Re: Hockey
[ QUOTE ]
The third reason is to "show 'em you won't be embarrassed". This is stupid. Reference Atlanta losing to Leafs, and Tampa Bay. They got slaughtered, and then started running guys & starting fights. There's no place for this in hockey, because it serves no purpose.
I think, as far as the Rules of engagement go, they're pretty clear with the players.
[/ QUOTE ]
This third point speaks to what I meant, I guess. I was thinking of things like the Atlanta incident, and naturally of the Vancouver incident, where it was intimated that Crawford was egging his guys onto Moore even after Moore had dropped gloves with a member of the Canucks. I know Hartley was also roundly criticized for what happened in Atlanta. I feel the same way that you do, pretty much to a T, agree with your post completely. I think the enforcer is necessary in a sport where people carry big sticks and skate at high speed, and that the "get the crowd going" show is pretty harmless and a lot of fun for fans. But when coaches start sending guys out with what seems like clear intent to injure, that's a problem.
Maybe I'm just trying to keep this thread on the front page... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|