From: assist@orion.oac.uci.edu (ASSIST Coordination Site)
Subject: Re: Gil STein will change the NHL
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
Keywords: hockey, fight, TV, penalties, outlaw, ban 
Date: 21 Jul 92 16:10:08 GMT
Distribution: na 

In article <1992Jul20.181209.26032@meadow.uucp> zeke@meadow.UUCP (Samuel Lee) writes:
>
>In article <2A644BDF.28214@noiro.acs.uci.edu> assist@orion.oac.uci.edu (ASSIST Coordination Site) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul15.142042.13758@sei.cmu.edu> sad@sei.cmu.edu (Susan Dart) writes:
>>>
>>>It looks like Gil Stein will change hockey in a very positive way.
>>>Last night I heard that he will outlaw fighting in the NHL. He's also
>>>going to get national TV contracts (not just the sportschannel
>>>nonsense).
>>>
>>    ** How can a ban on fighting be positive for hockey?  Part
>>       of the excitement of going to hockey games is some of the
>>       tension between the players.  I agree with the rules about
>>       extra penalties for a third man entering the fight, charging,  
>>       etc.  However, a one-on-one fight between two players as long
>>       as it is not continual and is not too disruptive of the playing 
>>       of the game often gives the game some added spark.  (And I have 
>>       never seen the players do any real harm to each other while
>>       fighting!  In fact, I've seen more injury done on slashing
>>       and high-sticking infractions then in any fight).  I would
>>       like to hear what others think . . . ** Kris **
>
>Well, it depends on your point of view.  Hockey is the only professional sport  
>in which fighting is allowed insofar as you do not get ejected automatically
>for throwing a punch.  Naysayers will say that this is a unique aspect of
>hockey and is the basis of its appeal, like you feel.  Whether this feature
>is a positive or negative as far as impact on its popularity goes is debatable.
>I think that you have a good point in that the stick is a more dangerous weapon
>than players' fists and is perhaps more of a problem in terms of serious injury.
>However, Stein's responsibility is in promoting the game and making the league
>a success from a financial viewpoint.  Indisputably, the only way to do this is
>to land a major network deal, and with it the big bucks.  Do you really think
>that fighting is the only reason that hockey doesn't have a major network deal?
>I don't.  It's all in the image.  Hockey needs to broaden its mass appeal in 
>order to be more marketable and thus more profitable.  This may take the form of
>some radical changes, but the survival of the league depends on it.  I agree 
>that fighting shouldn't be eliminated, but the success of the league is  
>important as well.  It may have to go for the sake of the NHL.  What we need
>are constructive ideas like your one about stick infractions to clean up the
>game.  RIGHT ON!  We should preserve hockey as a Canadian institution.
>
>-- Zeke. 

        ** I must say that I may have to eat my words because you
           have made some very good points. I appreciate an 
           intelligent rebuttal (unlike "Employer May Disagree"!).    
           Keep up the good work Zeke  -- you might just make me   
           change my mind! ** Kris ** 

--
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey