Godsmack Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 If anyone is interested in learning about the rules and unwritten rules behind fighting in hockey, I strongly recommend they read, 'The Code-The Unwritten Rules of Fighting and Retaliation in the NHL' by Ross Bernstein. I wrote a letter to the Herald mailbag about five years ago, arguing why the NCAA's strict rules against fighting actually make the game more dangerous. Fighting actually cleans up the game when you factor in guys who use their sticks as weapons knowing they are less likely to face going face to face with fists. I'd take a fist to the face any day over the working end of a stick. I enjoyed this book and it gave me a much better perspective on the rules of engagement and why fighting is necessary in an inherently violent game such as hockey. I saw absolutely nothing wrong with the Commodre/Greene fight. Greene was standing up for his team mate as well as sending a message to the other team that hey, "I'm the eyes and ears on this team, I will be watching so if you feel it necessary to take a run at one of my guys-fine. But know that there will be consequences, so think long and hard before you do." Commodre also should be commended for following the code-once Greene was down, Commodre let off and stopped punching once Greene was in a vulnerable position on his back. Okay, I'll get off my soap box now. I gotta get packed to fly out to Wisconsin for the big hockey series between the Sioux and Badgers! GO SIOUX!!! My sincere apologies for mis-spelling Mike Commodore's name! I hope he doesn't come after me!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn-O Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 This isn't Commodore's first rodeo..he's been there before. Nice scrap, slight advantage to Commie for the knockdown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torpedo Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 I don't get this silly assumption that they had to fight. The way I see it they had two choices... they could choose to fight or they could choose not to fight. They chose to fight. Nobody put a gun to their heads and said "you have to fight". It's the same as you having two choices...you can respond to these posts attacking your anti-fighting stance, or you can not post...nobody is putting a gun to your head saying "you have to post" in order to defend your stance...but you do.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxfan1 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 Twas a great fight I believe its the first time I've ever seen Alum fight each other. I guess its true a first time for everything. Go Sioux!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big A HG Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 I've read that book and understand the concept of this so-called code. I don't agree with it, but I understand it. It's so full of inconsistencies and contradictions that only a person who craves gratuitous violence would allow themselves to become brainwashed into considering it as gospel in an attempt to justify the thuggery. If I was a hockey player and somebody accidentally jabbed me with a stick in the heat of battle I would be quick to forgive and forget. $hit happens, nothing personal. However, if some goon punched me in the face I would feel violated. To punch a person in the face is to rob them of their dignity and self-worth as a human being. It's one of the most degrading things that one human being can do to another. Let me guess...you voted for Obama too. That seems to be working out nicely....oh wait.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petey23 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 Like that has anything to do with this topic. There are certain things in life you just don't do unless you want to make enemies... you don't sleep with another man's wife and you don't punch him in the face. It's just that simple. When I was young I was given a very valuable bit of advice. Never, ever punch another man in anger....unless you are absolutely sure you can get away with it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Time Hockey Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 I don't get this silly assumption that they had to fight. The way I see it they had two choices... they could choose to fight or they could choose not to fight. They chose to fight. Nobody put a gun to their heads and said "you have to fight". You must be a Gopher Fan! They share the same viewpoint on the topic. Take little cheap shots, but choose not to fight and run away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GF_siouxfan Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 I've had some verbal disagreements with my brother over the years but it never came to physical blows, and if it did I would hold a grudge for life. There are certain lines you just don't cross. blue lines without the puck the United States Mixico border with a bag of fun police line fire line downed electricle line picket line but for the love of all that is holy! ' THERE IS NO LINE WHEN IT COMES TO DROPPING THE MITS, ASK THE WADENA SQUIRT TEAM THEY DROPEM WHEN EVER THEY GET A CHANCE. fOLLOWED BY A PARK RAPIDS MILLATIME BOWTIE. THAT WOULD BE A STICK TO THE NECK. NOW THAT IS A LINE YOU DON,T CROSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tnt Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 I won't make recommendations for anybody else. I'm just saying if anybody ever physically assaulted me that person would have an enemy for life. If one of my boys ever beat up one of his brothers I'd probably ground him for at least a year, but I think they've been brought up to know better than to commit such a heinous act. Don't act like some great parent, because I have never seen someone as antagonistic as you on numerous subjects. You seem to be playing the role as the instigator in hockey. If you bring your kids up like you act, guess what, they will run into someone who will fight them, whether they want to or not. I am not saying that is a way to handle things, but there are people out there that don't put up with people who run off at the mouth. Like it or not, it is reality, where the on-ice stuff isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 I've read that book and understand the concept of this so-called code. I don't agree with it, but I understand it. It's so full of inconsistencies and contradictions that only a person who craves gratuitous violence would allow themselves to become brainwashed into considering it as gospel in an attempt to justify the thuggery. If I was a hockey player and somebody accidentally jabbed me with a stick in the heat of battle I would be quick to forgive and forget. $hit happens, nothing personal. However, if some goon punched me in the face I would feel violated. To punch a person in the face is to rob them of their dignity and self-worth as a human being. It's one of the most degrading things that one human being can do to another. You're not making a consistent argument yourself. Your fist sentence implies an accident. Most people understand that accidents happen. Fights don't just happen by "accident." These guys can tell when stick work is intentional or not, and thus deal with it accordingly. For the most part when players engage in fights they are sticking up for their teammates' self-worth after they've been victimized by a cheap shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LB#11 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 It took Bush 8 years to screw us up to the point we're at now. Obama can't fix it overnight, but he's on the right track. I have no idea what point you're trying to make, but you're failing miserably. We're coming off the worst presidency in the history of our country (or at least in our lifetime), therefore we really have nowhere to go but up. It's going to take some time, but we'll get there. I could never quite figure DaveK out...now everthing seems a little more clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux_Hab-it Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 People who "don't put up with people who run off at the mouth" are thugs. In this country we have a little something called freedom of speech. We have the right to say whatever we want to whoever we want. We also are protected by law against being physically assaulted. Beat somebody up, go to jail. It's just that simple. You don't go to jail for mouthing off to somebody. You have the right to run your mouth, but you don't have the right to beat somebody up just because you don't like what they said. Anybody who gets that riled up by mere words is thin-skinned and weak-minded, IMHO. You are thin skinned yourself and I think we all clearly know what sets you off. We also have it figured out that you will only respond by frothing at the mouth. If a verbal assault, including serious defamation or slander in person isn't enough to set you off to the point of gettng physical then "Good for you Gandhi". But in reality you can't be Gandhi if you and your family carry grudges for life. More importantly, the fight we are debating in this thread has nothing to do with a mere verbal exchange, it has to do with something you clearly have never understood, honor amongst teamates. Commodore laid out one of the LA Kings more skilled forwards and Greene knew it was his duty to respond. Do you want us to believe that if someone physically assaulted a member of your family right in front of you, your only response would be to say "I now hate you forever". If so you really do belong on GPL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts