Fighting keeps hockey safer...seriously

Ian Neitzke
Managing Editor
Several general managers in the National Hockey League have debated at league meetings about removing legal fighting from professional hockey. The anti-fighting movement has gotten stronger following the death of a minor league hockey player in Canada. Don Sanderson, 21, of the Whitby Dunlops fell at the conclusion of a fight, hit his head on the ice and was killed. While this tragedy should cause us to look at fighting in hockey, it shouldn’t be used as a reason to remove fighting entirely. Fighting is a classic part of hockey. Die-hard fans love it; they understand it’s importance. Those who don’t enjoy the strategy of hockey can always enjoy some fist-on-face figure skating.

Fighting is often used to change the tempo of a game, swing momentum or get your team (and the crowd) riled up like Blackhawks penalty-minute leader Adam Burish asserted in his blog: “You may find your team down 2-0 just 10 minutes into the first period,” Burish said. “The crowd isn't into it, you look down your bench and guys are frustrated and a little sluggish. This is a great time to go look for a fight.”

The most common purpose of fighting, however, is to police the ice, to protect skill players. Several players have created careers for themselves by fighting skillfully. Bob Probert fought for the Red Wings, protecting stars like Steve Yzerman. Marty McSorley played in the NHL essentially to protect Wayne Gretzky, and was actually included with Gretzky in a trade from Edmonton to L.A. by request of the Great One himself.

The mission of a fighting ban is to make the game less violent, but removing fighting from the game would likely counteract it. Enforcers like McSorley, Probert and Burish rarely touch the ice in an effort to score goals, but will always be ready to strike when an opponent throws an elbow to the face of their team’s leading scorer. If fighting is removed, sticks, elbows and gloved fists will be more often used to exact revenge for these types of indiscretions. Believe it or not, fighting is the safest way to settle these disputes.

Some say that hockey is barbaric for allowing something that every other sport penalizes, but is it really any more barbaric than a pitcher hurling a 95 MPH fastball at an opponent who gloats after a home run? Possibly, but much like baseball fans, hockey fans understand the unwritten rules that dictate how unsportsmanlike or dangerous conduct is kept in check. Like major league pitchers know to throw at an opponents back (rather than his face), most NHL enforcers know the rules and the etiquette of fighting on skates. (Yes, I said “etiquette of fighting.")

For example, in a fight in December 2005, Anaheim enforcer Todd Fedoruk struck St. Louis forward Aaron Downey square in the face, knocking him backwards toward the ice. But Fedoruk held Downey’s jersey to prevent his unhelmeted head from slamming down like Sanderson’s head did.

In a fight on March 8, Boston’s Shawn Thornton ended a fight he easily could have won when his opponent, New York’s Colton Orr, had his jersey over his head. In the past, a jersey-covered head was an invitation to annihilate an opponent while he couldn’t see. Thornton, however, being a modern, seasoned enforcer, knew it was an unfair advantage, stopped punching and waved referees in to break them up. While these players were trying to hurt each other, they were not trying to kill each other, even if they had the opportunity.

The death of Don Sanderson is undoubtedly a tragic accident. But it was exactly that: an accident. It was not a result of fighting on ice, an activity that has been death-free since the NHL’s formation. It was a freak accident, and shouldn’t lead to reflexive, poor decisions.