey games salted with the odd scrap.

...Asham finally punching Beagle so hard in the cheek that Beagle is left lying near centre ice, semi-conscious and bleeding profusely.

But when Asham emerges from the ring and acts like a professional wrestler, making a couple of gestures to the wildly cheering home crowd, he is unilaterally denounced for his lowbrow behaviour.

... no group of players are afforded more respect from their collective colleagues than those who show the courage to fight the way Beagle and Asham did...

In life, those who settle their differences in the parking lot are considered to be low-lifes. In hockey, they're held in high esteem.

But, as Asham said, "You want to win, but I don't want to go out there and hurt anyone."

Which brings us to hockey's second contradiction: How, in a sport that is infatuated with the elimination of concussion-causing head shots, can it be quasi-legal for two players to punch each other in the head repeatedly?

Former NHL player Sheldon Kennedy, who roomed with the venerable Bob Probert while playing in Detroit, told a Vancouver psychiatric conference Thursday that the presence of fighting keeps concussions numbers down in the NHL. When Probert was on the ice, Kennedy said, the game was played in a cleaner and less dangerous fashion than when he wasn't in the lineup.

Which brings us to our final inconsistency: How do you win a bare-knuckle fight, yet not hurt anyone? How do you throw bombs at a man's temple, and claim afterwards that you never wanted him to be injured?

If there is a difference in fighting today -- a changing landscape that is pulling this old-time hockey guy back towards the lefties who see a game without fighting -- it is that the old axiom, "No one ever gets hurt in a hockey fight," is being disproven at an alarming rate.

Now, here's something to ponder....

...somehow, back when there was twice as much fighting as there is today, there were one-quarter as many serious injuries that came from fights.

Far too often now, scraps are ending the way the Asham-Beagle fight ended on Thursday night, or the way Steve MacIntyre-
Ivanans did a year ago. We used to call them "tussles," but they
are more than that now.

Then again, we used to defend the classic Scott Stevens headshot, because they were fewer and far less devastating. But today's bigger, faster and stronger player has shifted the responsibility from the skater -- "Well, he'd better keep his head up" -- to the player who is initiating the hit.

The more one-punch affairs we see, the more we'll admit: The fighting we've always defended isn't the fighting we're watching anymore.

Like the open-ice hit, it has evolved into something more dangerous.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

somehow, back when there was twice as much fighting as there is today, there were one-quarter as many serious injuries that came from fights.

Is that based on any actual facts?

 

[Kin]

But yes... those who support MMA and love it I really don't get how you can be against hockey fights but in favor of that... in a general sense.

I'm not the world's biggest MMA fan and I'm not in favour of completely removing hockey from the game but I think there's more than enough difference between the two to make the comparison a stretch at best. Sanctioned MMA fights take place between two guys of the same size who are wearing padded gloves on a canvas(I'm assuming, either way it has a ton of spring to it) mat. Hockey fights are bare-knuckled scraps between two guys of any size on skates over solid ice.

The really catastrophic injuries in a hockey fight usually come from the head hitting the ice, something that just doesn't exist in the MMA world.

 

[moon111]

somehow, back when there was twice as much fighting as there is today, there were one-quarter as many serious injuries that came from fights.

Is that based on any actual facts?

The facts would be as solid as how honest the players were that they were hurt in a fight.  A guy might of 'gotten his bell rung' and that's it. 
I don't think hockey fighters have a more dangerous job then construction workers.  Allot of them also have drug and alcohol problems, chronic injuries/disabilities, and even deaths.  However we should all try and make our professions as safe as possible.  If fighters are getting hurt, it's the NHL's job to step in.  I can't see why people are upset Don Cherry is pro-fighting.  When did it become so shocking to see someone promote and believe in something that served their best interests? 

 

[hockeyfan1]

somehow, back when there was twice as much fighting as there is today, there were one-quarter as many serious injuries that came from fights.

Is that based on any actual facts?

This is basically an opinion the author of this article is expressing.  If it is indeed based on actual facts, as you question, it does not appear evident at the moment.