Study shows Canadians support ban on NHL fighting

[wrangler 157]

According to a TSN report: http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=382923

[Law Goalie 147]

Argh-- Forum always seems less likely than any research firm to say what their questions were, or even hint at them. I'm baffled by Bozinoff's association of Crosby's injury with a fighting ban: specious even by pollster standards. Crosby wasn't even subject to the same *kind* of brain trauma that a fighter would suffer -- Pronger, maybe so.

I have no problem with considering a ban of fighting, full or partial, provided it's driven by conclusive medical science that convinces all parties of its necessity. Sit the league and the owners down and explain to them, "This is what it's going to cost you." Tell the players what it'll do to them in their 60s. I'd be willing to bet more than a few players would still want fighting in the game as a deterrent for reckless hitting -- in fact, they'd probably suggest that it should be easier to start a fight with a guy, but that staged fighting should be phased out.

If after that consultation they need to convince the fans, all they have to do is outlaw 'takedowns' (which are a dangerous, dubious, and very recent commentator-invented way to 'win' a fight) and let MMA make the 'put up your dukes' fights look silly by comparison. Boxing is (forgive me) already on the ropes because of MMA, and it's easy to make fighting look silly when the protagonists are standing on 3mm thick, 9' radius blades.

As for phasing out staged fighting and the jobs of the enforcers, the answer is economically simple. Instead of having to pay their medical bills from here to eternity, allow any player who is cut from an NHL roster as a result of such a ban to come and request a pension on that basis. If the league is worried about the cost (and I don't see why) they could cost-share with the PA, effectively taking up a collection from the players and matching with the owners.

[wrangler 157]

Are you seriously suggesting that results of a poll can be manipulated simply by the way the questions are phrased, and the wording of the available responses? And that we need to see those questions and answers to evaluate the value of the results? I have to agree.