View Full Version : Fighting
11-24-2002, 05:27 AM
to all you viewers out there, an incident occured last weekend, where a coach told his player to fight another player in a CRHL regular season game. in addition, the coach from what we have heard was serving his suspension this weekend, and i was just remotely curious as to what others thought about the suspension? How many games should a player receive for fighting (dropping the gloves and throwing punches), and what would be a fair punishment for the coach who specifically told his player to fight that opposing player. we have not received word as to how many games the player or the coach were given, but if anyone knows the outcome, inquiring minds wanna know. Moreover, does it specifically state anything relating to fighting issues in the CRHL handbook or rule book, and what that rule or punishment is? i was just curious, but if anyone out there has any knowledge relating to this little situation, i would love to know what you think. thank you very much for your time,
11-25-2002, 08:33 AM
I could be wrong but I don't think the CRHL materials state what specific suspensions are. But from my experience (personal and otherwise) a suspension for fighting will usually get you anywhere from 3-7 games depending ont he severity. 3-5 games is most likely. As for the coach,. I'm not sure that has ever happened before. But in my opinion (which doesn't count for much anymore) a coach who sends players out there to fight or injure should receive a minimum of 5 games. I would say he should get 5-10 games. That is inexcusable conduct. A coach is supposed to act professionally and without malice. You even saw a NHL coach get suspended for doing that.
11-25-2002, 11:28 AM
Bryan Trottier got 3 games for it, in a league where fighting is legal. The penalties should be much greater in the CRHL. If I were in the position of the person doing the fines/suspensions, and if the coach openly admitted to me that he put a player on the floor with the intention of starting an altercation, I would recommend a fine around $75 and a 5-6 game suspension.
11-25-2002, 01:59 PM
John, that's exactly what I was getting at. Of course it may be clear to the refs that a coach sent a player out there to fight or injure, but I doubt the coach would usually openly admit to doing so. I don't think it should matter whether he admits it or not. Anyway, the player would have to be a dumbass to fight anyway right? :-)
11-25-2002, 03:53 PM
I am not saying that I agree with fighting, but how can you prove the coach sent the player out to fight? If it is heard by the refs or team, thats good. BUT what if the player claims the coach sent him to fight but that wasnt the coaches intentions? Either way, USA Hockey gives you a Game Misconduct plus an extra game, I think that is enough. Now, if there become a re-occuring player involved in fights, more may be needed. We all have things that get to us on the court, sometimes in certain situations people toss the gloves. Again, I am not a fight promoter, but this is a competitive game and sometimes bad things happen.
11-25-2002, 04:39 PM
1 game is plenty, for the kinda fights your going to see in a college roller hockey league.
11-25-2002, 06:17 PM
A 1 game suspension is most certainly not plenty in regards to a player fighting. One game is nothing. A player should be suspended for 3 games minimum. As for a coach, it doesn't "just happen." A coach is supposed to act professionally, even more so than his players. Additionally he is not caught in the heat of the moment which can many times contribute to a person getting into a fight. He has time to make a decision about sending a player on to fight someone. A coach should be penalized much more than a player. And yes, the best and only way to know if a coach sent the player on is to overhear.
To accept that a player cannot help himself from fighting is the beginning of the deception. This is a game which reqires a great deal of self discipline to learn properly and play well as a team. If the self - discipline necessary to avoid a fight cannot be mustered then the player is not ready to play at a level beneficial to the game.
Fighting in hockey became accepted as away of repaying cheap shots by someone who was trying to get away with something already ouside the rules. In some leagues it evolved into part of the "entertainment" - but even in the NHL the fighting is usually restricted to those who are hired to do so - not always but most of the time. The days of using fighting to "intimidate" other players/teams in order to gain an advantage should be stopped as it will only make skilled players look elsewhere to play and result in an evolution to "Slapshot" hockey if left uncontrolled.
Where a team with a large skill advantage already over their competition stoops to fighting as part of their agenda - then not only should the players but the coaching staff be punished but the academic institution and the league's governing body should look carefully at the image they are projecting.
In fact if a rule was drawn up that every time a player engaged in a fight - not only would he be suspended but his coach as well for 2 games - these incidents would dissapear pretty fast.
11-25-2002, 09:37 PM
im one of those guys who grew up in the ice hockey scene, so fighting doesnt seem all that unnatural in the course of the game.
however, this isnt ice hockey, so i understand that restrictions must be applied.
perhaps a nice compromise would be that if a player were to get 3 or so games suspension for fighting, maybe the refs would let the fight last throughout its entirety. if one were to get a hefty suspension, itd be a shame to have receive it without even getting a good punch off. haha.
but in my bit of experience in collegiate roller hockey, i dont think that fights are anything to be concerned about. ive never seen one in a college game, and any game that mightve come close to including a fight, had situations that could easily have been controlled by the refs, and they were.
although i dont promote fights, and quite frankly im pretty sure that i punch like an 80 year old woman anyways, if i were a coach in a game that smelled like trouble might happen, i would make sure the ref knew that if he didn't take care of the other teams chippiness, we would. usually when they hear that, they take better control of the game.
not much of an opinion, but its all i got :)
11-26-2002, 02:49 AM
I don't condone fighting in collegiate roller hockey. It is a game designed around speed, patience, and execution. Furthermore, all of the players are students who cannot afford to get injured in a fight and miss time away from classes. Let's remember that when it all is said and done, we are playing a game. Everyone plays to win, but it is still designed to be a friendly competition played by STUDENT athletes.
During the summer, our team instituted a team rule stating that anyone engaging themselves in a fight AND whom receives an official league suspension will also receive a 1 game team suspension to be served immediately following the completion of their league suspension.
We haven't had any fights and I don't think we will, but the rule is out there and will be enforced if there ever is one.
Re: Coaches sending players out to fight...If I were to ever ask a player to go out and get into a fight or injure someone I would hope that the player wouldn't do so and I also would hope that I was replaced immediately.
Coach, UConn Roller Hockey
11-30-2002, 12:50 PM
I have been rather yappy as a new member to this posting site, so I will try to keep this one brief, and it is another of those soapbox oinions.
1. Fighting has no place in hockey.
2. If players were to be suspended for the entire season for engaging in fisticuffs, the practice would end.
3. For those who believe in the Gospel According to St. Barry: NO, the game would NOT degenerate into stick bludgeoning in the absence of fighting.
We must demand that our game be ONLY about skill, ability, heart, and creativity. We must have the guts to get rid of those that will not play like human beings.
Then our sport can reach its full potential, for players, and (even paying) spectators alike.
11-30-2002, 04:04 PM
I agree with you, but getting suspended for the entire season for engaging in a fight is harsh.
11-30-2002, 04:24 PM
The whole season is too much.
Does anyone knowwhat the NCAA's punishment is for fighting in ice? that might serve as a guideline or offer some help. Not the exact same. Probably harsher since ice is a varsity sport while inline is still club. Thats just my 2 cents.
11-30-2002, 06:58 PM
"...too HARSH..." is indeed the entire point.
If the intent is only to penalize, then we are allowing fighting to continue as a tactic, however it may come to be used.
If the intent is to eliminate, the penalty must be so harsh, that the consideration of whether to engage in a fight will be eliminated. If a penalty is NOT too harsh, then we continue to allow the tactic to be considered, and nothing changes, except maybe by degree...
We might contend, IF we really did kick you out "forever" for fighting, that you would certainly think about it a whole bunch of times before you entered into a fight, and you probably would discard the notion as not worth it, precisely because no tactical advantage for the single game would be worth it...ever...
...end of soapbox, I promise.
11-30-2002, 10:02 PM
This "penalty", might prevent lots of fights, but granted that most fights are in the heat of a moment. And if two guys are going after each other in a game likley one of those checks, slashes, trips or elbows is going to start a fight no matter what the penalty is. I agree if it is more serious less will occur but it will never be eliminated from the game.
12-02-2002, 07:53 PM
As for coaches sending players out with the Full intent of fighting or injuring a Match Penalty should be imposed. A match penalty is on in which a player or coach will be given a 5 min. major, game misc., and a minimum 30 day suspension in which the league authorities will then review the situation and make a final suspension ruling which will be served on top of the time served with the (up to) 30 days.
12-03-2002, 07:36 PM
You sound like a ballerina. Fighting has always been a part of hockey an always will. if players didn't fight, they would play chippy all game long. If one player has a grief with another player, and it is mutual grief, then let them box it out and get on with the game.
12-03-2002, 08:05 PM
Well now why can't we have the best of both worlds? Fighting should have its penalties that are given out every time(i.e. game misconduct every time you fight). But depending ont eh situation the referees should file a report to a league administrator for further consideration. Also allow both players and/or their coaches to give tell their story. I know as a ref you can't always be 100% accurate. Just an idea..
12-03-2002, 10:03 PM
I promise that I won't insult you by calling you names.
You make three conslusions, none of which you have backed up with anything...and, IF you really held any interest in developing our sport, you would educate yourself as to how and why these incidents really do happen, and you would not make statements that have no basis in fact.
In other words, you are wrong in everything that you have said. None of your conclusions, masked as assertions, are correct.
12-04-2002, 11:25 AM
I agree. I did not mean to say that they should not be penalized at all, but trying to impose stricter penalties should not happen. if you drop the gloves, 2 minutes. If you go looking for the fight, 5 minutes, and that should be the end of the story. I do want to see the sport of Roller Hockey develop, but it should develop with the same understandings and rules of ice hockey.
12-04-2002, 11:32 AM
The real sport of hockey should be handled on ice. Creativity is for those players who skate with their heads up their a@@ because they know that they cannot be hit. Skill comes to those players who know how to skate pass the check and through the defenseman, not try and tip toe around him. Skill and heart are part of any sport so you hold no ground on that. There are a lot of players who do have a lot of skill in roller hockey I will give it to them. I don't mean to spark a heated conversation on the matter so I apologize for my direct style of writing. When it comes down to it, fighting is a part of hockey, and roller hockey isn't exactly hockey, so maybe taking it out of the game will be good for those who play.
12-04-2002, 12:30 PM
But roller hockey is not ice hockey so why should we try and develop it with the same rules? Roller hockey is not ice hockey on wheels and sport court. It is its own game with its own rules. By blurring the line between the 2 sports it hurts roller hockey because it draws more and more comparisons to ice hockey which does not promote roller hockey as its own game not an alternative to ice hockey, or as some have said "the evil twin of ice hockey."
12-04-2002, 01:22 PM
Good point. I play both so it is hard sometimes to keep my thoughts from blurring between the lines.
12-04-2002, 02:57 PM
The real sport of hockey should be handled on ice.
When it comes down to it, fighting is a part of hockey, and roller hockey isn't exactly hockey....
....so I apologize for my direct style of writing.
Wow, powerful statements, taken a bit out of context but still really fun to post on a roller hockey message board. So if you are not a fan of roller hockey, what are you apologizing for? Seems to me people can jump all over the above statements you made :)
12-04-2002, 03:36 PM
I can't see through all the hypocrisy here. I read every single post you made in this thread, oldie006. You say you play roller hockey and ice hockey, then you disparage one.... and then apologize for it!
The 'real' sport of hockey is played wherever you can find a few guys with sticks, shooting a (ball, puck, can, wad of paper) into a (net, garbage can, pair of shoes). That is the beauty of it. There's a word for those who just want to strap on a pair of skates, go out onto the ice and knock somebody out; "D-League."
And for the record, I play both ice and roller, and I enjoy both equally. I fail to see why ice hockey players still begrudge roller hockey so much after all this time.
12-04-2002, 03:38 PM
Hey all I want to say is if you don't consider roller hockey to be "real" hockey then why even post on this message board to begin with. Roller hockey isn't ice, never will be, although both are equally enjoyable, they share similar structures but the mind sets of the players are entirely different. Sorry, I am not trying to get more controversy started on this post but oldie006 watch what you say about roller hockey on a roller hockey message board.
12-04-2002, 04:37 PM
I am just having fun and people are buying into it.
12-04-2002, 04:42 PM
Like I said above, I am just having fun. I was trying to see how people really feel and now I know. I just dont like when people try and take the little contact we have in roller hockey and strip it away. To all above, I respect roller hockey and spent four years playing in the CRHL, three of which as captain of the team and two of which as a player/coach. Hope this calms you all down.
12-04-2002, 04:55 PM
I also play both ice and roller and happen to enjoy roller more. Not beacuse there is limited contact but because games are more wide open and have more flow. It is more fun to play roller because the games are just as competetive as ice but you dont have to spend 50% of your time fighting in the corners or along the boards or in front for the net for the puck and you have better scoring chances. It is a much more wide open game and thats why I enjoy roller hockey more than ice.
12-04-2002, 05:22 PM
That's totally cool. I am the exact opposite, I love the battle in the corner and enjoy pissing off D when they cant move me out of the front. Yet I still enjoy the occasional roller hockey game. I was forced into four years of roller hockey with the CRHL as there was no ice rink near campus, oh well.
sounds great - lets see - we have here a professional middle weight boxer who also plays roller - (or ice) hockey and who is really ticked because one of those "ballerinas" blew by him 3 or 4 times - time to take his head off - maybe teach him some respect for his "betters" - I repeat from an earlier post - clamp down on the cheap shots and the incentive for retaliation fighting is removed to a great extent. But intimidation fighting is also part of the "game" as you refer to ice hockey - and where it occurs - roller hockey. Should we keep this part of "ice" too? Let's see - if I can beat the crap out of you, and you know I will if you piss me off, - you probably wont be so effective when you play me next time. This is what you think should be inherited?
12-05-2002, 03:36 PM
I'm not saying i don't love battling in the corners and in front of the net but I dont like doing it all the time!
12-05-2002, 04:00 PM
Who does? Well, I am a pure roller hockey player, I love the speed and fast-pace flow of roller hockey. A physical battle in roller hockey is usually much more exciting because they dont happen all the time as in ice. I played ice for 5 years and the one thing I don't miss is the battles just because in my opinion they slow the game down.
12-06-2002, 06:06 PM
The term fast paced and roller hockey do not belong in the same sentence. The only time roller hockey gets fast in when someone decides to skate coast to coast. Other than that it is a controlled, slow paced game. The players have fast hands and thats it.
12-06-2002, 06:08 PM
After 18 years of ice I couldn't agree with you more.
12-06-2002, 06:13 PM
Who said the boxer played defense. You assume so much. I never said use fighting as intimidation. I just stated that if two players have been cheap shotting each other all game and racking up penalties, just let them fight if they choose to. Each players has the chance to back out of a fight. If a player gets in a fight it was his decision that put him there. I can remember games where another player and myself where just going at all game and finally decided to throw down. As soon as it was over we both back on our game and the feud was over. It kept up the pace of the game and afterwards we laughed at it.
12-06-2002, 06:30 PM
how can you say that roller hockey does not have speed? when you are playing wide open hockey with plenty of passing the game can be very fast paced.
12-06-2002, 07:17 PM
Roller hockey is just as fast-paced as ice if not more. There are less people on the rink thus creating more space to skate and pass. It is usually back and forth through out the game. And most inline rinks have no icing or offsides making it have a much faster pace in my opinion.
12-07-2002, 11:59 PM
I think the point he's trying to make is that roller hockey (at high levels) relies on puck control and moving the puck in a controlled fashion into the attacking zone.
Contrastingly, ice hockey relies more on first gaining the zone by having a puck carrier either skate or dump the puck into the zone, then having the rest of the team work to hem the opponent in.
Both sports have quick rushes, but I think that overall roller hockey demands more control and a slower pace when controlling the puck. This doesn't mean the same thing as low-scoring or less exciting.
Eastern Collegiate Roller Hockey Association
12-08-2002, 06:12 PM
Roller hockey does demand moew control and in my experiences it is faster paced than ice hockey. I was only speaking from my experiences
12-08-2002, 08:20 PM
well meow to you too :)
12-09-2002, 12:55 PM
Having no offsides and icing actaully makes the game slower. Players get more lazy and go for the long pass instead of short crisp passes as they make their way up the rink. Icing and offsides forces players to skate faster and harder. If roller hockey was faster, players wouldn't take such long shifts. I too am guilty of taking long shifts when I play roller hockey so I am being a hyppocrite when I say so, but when I am on ice I can play for like 45sec-1.5 minutes top, and when I play roller hockey I can last like 2-3 minutes.
12-09-2002, 12:58 PM
Thank you for understanding what I am trying to say. You are totally correct.
12-09-2002, 03:38 PM
I played ice for about 5 years as a little kid till I completly switched to roller hockey. So I get what your saying about icing and offsides slowing the game down in that aspect. But what it all comes down to is what kind of league you play in, whats your coaches stlye. I've had teams who are very lazy and took shifts of close to 4 minutes and those games dragged on for an enternity. But then again I've had teams with similar ice shifts of about 1 minute and our whole game revolved on the short pass in a combination of speed. So in at least my case it all comes down to the situation.
12-09-2002, 07:19 PM
I also see how icing and offsides can slow a game down. Good point. And in house leagues its true you can take longer shifts (I do it in house) but on a good travel inline team you will find shifts to be relatively the same amount of time as on a good travel ice team. Ice travel we skate 45-60 second shifts roller travel we skate 45-75 second shifts in house ice we skate 60-90 second sifts and house roller we skate 2-3 minute shifts.
12-10-2002, 11:51 AM
Those three minute in-house shifts are fun though.
12-10-2002, 01:46 PM
Let me ask something to fuel this fire of roller vs. ice, and this just might be because I'm from Philadelphia and I'm subject to watch mostly Atlantic Division, Eastern Conference NHL games.
But, honestly, after watching the crap that passes for hockey in the NHL this season, can you knock roller hockey for being less a sport than ice hockey? Like I said, maybe it's just the Flyers, Devils, and Rangers that are doing it to me, but dump-and-chase me to death, why don't ya? The only interesting spot in the games is the OT, when the ice opens up, people can move, and offense happens.
I really think the NHL should screw the traditionalists, go four-on-four... at least the game would be semi-interesting to watch. I went to the Flyers/Blues game on Saturday, Blues win 3-1 on the strength of an awful Al MacGiness goal (I swear, it bounced of 20 things en route to the net) and an empty-netter by Pavol Demetria with 0.6 on the clock. Is this "skilled hockey"?
Defense might win championships, but no one wants to watch it! :)
12-10-2002, 01:49 PM
Hey, after watching the last month or so of the NHL season, can we now say that "ice hockey is simply roller hockey on metal blades?"
12-10-2002, 02:19 PM
I didn't see the RHI exactly posting great ratings when it was around. The point is people do watch ice hockey, and the more roller hockey distances itself from ice the less likely it is to be watched.
I played in the CRHL for four years, but seriously, have you objectively watched a roller hockey game that you have no vested interest in? It's a very slow moving game outside of like 20% of the games at nationals. It is not a great spectator sport, but it's fun to play. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but roller hockey has its place, and I don't think it's in front of thousands of fans, as cool as that might be.
12-10-2002, 02:57 PM
>>I didn't see the RHI exactly posting great ratings when it was around. The point is people do watch ice hockey, and the more roller hockey distances itself from ice the less likely it is to be watched.<<
I have no idea what RHI's ratings were. But, I can imagine they were comparable, in Philadelphia, to what the Philadelphia Kixx (indoor soccer) put up for their televised games, and they might be even close to the ratings generated by the handful of Phantoms (AHL) games that get put on Comcast. Truthfully, I don't know, but I can't imagine the numbers being significantly far apart.
I can't say I totally agree with your second statement there either. Granted, while I don't think ramps and balls are of particular interest to the average fan, I do think ice hockey fans would enjoy a product maybe similar to MLRH, where you have quick paced hockey combined with hitting and fighting. I say this because I see how the Marple Gladiators draw fans out to their homegames despite not having any real major PR or, quite honestly, any actual league PR either.
>>"I played in the CRHL for four years, but seriously, have you objectively watched a roller hockey game that you have no vested interest in?"<<
Yes, alot. I travelled to NARCh Winternationals last season for no purpose other to take a break from school, gamble, and watch some of the best roller hockey in the world. I watched from the stands as CJ Yoder scored the game winner for the Tour Mudcats to beat Team Tour West in the Pro finals with about 7 seconds on the clock. I've also gone to ECRHA Regionals even when my team was not playing, particularly the year when RIT beat PSU Altoona twice in the finals to win the region.
>>"It's a very slow moving game outside of like 20% of the games at nationals. It is not a great spectator sport, but it's fun to play. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but roller hockey has its place, and I don't think it's in front of thousands of fans, as cool as that might be."<<
I definitely think you're selling the sport short. Yes, you're right: not every game is the barnburner, has the end-to-end action that roller hockey brags about. But in my experience, and maybe I'm either in a position to watch good roller hockey on the East Coast or I'm just lucky, there are some excellent games that go on in MLRH, in PIHA, and in the ECRHA.
I mean, case in point, Rebecca Breitel had me come up to Rahway last month to help her event direct one of the ECRHA's weekends (ok, I guess I had a "vested interest" to be there in this case). I watched just about *the greatest hockey game* I have ever seen, where Boston fought tooth and nail and basically left every bit of heart they had on the floor to pull out a 3-2 victory over the University of Delaware, scoring the game winner with 0.1 seconds on the clock. And this game didn't come from people making a buck off the game.. it came from kids my age, who are just there cause they love to play and compete, and because they want to get some recognition for their school.
The problem is that the groups that are involved in roller hockey just don't have the finances to make an adequate campaign to draw fans, and some are just organized in such a way that getting fans out is near impossible (tournament series, college roller hockey). I have some ideas to help them out and bring the world of roller hockey into the hands of each and every potential fan and player. But as always, they stay gently tucked up my sleeve until I walk out the door at Drexel, and maybe then I'll let my evil plans loose on the world for you all to enjoy!
[And to the select few people that know what the heck I'm talking about, zip it... :)]
12-10-2002, 03:26 PM
Yeah, after being on the rink for shifts of 3-4 minutes you then do truly appreciate sitting on the bench for a rest :)
12-10-2002, 03:31 PM
Well, I think that MLRH does a good job of not leaving ice hockey behind. My point is exactly that when you take out the physicality and some of the speed of ice hockey, you don't have a very fun sport to watch. I do think that ice hockey fans can take an interest in roller hockey, I just don't think roller hockey can compete with ice hockey.
I've seen a ton of great hockey games in the CRHL. I've also seen a ton of crappy ones. I've seen great NBA games, but in general they are not great. That's my point. It's not that roller hockey games are boring, but on average, they're not that enticing, in my opinion of course.
I agree that finances are a major problem in roller hockey, which to me means there are a couple of things that must happen for anything to develop in the sport.
(1) ONE LEAGUE must be designed for "professional" roller hockey. It does no good to have competing leagues.
-- I don't think this will happen in the near future because (1) there are too many different rule discrepencies that govern roller hockey (checking, fighting, offsides, etc.) and (2) It really doesn't seem like anyone has the patience to start with just a couple of teams and watch a league grow naturally.
(2) People must aspire to play roller hockey instead of ice hockey. Maybe I'm nieve here, but I don't think this happens MUCH outside of Cali., Florida, and Texas. I know that it does happen, just not that much.
(3) Also, and this is minor, roller hockey needs pucks that stay flat on the surface. Just my opinion.
The one thing that ice hockey has that roller hockey will never have is the ability to stop and turn on a dime. This is what makes ice hockey "faster." I realize people can turn quickly, but the ratio of falling to stopping is not great.
Anyway, it doesn't really matter, I just wanted to back up my points a little.
12-10-2002, 03:48 PM
I agree one league and nly one league..unless say piha becomes a minorleagues such as the ahl is.
And yes roller hockey does need pucks to stay flat!! especially in the cold. The pucks get harder and bounce like crazy.
You are correct that there aren't very many people who aspire to play just roller hockey. But that may change you never know. Hopefully it does. Hockey is my love not one in particular and both are a blast to play.
12-10-2002, 03:50 PM
yes we can! the rules changes the NHL has made to a more wide open "roller hockey style" game has not helped inline at all.
12-10-2002, 03:51 PM
12-10-2002, 03:57 PM
Nothing the NHL could do in its game could help inline hockey. The only thing they could do is to promote the game as like the NBA did with the WNBA (even though it did little good.)
12-10-2002, 04:01 PM
I agree with you about the boredom of the NHL this season (I have felt like falling asleep during a few games) but if you notice the NHL is trying to open up the offense game. Super Mario is a perfect example of benefiting from the new rules. I think they are trying to get back to the times of the NHL in the 80's when like 15 players would have a 100 points.
12-10-2002, 04:09 PM
>>"(1) ONE LEAGUE must be designed for "professional" roller hockey. It does no good to have competing leagues."<<
Well, the whole "ONE" thing isn't just limited to pro leagues. I mean, we have USARS and USAHIL trying to be the leader of the sport nationally, various tournament series competing against each other, and even the CRHL fragmented itself with Premier and Competitive. The problems with the many faces is no organized rule set, no real approved method of certifying and appointing good officials, etc. Basically, the things that USA Hockey is good at providing for ice hockey, we have trouble getting... stability, support.
Boil it down though, man. Out side of CRHL, this is a business. Someone is spending money in the hopes of making some back. Granted, some aren't making much, but some really are cleaning up, no doubt. What interest do they have in merging with other people? Just more hands in the pot, more voices to deal with. It would take people to really put aside personal grudges and their pocketbooks, and doing what's right for the sport in the long run. And, additionally, it would take all of us to express our unity and push their hands a little too.
>>"(2) It really doesn't seem like anyone has the patience to start with just a couple of teams and watch a league grow naturally."<<
Whoa. I think that's what MLRH is trying to do, especially now after becoming stable on the East Coast, they're taking a big stab at getting something going out in Cali [Granted, they really need to address the fact that there's four teams in the state of New Jersey, and New Jersey doesn't have four big cities larger than my thumb!].
12-10-2002, 04:12 PM
I really got to hand it to the MLRH for trying to expand out to the westcoast. Besides the 4 teams in NJ they seem to be going at getting roller hockey profesional in the most logical way of all the leagues.
12-11-2002, 03:32 PM
I'm not saying the NHL could help it. Although they did try a little with Breakout and NHL Rules. But hurting is possible and I think thats what they did. Actually the NBA did help the WNBA by having the shooting contest where teams of 1 NBA player and 1 WNBA player played against each other, It was at the all-star game i believe.
12-11-2002, 03:46 PM
I also don't belive that the NHL could help roller hockey significantly. But they defiently could hurt the game. Also on a sidenote I watched the shootout with the mixed "teams" of nba and wnba players, and really has anyone turned on a wnba game and watch it to completion since watching that event, I know I haven't.
12-11-2002, 04:57 PM
I've turned a few WNBA games off, that's for sure ;)
12-11-2002, 08:30 PM
Yeah I can barely watch the NBA, usually i just wait for the highlights no sportscenter. I don't know about anyone else but I just want watch womens sports. Not that they are boring, but the games are a slower pace and it drives me nuts!
12-12-2002, 05:00 PM
As Someone who has played Roller Hockey for 8 years and made the switch to Ice Hockey 2 years ago this is what i have noticed.
Ice Hockey is requires alot more skill then Roller Hockey for a number of reasons.
Ice Hockey is a faster game, for the simple reason that you are able to skate faster, stop quicker and make sharper turns on ice, this makes the game alot faster. another thing that makes ice hockey faster is the fact that the puck moves quicker on ice. also with the the thought that you could be hit at any tiime you have to play heads up hockey (something most inline players dont learn) and make quicker decissions with the puck. what makes roller such an offensive game is not that it is faster but that its so hard to play defense in roller hockey since a defensive player cant stop on a dime and turn as quickly, making it easier for an ofensive player to skate by him. also goalies are in a dis-advantage since you cant skate from side to side the way you do on ice.
also with only 4 players aside there is so much space which gives alot of time to make decissions which slows the game down.
after playing on Ice roller seemed like a piece of cake, i think alot of players who choose roller over ice do so because roller is easier.
12-12-2002, 06:09 PM
I've played both and continue to play both. And in my opinion they are equally challenging. They are different kinds if games, and you have to learn how to adapt to both. But I wouldn't say one was easier than the other.
12-12-2002, 07:04 PM
Just a thought - the rolling resistance for roller blades versus ice skates maybe about 1/3- this also may explain the aerobic differences
Dont' forget that most roller hockey is non contact(except major league) - so you save a lot of energy not having to stop quickly to avoid hits, as well as not being hit - which can take away a lot of energy(the hits), plus the physical struggles on the boards are not as intense as ice - simply because of how most games are called by the refs.
Good thought on NJ and maybe this should be extended. Not because there are not enough major cities only but because the talent pool is not deep enough to field 4 teams who can be competitive with some of the "stacked" teams. If there were only say 2 teams in NJ, 2 from NE (as there are now, 2 teams from Pa. and 2 teams from Virginia/Maryland, then the fan bases would be less dilute, and the competition levels raised. This would also allow the developmental league - as intended (AA) to grow players and skills on a more local basis. Maybe the AAA teams could then find larger arenas to play in and even start to draw enough fans to talk about financial viability - actually becoming a true "PRO" league.
12-13-2002, 11:47 PM
uuummm NO if u play against top level roller hockey u wouldnt say that at all and i've played against junior A,B midget AAA players and i've spanked them all and i dont even play ice i played for like a half of a year for like once a week. and u can stop on the dime in roller it just takes skill.
12-13-2002, 11:53 PM
for get the nba i love to watch that And 1 team they r soo good..
12-16-2002, 03:27 PM
12-16-2002, 03:33 PM
I agree, especially about that heads up hockey thing. There have been many times I have wanted to line up one of those hot dog forwards who comes through the middle with his head up his ass, oh wait, I do. :)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.