It’s time to debate. Opinionated articles are my favorite type to write, and it’s been too long since I’ve written one. Well now the perfect opportunity has presented itself. After Monday night’s first round NHL game between the Carolina Hurricanes and Washington Capitals, the question of “should fighting still be allowed in the NHL?” became a popular topic of discussion. This was due to the fight between star Alexander Ovechkin of the Capitals and 19-year old Andrei Svechnikov of the Hurricanes. It’s pretty undeniable that Svechnikov was provoking Ovechkin (who hasn’t fought since 2010) early in the game before the two dropped gloves. Ovechkin proceeded to throw a couple of hard right punches, knocking Svechnikov to the ground. He stayed down for a few minutes, was helped off the ice, didn’t return to the game, and will probably miss game four.

So, knowing all the background information now, should the NHL ban fighting or still allow it? My answer to this question is they should 100% allow it. Fighting is part of the sport, plain and simple. When you think hockey, you think of many things that make the sport so exciting…which includes fighting. It’s such an exciting rush as a fan when you are in the seats at a hockey game and two players drop their gloves and go at it. I’ve experienced it. And I wasn’t the only one that loved it because the whole arena was rocking during the exchange and the moments after. It is part of the game. Now, fans don’t attend games, or watch games, just to see a fight. Hockey is exciting without it. But when a fight happens, it’s an added bonus. It makes the game that much better.

We live in a society now where too many people have become so sensitive and soft. Everything in life, from the way kids are raised, to sports, is trending towards becoming softer and softer. Wanting fights banned from hockey is undeniably a product of that. People claim that banning fighting would make it safer and that there would be less head injuries with lasting effects. And they’re right…without fighting, it would be safer. You can’t argue that. But those people are missing the point. Everything in life isn’t meant to be completely safe, especially professional sports. When players decide to play hockey for a living, they know what they are getting into. They know they will be involved in a contact sport where fighting is part of it, where they will take a lot of big hits, where they might take a puck to the face and lose a few teeth. Hockey players are tougher than players from any other sport. If you’re not tough, you don’t sign up to play hockey, plain and simple.

If they are going to use the “safer” argument, then why stop at banning fighting? Why don’t we require players to wear full facemasks? Why don’t we require games to be played with a plastic puck? Why don’t we require players to play wrapped in bubble wrap? Shoot, why do we even play physical games at all when we can just play them on a video game console where everyone would be safe in the comfort of their own home? So yes, it would be “safer” without fighting. But where do you draw the line? At some point people need quit being so soft and accept that hockey is a tough-guy sport. I would also like to add that it’s not even like fighting occurs that much anymore, anyway. They don’t fight nearly as often as they used to, and when they do, the vast majority of the time they both serve their penalty minutes and are right back into the game. They don’t get hurt that much from fighting, and while I hope that Svechnikov is OK (he has stated that he feels great) it’s not like this will impact his career or anything. He got bested in a hockey fight, which happens, and may miss a game or two. He will be back.

Nancy Armour published an opinionated article in USA Today, which takes the other side of this argument. She argues that players are getting hurt for no good reason. She claims it’s brutish and outdated. Armour would easily be classified as one of those “soft” people I was talking about. Let’s start with “brutish.” That would be defined as violent, cruel, and like an animal. I’ve already stated that hockey is a violent, tough-guy sport, and that is common knowledge. Either Armour doesn’t know that about hockey because she doesn’t watch it, or she wants it to become non-brutish, or in other words: peaceful, happy, and everyone singing songs and breaking bread together during intermissions.

Next let’s break down her “outdated” claim. “It’s a relic of a bygone, brutish era when people didn’t know better.” Hmmm, didn’t know any better? It sounds like she thinks people in previous decades were dumb as rocks and fought because their brains weren’t advanced enough to know that fighting could get them hurt. The players knew exactly what they were doing getting in fights. They knew it was part of the game by settling little disputes and showcasing your toughness to the other team. If Armour thinks it’s outdated, I guess she feels that society in general is more sophisticated nowadays, so sports like hockey should become more sophisticated as well.

Her final argument is that fighting “adds no value to the modern game.” I would LOVE to poll hockey fans around the world and see how they feel about that one. When players drop the gloves it instantly adds extreme excitement to the game, whether you are watching it on tv or are attending the game. Excitement=Big-time value. I know for certain when I attended the professional hockey game when the two players dropped the gloves, there was a lot of value added to that game. All I had to do was look around the coliseum and feel the extra energy that was added. For her to make a claim like that makes me think she isn’t at all in tune with the sport of hockey.

In conclusion, fighting in hockey should not be banned. It should be welcomed. To take it away would be to take away a historical and cherished part of the game. Whether you like it or not, fighting is woven into the fabric of the game. Taking away fighting will lead to eventually taking away something else, and if you take away too much fabric there will be nothing left. Nothing left for fans to enjoy from a once-great sport. Too many times people push for change because they themselves want to feel like they’ve made a positive contribution. And that makes it a purely selfish motive that has zero regard for the actual product they want to change. But back to my point: change is not always positive. Change can be negative and I firmly believe that would be the case with this issue. If it’s not broke, don’t fix it. And fighting in hockey is not broke, although it may lead to a few noses that are.

Garett

Should Fighting Still Be Allowed in the NHL?