By Josie
Lemieux
Tuesday, April 30th, 2002
Stick incident. Cross-checking. Instigating a fight. Kneeing. Charging. Elbowing.
Attempt to injure. Gross misconduct. Leaving bench to fight. Slashing. No
words need to be said here - what we see live on television during a hockey
game speaks a thousand words.
Do not be fooled, we do not talk about the legal, strong, well-applied body
contacts which make hockey look awesome and thrilling. We are talking about
dangerous, unjustified, and reckless attacks. Do not get your guts out while
playing, just lay the opponent down, it will break his team and we'll win.
Yikes.
Ice hockey teams that play with more violence are less likely to win, according
to a scientific study released in 1999-2000, on professional sports violence
conducted by the Texas Youth Commission's John Walker, M.D., and Illinois
State University Health, Physical Education and Recreation Professor Steven
McCaw, Ph.D.
According to Dr. Walker, the violence prevention research provides new evidence
of both statistical and practical significance. "At the highest level of
competition, teams playing with more violence are not more likely to win;
in fact, the opposite is true." In a study of 1,462 recorded penalties from
all 18 Stanley Cup championship final series from 1980 to 1997, teams playing
with less violence were more likely to win and averaged more than seven more
shots on goal per game than teams that played with more violence.
Over the course of a seven-game series, this would provide an additional
53 more shots on goal - more than a whole extra game's worth of shots on
goal - to teams playing with less violence.
The researchers also found that losing teams demonstrated more violent player
behavior early in the game, suggesting that violence was not due to the
frustration of losing, but rather due to an intentional strategy possibly
supported by coaches who cling to the belief that such behavior contributes
to winning. Professor McCaw adds, "It may have temporary short-term success
from time to time, but in the long-run, there is no shortcut to success."
On a more recent level, there has been a total of 33 suspensions served by
NHL players during the 2002 regular season. A closer look at the offenses
and resulting suspensions could make your hair stand on the back of your
neck for a second: charging or kneeing? One game. The longest suspensions
served? Ask the Canucks' Todd Bertuzzi, who has been caught
against the Avs on October 15th. L.A. Kings player Adam
Mair also had a 10-game suspension on December 21st, against the Ottawa
Senators. Reason? They left the bench to fight.
In resume, a player who leaves a bench to fight is more severely punished
than Kyle McLaren, who put Richard Zednik on a stretcher (2-3
games), the Rangers' Igor Ulanov, who cross-checked the
Capitals' Steve Konowalchuk (7 games), or even the Ducks
Kevin Sawyer, who attempted to injure Flames goalie Mike
Vernon (5 games).
What's it all about? How can testosterone demonstrations be more condemned
than obvious and deliberate assaults? Did those violent behaviors result
in a place for the playoffs or a winning game? Not at all.
Ice hockey has become the fastest growing sport in many parts of the world.
Professor McCaw concludes, "Although European ice hockey has evolved into
a highly refined game, based on skill and finesse, the North American version
of the sport is still based heavily on violence."
In terms of attendance at NHL events, corporate sponsorships, licensed sports
product sales, and media coverage on television and radio, the magnitude
of sport in our society has never been so dominant - and its impact is still
on the rise.
Regardless of who he is, adversity on ice doesn't make an offending player
be aware of the danger. Adversity only shows what kind of man is inside that
player.
Back
to NHL
Back to
Home