The rules and regulations regarding fighting in college hockey seems to crop
up every year, and somehow I seem to change my opinion every year as well.
Nonetheless, here's a few "neutral" comments and concerns regarding college
fisticuffs:
 
-- If fighting is allowed rather than penalized, college hockey will most
definitely slip into a great dark age (see also: NHL, 1950's). Just imagine
the fun to be had when smaller, quicker players such as Paul Kariya miss half
the season with a broken jaw. Imagine a player winning the Hobey because of
his plus-minus ratio, earned simply by mauling every player better than him,
with or without the puck.
 
-- Hockey players are one of two college sports (lacrosse being the other)
where players are carrying (what can be used as) weapons at all times. Add to
this that they are armored, often feeling indestructable. Reminds me of
Braveheart. Of course, them highlanders were fighting for personal freedom
from royal oppression. Imagine Mel Gibson rallying the troops because he was
hooked on his last breakaway.
 
-- Players in any sport, including hockey, do not need to learn how to
"defend themselves." If a player gets tied up in the corner and another
decides he wants to take him on, there are two options: Skate away from the
neanderthal or drop to the ice. Fighting is NOT an option in ANY sport
(except for boxing, natch). In the NHL and associated minor leagues where
fighting is allowed, it is always stopped when the players drop to the ice.
If a player can't skate away from a grappling opponent, then fall to the ice.
Fighting will be stopped, the penalty will be issued to the jerk, and the
"victim" rests on the bench or scores a goal on the ensuing power play.
 
-- Why does fighting exist? The same reason schoolyard bullies and muggers
do: because they can get away with it. Take that away and they're nothing.
 
-- Hockey is the only professional sport where fighting is a regular
occurrence. Take note that even in Football (including last night's
Raiders-Broncos game), fighting is a VERY rare occurrence, and that the top
pros are VERY, VERY RARELY involved. It naturally stands however, that if
college hockey serves to further develop a player's skills, that they should
allow fighting.
 
-- College hockey (and its scholarships!) exists for ONE reason: to provide
talented athletes with a chance at an EDUCATION. If players feel the need to
do nothing else but play hockey, let 'em beat the snot out of each other in
the juniors and farm leagues. No college sport should be seen as a farm
league for the pros. Period.
 
-- I can't count how many times I've seen college players fight and then get
sent to the box for "roughing."
 
-- If a player does decide to fight, I'm all for it. Like any rabid fan, I
often enjoy a great hockey fight. However, the persons involved should be
prepared to accept the consequences, whatever they are. And regarding the
three-fight, season-suspension concept, just what kind of players get
involved in three fights a season?
 
-- During my first year watching college hockey (as a freshman at BU), I
thought it was really interesting to see police officers (not security
guards) standing right behind the BU bench. I thought it more interesting to
see a few players get arrested on assault charges. While these were for
particularly vicious attacks, these are brought on by the "acceptance" of
fighting. If fighting were a "big deal," fewer players would fight. As such,
attempting to remove a player's head with a hockey stick, keeping him from
playing 5-10 (or more) games is a "big deal."
 
-- One of the chief tenets of the NCAA is promoting "good sportsmanship."
Last I checked, this didn't include sending someone to the locker room for
stitches.
 
-- Fighting is not limited in any level of hockey to only the "goons." Last
season, I watched with disgust as Cam Neely tried to play dentist with Claude
Lemiuex. I, like many of you Hockey-L'ers, enjoy watching hockey not just for
the action around the puck, but to follow specific players and see how they
move without the puck. Lemiuex was doing his job, and was well within the
rules of conduct. Neely however (no flames about this incident please)
attacked Lemieux out of pure frustration.
 
There are players (albeit few) in other sports like the NBA who have the
ability to shut down superstars like Michael Jordan. I don't recall seeing
Jordan becoming violent just because Joe Dumars shut him down for a game.
 
On the other hand, last week we witnessed Brett Hull get involved in a
fracas. Unlike Neely, he was provoked all game long and was pulled into the
fight. So, Hull fought (pretty darn well, IMHO). Did he complain about his
5-minute major? No. Did his coach? No. Did his team? No.
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.