Fighting in the National Hockey LeagueThere has been a continuous debate on whether or not to ban fighting in the National Hockey League. There are many proponents and opponents to this idea and both groups have merits and demerits that they espouse. This paper will give a comprehensive analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of fighting in the league and propose a stand will give direction in the present and future of the sport.Many managers are advocating for the practice to be banned. Yzerman, the manager of Tampa Bay started by advocating for players participating in fights to be reprimanded for misconduct and shifted his position to total banning of the practice (Gough 32). He was informed by the fact that the league had already taken some measures that could only be deemed as gravitating towards banning of fighting. Currently, the league penalizes and suspends players who make contact with their heads while checking. This is in an effort to reducing the number of head injuries sustained during the sport. The manager says that it is applying double standards to prohibit something and ban it at the same time in the same sport. There is need for a quick decision as to the type of sport that hockey aspires to be: one where everything goes and consequences are accepted or one where fighting is totally eliminated. George Parros of Montreal was recently stretchered off a game after slamming his face into the ice during a fight with Torontos Orr Coltin (Fitz-Gerald 2). He was found to have suffered a severe concussion in the process.In the Olympics, there is no fighting allowed. This does not mean that the sport is not as entertaining as athletes still mix it up from time to time. The consequence of fighting is that a player loses his slot in the next game. Therefore, one has to weigh between fighting and costing his team his services in the next game. This rule alone has curbed much of the fighting that still is a spectacle in the National Hockey League. There are many injuries that result from the fast movement of the sport where contact and spills are inevitable. In 2001, British Columbia Injury Research and Prevention Unit carried out a study where they found that there is likely to be four times as many injury cases reported in leagues that allow contact than those that do not (Roland 7). The study further concluded that body checking among teen players was responsible for about 86% of all hockey injuries, which are sometimes very serious. Furthermore, 23% of these cases are usually injuries to the head and neck.Many casual fans of hockey dismiss fighting as a small part of the sport. The cheap shots that players take at each other, while being a small part of the game and infrequent, are part of the way that they have adopted to settle scores (Bernstein 43). The fights are usually to defend team mates in the game and also settle differences with rival teams. These cases are not common in international events and even in college hockey. However, they are very common in the minor leagues of North America and to a small extent to the NHL. Parents and other stakeholders are concerned with the acceptable use of violence as a means of settling scores. The sport has unwittingly molded violent characters who do not know any other ways of settling scores except fisticuffs.Proponents of fighting in hockey assert that it is an important component of the sport. It is considered as taking part in authentic Canada and Northern US culture. Having a team to root for on the rink, in different competitions make people feel that they belong. It also helps to bond a group of people together when they come to each others aid. The players learn to look out for each other even as they have fun in the sport. The traditions of the sport have had fighting as an important component.Players feel that taking fighting away from the sport will be taking a very important part of its history (Allen 76). The Detroit Red players feel that there is still a place for fighting in the sport as it currently is. They say that the activity fosters respect between players and also plays a key role in changing the momentum of a game. They admit that they sometimes get carried away but at no particular time do they go out on the ice to intentionally hurt another player. Once a player has developed the reputation of being rambunctious, the opposition team will always be intimidated by his presence. This gives a team the edge that it requires to win a game. The players argue that they draw a line between what is beneficial to the team and what is harmful to both them and the opposition players health. Therefore, if squaring off was to be banned, then players would have a field day in making cheap shots at each other. In order to avoid this, the teams feel that they need an enforcer to intimidate others.There is need to draw a line between either allowing fighting to continue or getting rid of it. The disadvantages of the practice are clearly outlined by studies done on the effects that fighting has on the players health. Cases of players having severe concussions are common. Others have severe injuries that spell the end of their careers. Many competitions have already banned or discouraged the practice through a number of consequences. While the argument for continued fighting is that it is part of the culture and that it motivates players and crowds there is no evidence to show that other competitions that have banned fighting are boring to the fans or lack motivation for the players. In this case, the demerits for continued fighting far outweigh the merits. The demerits are that the practice affects physical and psychological health of the players. This is in terms of having broken bones, suffering concussions and bruising that may range from small to very severe. Additionally, continued fighting promotes violence in the players who are sometimes very young and do not know better. Hence, these players grow up convinced that fighting is the right way of settling differences with others. On the contrary, the merits are that the players value it as it intimidates others and entertains crowds. The latter is a weaker argument that does not hold out against the former. Therefore, fighting in hockey should be unilaterally banned and those who practice it should face dire consequences. Fans will still flock arena to watch their favorite teams even without fisticuffing.Works citedAllen, Kevin. . Triumph Books, 1999Bernstein, Ross. , Triumph Books, 2006Gough, David. . Wallaceburg, Ontario: Courier Press, 2007Roland, James. . Livestrong.com, June 2, 2011. http://www.livestrong.com/article/461752-hockeys-advantages-disadvantages/. 25 November 2013