The age-old argument

The majority do not want increase penalities just a few and this will never see the light of day. The problem that hockey has created is two fold. 1. Instigator penalty is bad because that is why there are "staged" fights in the NHL nobody wants to get the extra misconduct that rule needs to be eliminated like the IHL has done. 2. Visor rule in Minor leagues has created more problems with a fighter taking off there helemts so they don't hurt there hands on the visor. If they want guys to keep there helmets on then they need to remove the visor rule. What happens is when these young guys get to the NHL it is just habbit to shed their helmets because that is what they have always have done. I was a huge Redwings fan in the Kocur / Probert days and watched as many games as possible because you knew there would be the possibility of fights, now I can't stand to watch the Redwings because of their boring style.

Player police themselves. Whoever said that hit the nail on the head. Paybacks are part of the game. They have always been and always will be no matter what rules they impose. Knowing when to go with the other guys is very important. You never want to hurt your team. The guys know that. Brad "The Truck" MacMillian is the best example you can follow. Some times you just have to teach certain guys a lesson. The NHL really does not want to stop all fighting. It would not be good for the fans. After all they buy the tickets.

A couple of years ago, while picking up my season tickets, I got the opportunity to speak to David Franke. We chatted about the team that they had put together and some of the new rules in place. The subject of fighting came up and we both agreed that no one wants a "goon" league, but there were people who had a hard time accepting the fact that fighting even existed in hockey. I told him that whenever I ran into someone who expressed outrage about fighting in hockey I would always tell them this; There are three times when people stand up at a hockey game; one is for the National Anthem, two is when the home team scores, and third was when a fight took place. He laughed, thought that it was funny yet true, and told me he was going to use that line. I hope that "hockey people" think this thing through before making any permanent decisions.

I wonder when and if we're ever going to get to the point where fighting becomes totally irrelevant because of all the rules and protocol. I believe we're getting closer to that, as it's happening less often in games anyway. I think part of that is that hockey is producing fewer fighters, plus there's the demand that they be more all-around players. I think back to some of the 1990s IHL enforcers and a lot of them could not play in today's game. Coaches wouldn't carry them on the roster for one thing.

Yes fighting has gone from it will happen 2 to 3 times during a game in the 80's and 90's to it may happen now. Yes there has been major changes to rules and protocol in lower levels of hockey. Look at the college game and how they play their game. But I will say this about some of the lower levels of hockey if you are going to make the wear a full cage all the way through and take out fighting in the game then you have to make them wear full gages in all levels of pro hockey! The stick work and flagrant hits that take place in the college game and some other levels is just brutual at times with no fear of having to "fight". I think those rules and protocol at that level has help the game in some areas, but it has also hurt the game to when these players make it to the pro game. Let's face it the college game is just another form of "Minor" league hockey, just like college baseball is a form of Minor league baseball for the MLB. Just look on how many of those kids are draft and property of a professional sports club...

I have been following this whole debate. Oddly enough, I find that I can relate to the points being made by both sides. The problem is that we live in a society where when tragedies occur, people demand change. They want to know that something has been done to make it all better so that it can never happen again. But the harder they try to make everything 100% safe, the more obvious it becomes that it can't be done. Not to mention that things can get ridiculous as a result. So it goes with hockey. The trend does seem to be towards more skill and less fisticuffs. That makes me sad because I think the fighting is probably the one thing that really makes hockey unique. Is it a necessary part of the game? Technically no, but it gives it its character. It always reminds me of the "Old West". People can get by just fine without taking the law into their own hands, but try telling that to the Outlaw Josey Wales, you know? It's just a different mentality. So yes, I support the fighting in hockey as something that appeals to fans and gives the game personality. That being said, I personally don't approve of fights that take place merely to "set the tone". That crosses the line, in my opinion. Players should stand up for themselves and each other, but it's another thing entirely to be the aggressor. Like I said, that's just my opinion. I know that others think those are some of the most important fights in the game.

As for requiring players to keep their helmets on, there is just one question that I have about that. Don't the helmets usually get knocked off even if the players don't remove them? In the fights I've seen in which someone just started throwing punches, that's usually the case. Goodness knows, some players have had a hard enough time just keeping their helmets on through the course of a game, let alone a fight. So if the helmets are likely to come off anyway, doesn

Wendy- I loved the reference to "The Outlaw Josey Wales." That was one great movie that had a lot of great lines in it. "Diein' aint much of a livin' boy."