Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Subject: This is why Hockey is the real manliest sport.
  • Subject: This is why Hockey is the real manliest sport.
Subject: This is why Hockey is the real manliest sport.

Please stop complaining about the 'death of a loved one' it's my job. They probably deserved it anyways. Here's a warning, if you keep making pentagrams out of the neighbors livestock I will personally come to your house and kill everyone you love. Now leave me alone, I got to get back to work.
~M.D~

rugby is better

  • 01.05.2013 9:41 PM PDT

So by law this is legal, but fighting out of a sport is illegal? I don't get it. A fights a fight.

[Edited on 01.05.2013 9:41 PM PST]

  • 01.05.2013 9:41 PM PDT

Cammalamm is the best.

External Links-
>My Photobucket page
>My Twitter account


Posted by: Miz KillZone
So by law this is legal, but fighting out of a sport is illegal? I don't get it. A fights a fight.
Its all about views and making money.

  • 01.05.2013 9:42 PM PDT

-blam!- Was that actually blammed out? Or did I just type it? You'll never know.

Posted by: Marinade
Why isn't it supposed to be a part of the game? Who made that decision? It's been a part of the game since pretty close to it's inception.


1. Because there are specific rules against it. Unless you'd like to argue that rules about conduct in a sport aren't supposed to dictate the conduct in a sport.

2. The IIHF, NHL, NCAA, etc.

3. And then they found it was not conducive to playing a functional game of hockey. Once they began making leagues and organizations these groups made decisions on what was and was not best for the game. And arguing that it's been a part of the game since the beginning is an appeal to tradition.

I'm not trying to solve any problems. I'm just pointing out how it is.Hume's Guillotine.

  • 01.05.2013 9:50 PM PDT

If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friends.

The Flood Theory of Deterioration: q(p)=(qi)e^(-p/r)

Where q(p) is the quality of the thread as a function of p posts, (qi) is the inital quality of the first post, p is the amount of posts and r is the e-peen of the original poster.

Posted by: Miz KillZone
So by law this is legal, but fighting out of a sport is illegal? I don't get it. A fights a fight.

It's because when you play a sport like Hockey you accept that being in a fight is part of the game and a risk you will have to face. Just like how getting hit is also a risk you accept. So there are no legal repercussions provided it doesn't go beyond what should reasonably be expected during a game.

That's why there are very few instances where players have successfully sued other players over something that happened on the ice. Don't want to take the risk, don't play the game.

  • 01.05.2013 9:50 PM PDT

I am the God Emprah of Mankind.

Deal with it.

Hockey is just boxing on ice.

  • 01.05.2013 9:58 PM PDT

If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friends.

The Flood Theory of Deterioration: q(p)=(qi)e^(-p/r)

Where q(p) is the quality of the thread as a function of p posts, (qi) is the inital quality of the first post, p is the amount of posts and r is the e-peen of the original poster.

Posted by: dahuterschuter
Posted by: Marinade
Why isn't it supposed to be a part of the game? Who made that decision? It's been a part of the game since pretty close to it's inception.


1. Because there are specific rules against it. Unless you'd like to argue that rules about conduct in a sport aren't supposed to dictate the conduct in a sport.

2. The IIHF, NHL, NCAA, etc.

3. And then they found it was not conducive to playing a functional game of hockey. Once they began making leagues and organizations these groups made decisions on what was and was not best for the game. And arguing that it's been a part of the game since the beginning is an appeal to tradition.

Yes there are rules against it, there are also rules against many other things that happen in a typical game. Hooking, Slashing, Tripping, Charging, Boarding, Blindside hits, etc. If a player chooses to do one of these things they are given the appropriate penalty. For fighting it is a 5 minute major. So if someone chooses to get into a fight during a game of Hockey, they are assessed a 5 minute penalty.

I don't see how that makes it "not a part of the game." It's clearly addressed in the rule book as something that happens and what it's punishment is. Hockey is a passionate game, with passion comes strong emotions, which can lead to fights. The NHL has accepted this and so they let them get it out in the fight, then they have to sit for 5 minutes. Other leagues don't allow fighting and it is given a much stricter penalty because they want to discourage it as much as possible. Once again, I'm just stating how it is. To claim fighting is not a part of hockey is just as ignorant as claiming it's an integral part of the game.

Posted by: dahuterschuter
Posted by: Marinade
I'm not trying to solve any problems. I'm just pointing out how it is.
Hume's Guillotine.

Good job bring up the ol' is-ought problem and not actually addressing the point. You think fighting ought not be part of the game. I was simply pointing out why it is. I'm not arguing that it's important to the game, but the majority of fans support it. The 5 minute penalty is sufficient as far as I'm concerned. It's something that is going to happen. Either accept that or try and change it. Just don't make asinine claims like, "it is not a part of the game." When it, quite clearly, is.

[Edited on 01.05.2013 10:04 PM PST]

  • 01.05.2013 10:01 PM PDT

-blam!- Was that actually blammed out? Or did I just type it? You'll never know.

Posted by: Marinade
Yes there are rules against it, there are also rules against many other things that happen in a typical game. Hooking, Slashing, Tripping, Charging, Boarding, Blindside hits, etc. If a player chooses to do one of these things they are given the appropriate penalty. For fighting it is a 5 minute major. So if someone chooses to get into a fight during a game of Hockey, they are assessed a 5 minute penalty. I don't see how that makes it "not a part of the game" it's clearly addressed in the rule book as something that happens and what it's punishment is.
Punishments are given to discourage the thing they're given out for.

Hockey is a passionate game, with passion comes strong emotions, which can lead to fights. The NHL has accepted this and so they let them get it out in the fight, then they have to sit for 5 minutes. Other leagues don't allow fighting and it is given a much stricter penalty because they want to discourage it as much as possible. Once again, I'm just stating how it is. To claim fighting is not a part of hockey is just as ignorant as claiming it's an integral part of the game.No-one's claiming that fighting is not something that goes on during hockey games. It's just not a part of the game of hockey.

Good job bring up the ol' is-ought problem and not actually addressing the point.There's nothing to address. You said that that is how it is. That is correct that there is fighting on the ice. The only thing that needed to be said was the difficulty of attaching an ought to that is. I don't mind if you go around stating how it is all day long, that's what I'm doing too. By outlining how it is we can better understand how it ought. It's valuable service.

Either accept that or try and change it. Just doing make asinine claims like it is not a part of the game, when it quite clearly is.It's not a part of the game.

If someone plays a game of hockey without breaking any of the rules of the game, there will be no fighting. The rules of the game define what the game is, and what is and is not a part of it.

[Edited on 01.05.2013 10:08 PM PST]

  • 01.05.2013 10:08 PM PDT


Posted by: Marinade


Yes, but most "street fights" or better example school fights are the same in that sense. They know what they're getting themselves into and they've obviously agreed to fight.

I do realize getting jumped/attacked is different however.

I don't know I was always under the impression that fights are illegal no matter the circumstances, unless it's MMA or something revolved around fighting. I thought the fights in the NHL were real fights and not so much a part of the sport itself, am I wrong?

  • 01.05.2013 10:14 PM PDT

rugby.

  • 01.05.2013 10:14 PM PDT

Dear tomorrow, Find some sensibility, Respond to emotion.
Dear Politician, Define sagacity,
All chances of survival are beginning to diminish.
Comedy is no excuse for our own blasphemies.
Mass media, Mass pessimism, Mass Denial.
My television tells me to panic, but I don't think I'll listen.
The apathetic force us to persevere, with their backwards priorities.

I went to a Hockey game and found the players' malice to be repulsive.

  • 01.05.2013 10:15 PM PDT

If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friends.

The Flood Theory of Deterioration: q(p)=(qi)e^(-p/r)

Where q(p) is the quality of the thread as a function of p posts, (qi) is the inital quality of the first post, p is the amount of posts and r is the e-peen of the original poster.

Posted by: dahuterschuter
Posted by: Marinade
Yes there are rules against it, there are also rules against many other things that happen in a typical game. Hooking, Slashing, Tripping, Charging, Boarding, Blindside hits, etc. If a player chooses to do one of these things they are given the appropriate penalty. For fighting it is a 5 minute major. So if someone chooses to get into a fight during a game of Hockey, they are assessed a 5 minute penalty. I don't see how that makes it "not a part of the game" it's clearly addressed in the rule book as something that happens and what it's punishment is.
Punishments are given to discourage the thing they're given out for.

Hockey is a passionate game, with passion comes strong emotions, which can lead to fights. The NHL has accepted this and so they let them get it out in the fight, then they have to sit for 5 minutes. Other leagues don't allow fighting and it is given a much stricter penalty because they want to discourage it as much as possible. Once again, I'm just stating how it is. To claim fighting is not a part of hockey is just as ignorant as claiming it's an integral part of the game.No-one's claiming that fighting is not something that goes on during hockey games. It's just not a part of the game of hockey.

Good job bring up the ol' is-ought problem and not actually addressing the point.There's nothing to address. You said that that is how it is. That is correct that there is fighting on the ice. The only thing that needed to be said was the difficulty of attaching an ought to that is. I don't mind if you go around stating how it is all day long, that's what I'm doing too. By outlining how it is we can better understand how it ought. It's valuable service.

Either accept that or try and change it. Just doing make asinine claims like it is not a part of the game, when it quite clearly is.It's not a part of the game.

If someone plays a game of hockey without breaking any of the rules of the game, there will be no fighting. The rules of the game define what the game is, and what is and is not a part of it.

I see there is no reasoning with you. That's okay continue to believe it's not part of the game, despite it quite clearly being part of it.

If they wanted it gone because it actually wasn't, it would carry a suspension. Much like blindside headshots do.

  • 01.05.2013 10:17 PM PDT

-blam!- Was that actually blammed out? Or did I just type it? You'll never know.

Posted by: Marinade
I see there is no reasoning with you. That's okay continue to believe it's not part of the game, despite it quite clearly being part of it.
You've made no argument for why it is a part of the game. There's no "reasoning," with me because you've made no attempt at reasoning. I've shown you why it is not, and all you've said is, "Yes it is." That's just not good enough. Unless you can come up with a way to circumvent this:

>The rules of a game define the game.
>Something which is against the rules of the game or is excluded from the game by the rules, or is not described as a "do this," part of the game by the rules, is not a part of it.
>Fighting is against the rules, excluded from the game by the rules, and is not described as a "do this," part of the game by the rules of the game of hockey.
>Fighting is not a part of the game of hockey.

Then we're pretty much done. Again, if someone plays a game of hockey, which is to play it following the rules of the game perfectly, there will be no fighting.

If they wanted it gone because it actually wasn't, it would carry a suspension. Much like blindside headshots do.But they don't want it gone. It sells tickets. This discussion was never about whether or not the NHL wanted it gone, it's clear they want it to stay.

  • 01.05.2013 10:29 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: evilcam
Bobcast is paid in MILF blind dates.

Was expecting some Avs vs. Redwings footage.

*Leaves disappointed*

  • 01.05.2013 10:30 PM PDT

If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friends.

The Flood Theory of Deterioration: q(p)=(qi)e^(-p/r)

Where q(p) is the quality of the thread as a function of p posts, (qi) is the inital quality of the first post, p is the amount of posts and r is the e-peen of the original poster.

Posted by: dahuterschuter
If they wanted it gone because it actually wasn't, it would carry a suspension. Much like blindside headshots do.But they don't want it gone. It sells tickets. This discussion was never about whether or not the NHL wanted it gone, it's clear they want it to stay.

So you admit that the NHL, which as you've already stated as one of the ruling bodies that therefore decides what is or is not part of the game, wants fighting to stay. Which means it is part of the Hockey when played in the NHL. Which is exactly what I've been saying. Thanks for agreeing with me.

  • 01.05.2013 10:34 PM PDT

-blam!- Was that actually blammed out? Or did I just type it? You'll never know.

Posted by: Marinade
Posted by: dahuterschuter
If they wanted it gone because it actually wasn't, it would carry a suspension. Much like blindside headshots do.But they don't want it gone. It sells tickets. This discussion was never about whether or not the NHL wanted it gone, it's clear they want it to stay.

So you admit that the NHL, which as you've already stated as one of the ruling bodies that therefore decides what is or is not part of the game, wants fighting to stay. Which means it is part of the Hockey when played in the NHL. Which is exactly what I've been saying. Thanks for agreeing with me.
Grasping at straws and moving goalposts general then?

No. I refer you to the first part of my post (that you decided to exclude so you could just keep on arguing for some reason) to tell you why.

  • 01.05.2013 10:40 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

LeaveItYeah

Doesn't change the fact it's a terrible sport.

  • 01.05.2013 10:40 PM PDT

Key

Based on that criterion, boxing is clearly much manlier. Your thread is invalid and incredibly wrong.

  • 01.05.2013 10:44 PM PDT

If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friends.

The Flood Theory of Deterioration: q(p)=(qi)e^(-p/r)

Where q(p) is the quality of the thread as a function of p posts, (qi) is the inital quality of the first post, p is the amount of posts and r is the e-peen of the original poster.

Posted by: Miz KillZone
Posted by: Marinade


Yes, but most "street fights" or better example school fights are the same in that sense. They know what they're getting themselves into and they've obviously agreed to fight.

I do realize getting jumped/attacked is different however.

I don't know I was always under the impression that fights are illegal no matter the circumstances, unless it's MMA or something revolved around fighting. I thought the fights in the NHL were real fights and not so much a part of the sport itself, am I wrong?

Where I live fights aren't considered illegal if both participants are willing.

Fights are considered part of hockey by the NHL, so it is part of the game when playing at that level. If you were playing in some of the European leagues where they aren't considered part of the game then it would be different.

  • 01.05.2013 10:45 PM PDT

The bible is the best book Ever!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I AM A PROUD CHRISTIAN. HALO IS AWESOME BUT GOD IS MUCH BETTER!!!!!!!!
Did you knew that JESUSdied for you?

football aka "soccer" is the best sport known to man or deidity

  • 01.05.2013 10:51 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Acal
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Marinade
Posted by: Miz KillZone
Posted by: Marinade


Yes, but most "street fights" or better example school fights are the same in that sense. They know what they're getting themselves into and they've obviously agreed to fight.

I do realize getting jumped/attacked is different however.

I don't know I was always under the impression that fights are illegal no matter the circumstances, unless it's MMA or something revolved around fighting. I thought the fights in the NHL were real fights and not so much a part of the sport itself, am I wrong?

Where I live fights aren't considered illegal if both participants are willing.

Fights are considered part of hockey by the NHL, so it is part of the game when playing at that level. If you were playing in some of the European leagues where they aren't considered part of the game then it would be different.


I don't think you're getting what "part of the game" means. Let's take basketball for example. In basketball, if you travel, you are penalized. Traveling happens from time to time and the ref blows his whistle and that person is penalized. Therefore traveling isn't a part of the game of basketball even though there is a rule against it.

Now back to hockey. Yes, fighting happens in the game of hockey and always has happened and probably always will happen. That being said you're penalized for it, meaning you're not supposed to do it. Thus, it isn't a part of the game. The same way traveling happens in basketball, but it's not a part of the game.

Point being, fighting in hockey shouldn't be a reason for the sport being "more manly" or better than another sport when it really isn't supposed to be a part of the game to begin with because there is a penalty against it. The mere fact that there is a penalty against fighting means its not a part of the game.

It doesn't matter whether or not it's a part of the "culture" because there is still a penalty against it.

[Edited on 01.05.2013 11:02 PM PST]

  • 01.05.2013 11:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag: BC1096
  • user homepage:

BC1096
One does not choose a destiny, his destiny is bestowed, shaped and formed, from the soul.

I play hockey, and I would say the manliest sport is rugby. The guys are huge and go non stop and scrums are exhausting, trust me

  • 01.05.2013 11:09 PM PDT

If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friends.

The Flood Theory of Deterioration: q(p)=(qi)e^(-p/r)

Where q(p) is the quality of the thread as a function of p posts, (qi) is the inital quality of the first post, p is the amount of posts and r is the e-peen of the original poster.

Posted by: Owned Maybe

Except for, you know, that whole thing where "most players and administrators continue to insist that fighting stay as a permanent element of organized ice hockey" see here.

That there is recognized etiquette to fights in hockey is another example that, at the NHL level, it is considered part of the game. I never said that fighting is what makes hockey manly. I'm merely pointing out that, for the NHL, most players, administrators, coaches, staff and commissioners recognize that it is part of the game.

To be honest, what makes Hockey manly, as far as I'm concerned is the speed, hits, grit and toughness the players exhibit. You can't be a wuss and play Hockey. You'll just get really badly hurt.

  • 01.05.2013 11:21 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

So do all who live to see such times, but that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us.

-Gandalf

My reply.

  • 01.05.2013 11:25 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Acal
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Marinade
Posted by: Owned Maybe

Except for, you know, that whole thing where "most players and administrators continue to insist that fighting stay as a permanent element of organized ice hockey" see here.

That there is recognized etiquette to fights in hockey is another example that, at the NHL level, it is considered part of the game. I never said that fighting is what makes hockey manly. I'm merely pointing out that, for the NHL, most players, administrators, coaches, staff and commissioners recognize that it is part of the game.

To be honest, what makes Hockey manly, as far as I'm concerned is the speed, hits, grit and toughness the players exhibit. You can't be a wuss and play Hockey. You'll just get really badly hurt.


You can show me all the articles you want. Until they remove the penalty for fighting, it's not a part of the game.

Also, why are you being an instigator when the whole point of my first post was that fighting shouldn't be a reason as to why you think hockey is "more manly" (whatever the hell that means) than another sport. Who cares if it is or isn't? I'm glad we agree that it isn't a factor in the "manliest" of the sport (seriously though, wtf constituents "manliness"? What a stupid concept).

In all seriousness, I could easily say you're MORE of a man for NOT fighting. Would I be right? Who knows? It's all relative. Which is why any arguments about what makes something more manly than something else stupid, trivial, and ultimately a waste of time.

  • 01.05.2013 11:30 PM PDT