National League Hockey Regulation
Hockey has become a widely loved sport across the world. It has also become one of the most dangerous sports due to the high velocity of the game. More players get seriously injured in National League Hockey because of the lack of regulation and protective gear, and in any other National League sport. Rules and regulations are put in place to make the game safe, so it can be enjoyed by the fans. One argument against this statement is that there is no need for more regulation, it would make the sport boring. Today other National League sports are being deemed boring as it has all changed so much. NFL games used to be exciting and fun to watch. Today’s games are not as anticipated as they once used to be. People are now gearing more towards MMA fights. Protective gear in an MMA fight could be considered the first punch, when someone takes down their opponent as soon as the match starts to “protect themselves”
While fights do happen and hockey games, and fans may enjoy them, they do not last very long, they cause injuries, they decrease playing time on the ice, which could all result in a team losing a game. It is common that during a hockey game, a fight will break out among two or more players. While this does get the fans attention, most of the times it is a short lived fight that doesn’t last very long. If we got rid of fights on the ice it would limit the amount of injuries that occur during a game, especially career altering injuries. It would also play a part in the amount of playing time star players receive on the ice. An article from the Oxford handbook of sports and economics mentions that when players get into a fight on the ice, they will get anywhere from a 5-10 minute penalty depending on the severity of the fight. This means that each team loses one or more players for the duration of the penalty causing them to potentially lose the game because their star player is in the penalty box. This then enrages the fans because they came to see their team win but due to a fight on the ice the team has lost.
While fighting is entertaining in both hockey and MMA, on the ice it can result in serious injuries, which could cause season or career ending injuries, which would result in fans being upset by their favorite players not playing. MMA professionals are trained on how to protect themselves and how to throw a clean punch. It is also the nature of the sport to fight. Hockey on the other hand is the opposite. The nature of the sport is to shoot the puck in your opponents neck as many times as possible per game. Fighting on the ice is not something hockey players train for which could add to the reasoning in which people get hurt, because they are not fighting properly. It has been proven that certain fights on the ice have caused career ending injuries. Fans may think that the fights on the ice are fun and entertaining, until their favorite player has a career ending injury. Fans would much rather keep seeing their favorite continue playing on the ice than see them in a 10 second fight. An excerpt from the book “Our Real Life Was On The Ice” encounters a Canadian hockey fan who speaks about his love for the game, and how much he enjoys seeing his favorite players versus their rivals. The fights in a hockey game only last for a few seconds, whereas seeing one of your favorite players on the ice while you grow up lasts a lifetime.
Injuries due to a lack of helmet regulations is also a big problem in the NHL. Some people don’t think it is that big of a deal that the face shields don’t fully cover a players face or neck. Chicago Blackhawks player Connor Bedard suffered a serious facial injury during a game this season versus the New Jersey Devils. This required him to get emergency surgery to repair his broken jaw which caused him to be out of multiple games. While he was not injured in a fight, rather an on ice collision, this could have been avoided with a more protective helmet. Had he been wearing a fully covering helmet which covered all of his facial extremities including his neck the injury would have been less serious and possibly avoided. When he returned back to the game, he was wearing a helmet some people may refer to as a “cage” or “fishbowl”. This is when a helmet fully covers the face to prevent facial injuries during playing time. An article from the “Open Access Journal of Sports Medicine” mentions how the orbital and facial injuries are at the most risk when it comes to NHL games due to the helmet regulations. The behavior of the players during the game needs to change. The NHL also needs to be held accountable for significant injuries that occur during games due to their lack of regulation. With the NHL being such a large franchise, one would think that they would advocate more for the safety of their player.
At the end of the day the real fans who want to see their favorite players continue playing would be in favor of more safety measures taken, as well as more regulation to take place during the games. As Hockey is one of the most dangerous sports, it makes sense to have it be the most regulated National League sport. MMA fighting is a fighting dominated sport, you go into an MMA match knowing you are going to be injured to an extent when you step out of the ring. National League hockey is supposed to provide a safe environment for the players and the fans. The players want to play a sport they are passionate about, not walk off the ice with a career ending injury, and the fans want to watch their favorite players win the Stanley cup at the end of a season, not lose due to a lack of regulation.
References
Taylor & Francis Online: Peer-reviewed journals. (n.d.). https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.2147/DMSO.S33473
Google. (n.d.). The Oxford Handbook of Sports Economics Volume 1. Google Books. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=GAH3nxAiy8QC&oi=fnd&pg=PA159&dq=do%2Bfighting%2Bin%2Bhockey%2Battract%2Bfans%2Bin%2BNHL&ots=ncydtMnM85&sig=i94IvjBb19wvnyuS-Dyq5uw5kKI#v=onepage&q=do%20fighting%20in%20hockey%20attract%20fans%20in%20NHL&f=false
The Gamer 2.0
SleepyCat
Coffee Lover 03
doglover7025
Snowman10
excellentstudent27
Gymrat
hockeyfan
holistic25
ilovebeesss
ilovemydog
The Gamer
Naturechild101
BreakingBad45
ravensfan8
temporal111
thatpersonoverthere
toetio
username1132005
Calm&Patient
webbwrestler135
Counterintuitive Spring 2024 
Can I have 45 minutes of feedback please- HockeyFan
LikeLike
Hey, HockeyFan. I just spent 45 minutes on one of your classmate’s first paragraph. What I’ll try to do for you here is make a brief comment on each of your paragraphs first. Then I’ll go back to lavish more time on individual items if I have time left.
—More players get seriously injured than WHAT? More than if there were more regulations? More than they get injured in other sports? More than other sports that have more regulations? What are you comparing?
—This doesn’t sound like much of a refutation argument, HockeyFan. But it could be if it had a Champion who could be your Worthy Opponent. Right now it’s obvious you’re just arguing with yourself, which is never satisfying to readers. They see through it.
—A strong Refutation Argument that would incorporate your “it would make the sport boring” would be something like:
Next paragraph.
—First of all, eliminate your Rhetorical Questions. They’re almost never effective, and you don’t have a license to use them. You can apply to me for such a license, but you’ll have to show that you can use them effectively.
—You need a Topic Sentence that would summarize your entire paragraph. Every paragraph needs one. How would you summarize your argument here into one sentence? You say:
So, what’s the Summary?
Write it in one sentence, and then START your paragraph with that sentence. Until you have a stronger sense of how to organize your thoughts, you should ALWAYS start your paragraphs with your Topic Sentence to give your readers a chance of following the claims that follow (not always logically or directly).
Let’s try that again. I notice you’re already repeating claims from the previous paragraph.
Not much there. But there’s a nice opportunity to refute your WO.
Pretty nice, huh?
—This is a weird paragraph. What’s the claim here? Your first sentence, which should sum it up for us, says Injuries are a problem. But it specifies Injuries Due To Helmet Regulations, which sounds backwards. Don’t you mean injuries that result from a LACK of helmet regulations?
—That change alone won’t save the paragraph.
—What’s the point here? Connor Bedard missed some games. Was he injured in a fight? Or have you been arguing all along that BOTH fewer fights and MORE protective gear are your recommendations to make the sport . . . what? More enjoyable? Less dangerous? More competitive? Safer?
—You don’t make claims here beyond some Factual claims. Player is injured. Players misses games. Player returns with more protective gear. What are you advocating? That he shouldn’t have been on the ice without a cage in the first place? That he shouldn’t have been permitted to fight? Did he? That behavior should change or equipment should change?
—This won’t refute your WO at all. She says,
Helpful, I hope? You owe me 45 minutes of revisions. And about 350 words to bring you up to 1000. I hope the MMA example will be fruitful for you.
LikeLike
On APRIL 14, you posted ANOTHER Rebuttal Rewrite. You shouldn’t have. You should have updated this one instead, to keep all the versions and feedback together. I copied the contents of that NEW Rebuttal Rewrite into this post and Updated it.
I left this Reply on your NEW Rewrite, and then deleted it.
Here’s what the Reply said:
This is really confusing for several reasons, HockeyFan.
LikeLike