Ice Guardians @ Adam Smith Theatre - Wed 23 Nov 2017

[jonathan]

Looking to swap either two or four tickets for this Wednesday's showing.

Would prefer to go on Thursday 24 Nov instead.

Anyone?

[Billkmc]

Really good night at ice guardians tonight.
The movie was brilliant and a good insight into the role of these guys, the Q&A after it was also good with Toby taking the panto booing in his stride(well I should probably say hobble due his injury on Saturday)

[RedBird]

Nov 23, 2016 23:37:29 GMT Billkmc said:

Really good night at ice guardians tonight.
The movie was brilliant and a good insight into the role of these guys, the Q&A after it was also good with Toby taking the panto booing in his stride(well I should probably say hobble due his injury on Saturday)

Really enjoyed the movie as well, very thought provoking and some interesting facts on concussions, new equipment etc.

Would have preferred a bit more fan interaction (although not many offered questions tbh) in the Q & A session rather than listening to Allan Crow go on.

[rossco]

I posted this earlier over on THF about last night, save my typing up thoughts again

Interesting watch last night. I guess what I took away was a deeper respect for the guys that have played this role. I've never tried to understand what floats these guys boats but this gave a great insight. I'm probably less likely to call them Goons now

It remains a complex subject and I don't think the evidence defines clearly if the game is better or worse of as a result of these role players or not.

I think it did make a few points abundantly clear.

Guys got into the role from a personal desire to play the game, most of the film examples are of course to play the game at the highest level, the NHL, would be interesting to see if the career minor league enforcers thought the same - still chasing the dream, even if it is only for a cup of coffee ?

The era of staged fights, which for most fans simply made the role a side show, a distraction, an unnecessary gimmick - all this down to introducing the instigator rule. Hey teams had these guys kicking their heals on the bench so what were they gonna do with them but put them out in situations where they weren't going to be liabilities.

The health argument isn't really an argument.

The social/moral and human behaviour aspects again don't really stack up as a reason for anyone to get bent out of shape about fighting in the game. In some ways that view point can be seen as a tad hypocritical and sanctimonious.

It amuses me those people who are clearly pro tough guy that can't respect a team of 20 others who go up against a team with a fighter(s) and don't have anyone to hide behind on their team. They need to play the game honestly for fear that if they don't there is someone with a mind set and tools 20 feet away who could rearrange their life in a hurry. Yet teams do succeed without that type of guy.

Maybe just my hockey background but whilst it was fun watching Probert and Kocur destroy opponents of the Red Wings in the 80's, the Wings mostly weren't very good for their time in Motown. Kocur did win two Cups with Detroit but by that time the Wings had evolved into a power house without any "designated fighter" but instead relied upon a mix of guys who could take care of business if the need arose. Some were 4th liners often shutting down other teams top lines proving that they could play the game and others were top liners but they took no garbage. The opposition enforcer most nights against the Wings was a healthy scratch. Irrelevant, the Dodo syndrome.
To a similar degree the Fife Flyers have gone this way for almost all of the 40 years I've watched them. They've had guys now and then who could handle themselves, a few who were outright unhinged and frankly dangerous when let off the leash but generally a hockey first mentality.

I was brought up to fight my own battles, strikes me that getting someone else on the team to do my dirty work is arguably more embarrassing than choosing not to engage with a guy whose primary purpose isn't to beat you on the scoreboard. Why should you, smarts I think they call it.

So fighting in the game isn't going anywhere. That's a good thing. There will still be rats and pukes in the game who simply don't get how they should behave, deterrent hasn't made them extinct and the authorities appear unwilling to neuter them through rules, so being taken behind the woodshed still feels appropriate to me.

The development however of the role player has for many years now been being taken out of the game so the genesis of who fights, why and when is evolving yet again. Again I'm happy with that. Let's hope some can evolve their own opinions and "keep up"

[watcher]

The bottom line is that the NHL officials are not doing their job if injuries due to "cheap shots" are happening because the enforcers are no longer there to sort out the "Franks". A season ban for repeat offenders, instead of 2-5 game bans, for these type of offences would soon have the teams sorting themselves out.

[swarfiga]

When you've got the best players in the history of the game saying there's a place for these guys, that's good enough for me!

[ronniemac]

I agree with Swarfiga, after last nights show we heard from Bean,Cotterill and G Latto, Gordon said there is no doubt he would never have been the player he was without guys behind him to cover his back,in the film on the NHL front the likes of Brett Hull was full of praise for The Enforcers of the hockey world perhaps after Saturday night one may be on the agenda at KIA.

[swarfiga]

If they come out and dominate us physically like they did twice before then surely Tams going to realise we need a couple big bodies in