you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 11 points 9 months ago (11 children)

It's a way to keep other players honest.

In a game where your career, or your life, could be over in a matter of seconds over a single hit, the idea that you could get your teeth knocked out by someone for it is at least a slight deterrent.

When the fines amount to little more than pennies and suspensions rarely go beyond a handful of games, having to answer the bell for your actions can help keep a player honest.

And people may rarely get injured fighting, but try and tell me someone 6' weighing 200lbs punching you full in the face isn't going to hurt.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (8 children)

    If it is harmless then how does it keep someone honest?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (7 children)

    1 it isn't completely harmless, but the chances of getting a lasting injury are vanishingly small

    2 just because the chances of being injured are low, doesn't mean getting punched in the face doesn't hurt

    3 in a (mostly) consequence free environment, getting punched in the face can be considered a reasonable punishment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (6 children)

    You said they did way more violent stuff during the game and all the fighting does is tire them out.

    I feel like the reasoning of both "it's harmless" and "it keeps people in line" don't both work at the same time...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (4 children)

    Sorry, mistook you for the person above. Anyway, seems like there's two competing theories, in addition to it being just popular with the audience.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (3 children)

    There isn't really competing theories. The reason why its done is very well known, and others have stated it: fighting provides immediate consequences to players that break the moral code of the game.

    Whether its a good thing or not is debatable, for sure though. I'd personally argue that if there was a better policy to achieve the same results, we would use it, and fighting actually has gone down as a result of high definition cameras recording more of the games. Players get away with less bad actions and there are less fights.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago* (2 children)

    Well two mutually incompatible claims, then. And I just don't really believe in either one. Most hockey leagues don't have fighting and there's no more bad behaviour. It seems to be mainly a North American thing

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (1 child)

    I'm supposed to just assume you are right about the "no more bad behavior" part?

    Perhaps american sports incentivize immoral play and cheating simply by paying athletes more, and so fighting has emerged to counter this. Hard to say, we aren't able to measure fightings impact on the game in a useful way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 child)

    Even if they still have on their padding, it's going to hurt getting punched in the face. Those gloves are heavy with thick leather on the outside (how it's made

    The one and only time I've been punched in the face was in full boxing protective gear just messing around, and that was enough for me to avoid any situation that might get me punched in the face for the last 20 years. But it was a hook to the temple in just the right spot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment