At 3:45 PM 10/17/95, Carol S White wrote:
>Well, I don't have my rule book handy...but I believe that fighting is
>defined as: "a punch or any attempt to punch an opponent" (if this is
>wrong, please quote the exact verse for us please).
 
Yes, this is basically what the rule says.  A game disqualification is to
be assessed against any player who "starts fighting or attempts to punch an
opponent." (Rule 6-14)
 
In actuality, fighting is not such an easy penalty to call.  Sure, it would
be easier if it were called strictly by the book.  But we all know that the
way in which penalties are called is dictated more by what the coaches and
leagues want than what is written word for word in the rule book.
 
Thus, what I would consider to be more of a "love tap" and worthy of
nothing more of a minor, would also be considered fighting by many of the
rules purists and worthy of an ejection.  But many of the same purists also
see situations through rose-colored glasses - if an opponent throws a weak
punch at a member of their team, they want a DQ, but if their player does
it and gets tossed, they think it was a bad call. :-)
 
It seems to me that most referees are predisposed towards being lenient on
the DQs - you've really got to earn it.  I'd rather have it be this way
unless fighting becomes a major problem.  You'll notice that year in and
out, the rules that are emphasized most by the coaches and the rules
committee do not involve fighting.
 
On the other hand, interference makes it into the front of the rule book
each season as a point of emphasis.  And so the calling of interference can
potentially affect the physical teams much more than the WCHA's new rules
on fighting.  If interference is ever called as strictly by the book and as
consistently as the coaches claim they want it called - at least until the
season begins - then the physical teams would really be up the creek
without a paddle.
 
So when it comes to fighting, my opinion is: it's no big deal.  It has a
minimal effect upon the game of college hockey, and if a guy decides he
wants to fight, more often than not he gets DQ'd.  It's never going to be
eliminated entirely, and the current rules make it unwise enough of an
option that few players are going to do it anyway.
 
After all, this is not the NHL, and college hockey teams do not have a
roster spot reserved for goons.  And it's not going to change anytime soon.
 
However, we do need to draw a distinction between fighting or goon hockey,
and good old-fashioned physical play ("Toe Blake...Eddie Shore") along with
intimidation.  The latter does indeed have a place in the game by the very
nature of it.  If you don't believe me, watch any game.
 
One of the players recognized as one of the better forwards in the country,
Mike Grier, is also a quite intimidating player because of his size and his
penchant for hard hits.  Opponents can be intimidated when they go into the
corner after the puck and know that Grier is a step behind.  BU followers
know the number of times that this has resulted in opposing defensemen
making a hurried play to get rid of the puck - often a bad pass right to
another Terrier for a goal.
 
At the same time, one of the interesting "games within the game" is to see
whether opponents can get a leg up on Grier and turn his own philosophy
against him.  Grier's manner of play can give BU a lift emotionally and
result in opposing mistakes, but with the way he is relied upon for scoring
too, can the opponents distract him from that and cause him to worry too
much about his next hit rather than putting the puck in the net?  I saw
this happen a number of times last year, and part of his development as a
player involves learning when to hit and when to concentrate on offense -
how to strike that balance.
 
This is also why you see the teams that cannot attract the talent that a BU
or Maine has, like Merrimack or Providence, concentrate on building a
strong defense to counter the skills of the opposing forwards.  Part of
intimidation, especially for BU, involves establishing a presence in front
of the opposing netminder to distract him and create rebound opportunities.
But the flip side is that a Merrimack or Providence will use its defensive
size and strength to try to muscle the opponent away from the goaltender
and cause them to expect to get hammered when they wander too close.  If
you give them the front of the net, they will take it - and you will lose.
This is what made the Merrimack-BU and BU-Providence games down the stretch
last season so interesting, battles of different approaches to the game.
 
Personally, I don't like to see games where both teams skate up and down
the ice, score 20 goals and never touch each other (remember the NHL
All-Star Game a few years back) as much as I like to see games that involve
hard (but clean) hitting *and* dynamic skating and pretty playmaking.  The
loudest the crowd ever gets at BU, other than a BU goal, is when Grier
dishes out a clean heavy hit.
 
It is all part of physical play.  It doesn't involve fighting.  And it is
part of the game.
 
---                                                                   ---
Mike Machnik                   [log in to unmask]            *HMM* 11/13/93
>> Co-owner of the College Hockey Lists at University of Maine System  <<
*****       Unofficial Merrimack Hockey home page located at:       *****
*****   http://www.tiac.net/users/machnik/MChockey/MChockey.html    *****
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.