Book review about sport journalism
Jimbo-Weed
EAC955NBANBBRevisedWeek3.docEAC 955 NBA NBB Week 3
Violence in Sports
INCLUDEPICTURE "http://answers.bettor.com/images/Articles/thumbs/extralarge/Vancouver-Canucks-loses-Aaron-Rome-for-Stanley-Cup-Finals-after-a-hit-on-Boston-Bruins-Nathan-Horton-74493.jpg" \* MERGEFORMATINET
Introduction
Let’s face it, most of us like our violence.
The majority of us enjoy watching gore-filled movies and playing violent video games. Seeing two really big guys smash into each other gives many of us adrenaline rushes. Watching race car drivers do high risk turns at rocket like speeds is exciting- as is the possibility of seeing a crash. A number of you live to see two men pound each other out in a cage match. Others, would love to be caught in a mass crowd where you can smash store windows and raise all kinds of havoc- especially when you know that the odds of getting caught are slim to none.
But what about the “victims” of this violence? The athletes who suffer permanent injuries from head traumas, permanent addiction to pain killers or lost incomes due to career ending injuries?
What does our love of violence say about us? Is it a sign of moral collapse like ancient Rome? Or is it just a reflection of the human condition? That is, this is who we are and always have been? We gravitate to violence like moths to a flame? It’s in our DNA?
In this online lecture, we will examine a variety of issues related to violence in sports- with a particular emphasis on fighting in hockey, fan hooliganism and serious sports injuries such as concussions. We will begin by analyzing a few working definitions and then apply them with respect to fighting in hockey.
The National Hockey League is the only professional sports league that allows its players to drop their gloves and go at it. Why are the other leagues- including the very violent National Football League opposed to the use of fisticuffs?
Is fighting barbaric? Or is it a “necessary” component of this very aggressive game? We will examine the arguments both for and against a total ban.
And finally, we will discuss how many of the issues associated with sports violence may ultimate be resolved by the courts through class action law suits.
Learning Outcomes
By the end of this unit, you will be able to:
· Articulate the major theories explaining violence in sports.
· Better articulate your position on whether fighting should be banned in hockey.
· Understand the main causes of fan hooliganism and articulate your position on suggested measures undertaken to control it.
· Understand how class action law suits are dramatically changing the way sports will be played. And,
· Continue to see if any reasonable connections can be made between this lecture and the books you have chosen for the book review assignment.
Glossary
· Nature vs. Nurture Debate
· Instrumental Aggression
· Reactive Aggression
· Biological Theory
· Psychological Theory
· Social Learning Theory
· Hooliganism
· De-Individuation
· Desensitization
· Post Modernism
· Class Action Law Suits
This is just another reminder, if you see words that are capitalized, in big letters, have been bolded, coloured, underlined, or highlighted, I am simply trying to emphasize something. I’m not being angry or shouting at you. Remember, I don’t have the luxury of teaching before you in a traditional classroom. So I have to work with what I have and really, it’s just accented words, emojis, videos and website links. Fight your natural instincts here when it comes to what you are used to with texting. SAYING THIS does not mean SAYING THIS!!!! Get it? (
Please Watch The Following Videos
Michael Liambas Hit On Ben Fanelli
In this unit, we will be discussing violence in sport. The following video clip will help introduce this topic through the controversial hit by then 20 year old Erie Otters forward Michael Liambas on 16 year old Kitchener Rangers rookie defenseman Ben Fanelli on October 31st, 2009. Fanelli suffered a cracked skull and broken orbital bone and was left in critical condition.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Csu27WEjN54&feature=related
In late November of 2009, he was released from hospital. He now has a giant scar running down his right eye due to having his skull cracked and broken orbital bone. Fanelli’s recovery was slow but by 2011, he was back as a regular with the Kitchener Rangers. Unfortunately, though, he was never the same player and his playing career ended.
Fanelli co-founded the charitable organization, Head Strong: Fanelli 4 Brain Injury Awareness which provides support to athletes suffering from brain injuries.
Vancouver Riots: Make Love And War?
The following video is a CNN report concerning the post Stanley Cup final riots that took place in Vancouver in June of 2011. These riots put a black eye on this beautiful and safe city. For those of you interested, you may want to consider offering your own perspectives on this matter- on the discussion board.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Yr_8EaAGKU
Todd Bertuzzi’s Life Altering Hit On Steve Moore
Then there’s the infamous Todd Bertuzzi retaliatory cheap shot on March 8, 2004 on Steve Moore. Moore’s promising career ended after this brutal hit. This clip also contains a few other brutal hits from the past. A $40M lawsuit by Moore waged for over a decade. A secret settlement was agreed upon in late August of 201, just a few weeks before going on trial.
After the settlement, Moore told SportsNet,
"I can’t recover my career, the experience of living out my dream from the time I was two and half years old of playing in the NHL."
Bertuzzi played for an additional 10 years. Here is the hit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yxMbWlnWV8
If you have time, check out the CBC’s Top Ten list on Hockey Violence Low Lights at: http://www.cbc.ca/sports/columns/top10/hockey_lowlights.html
Zedno Chara “Unintentially” Hits Max Pacioretty
7 years later, on the same date as the Bertuzzi-Moore incident, Boston Bruin’s defenseman Zdeno Chara nearly killed Max Pacioretty with the following check: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJh3kKV3gMI&feature=related
Whatever your opinion may be of this brutal hit on Montreal Canadien Max Pacioretty, there is no denying that this was a watershed moment for hockey and hits to player’s heads. Was this suspension worthy? The NHL said no. What do you say? Feel free to do so on our discussion board. Pacioretty suffered broken vertebrae in his neck. According to doctors, had one of them cracked just 1 additional millimetre, he would have been permanently paralyzed. One more millimetre, and he would have died.
Zidane Headbutts Materazzi
Who could forget the infamous head butt that Zinedine Zidane gave to Marco Materazzi during the 2006 World Cup of Soccer Final. In a single moment, Zidane fell from being a World Cup hero to a World Cup zero. You have to wonder if France would have won this game had Zidane kept his cool from Materazzi’s taunts. As the game announcer stated, “the pictures tell the story.” http://youtube.com/watch?v=zAjWi663kXc
Imitating Wrestlers Is A Bad Idea
This next video shows how stupid it is to try to imitate wrestling moves. I want to warn you that there is swearing here and the injury suffered is real. There is a reason why WWE repeatedly shows disclaimers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45OZqbu-y3I
England vs. Ireland 1995
On February 15th, 1995 Ireland was leading England in a soccer match by the score of 1-0. English fans reacted by rioting. 50 people were injured. I think the scene that really caught my attention was the look of a frightened kid watching all of the mayhem. This video will also help introduce us to the many issues associated with violence in sport. http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-8809859091462752756&q=fan+hooliganism
Pacers-Pistons Brawl
Who could forget the infamous game between the Indiana Pacers and Detroit Pistons back on November 19th, 2004 in which Pacer Forward Ron Artest went on a rampage. Again, the final scene of a frightened kid remains permanently stuck in my mind.
If your computer can’t process online video, simply read the text portion of this online lecture.
If you have time, check out the CBC’s “Fans vs Athletes. Ten Ugly Incidents” involving fans and athletes at: http://www.cbc.ca/sports/columns/top10/fan_violence.html
Duck vs. Cougar
I’ve got to end off here with something funny otherwise we’ll go crazy over this topic. Ladies and gentlemen, let me introduce to you the best fleecy bare-knuckle match involving team mascots ever.
I bring to you Duck vs. Cougar: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkbKjtuNJhQ
Don’t ask me why, but I just love the Wrestle Mania style taunting hand movements here.
If you know of any other links that would be appropriate for this unit, please forward them to me by e-mail. I would be most appreciative.
Working Definitions
Before we can debate the issue of violence in sports, we need some working definitions. Ismat Abdal-Haqq, wrote a paper entitled, “Violence in Sports.” Abdal-Haqq cites three major theories that seek to explain violent aggression in sports. In many ways, these theories reside within age old “nature” versus “nurture” debate. That is, how much of violence is a “natural” element in us and how much is the result of our “environmental” conditioning? Alternatively though, one might want to ask how much this violence is the result of what a league may deem “permissible behaviour?”
The three main theories on aggression in sports are:
1. Biological Theory
2. Psychology Theory and
3. Social Learning Theory.
These theories can be used to explain why fighting exists in hockey- but as you will soon see, this issue is far too complex to be accounted by any one single theory.
Biological Theory
This theory sees violence or aggression in sports as a socially acceptable way to discharge built-up aggression. It acts like a “safety valve.” That is, it keeps tempers under control. It is a known fact that people with higher testosterone levels tend to be more temperamental. Testosterone levels tend to drop as one ages. This is one explanation as to why violent crime drops dramatically among 50 year olds and up. So biology can be a factor in sports aggression.
If this theory is applied to hockey, fighting allows teams to “discharge” their tempers by allowing two players to “go at one another.” Athletes who ascribe to Biology Theory argue that “they can’t help it.” It’s in their “nature.”
This makes sense. Right? However, if fighting is a necessary safety valve that’s inherently in our nature, then why do football players seldom get into fights despite the equally aggressive features of their sport? Do they have greater self-control of their “nature?” Or is it simply more prohibitive to throw a punch at a player wearing armour like equipment in football?
Also, what happens to the player that “loses” a fight? Does this not add more fuel to the fire for his team? Professional sports are played by professional players. This means that the vast majority are highly disciplined individuals. If they can’t control their biological urges and take on untimely penalties, they put their teams at risk of losing games.
Biological Theory therefore has a few holes in it. At the same time, some athletes may have many really good traits but are weak in the area of controlling their tempers. They may be able to score tons of points or do many great things and as a result, are kept on their rosters. That is, they do more good things then their occasional “brain cramp” biologically driven actions. If you were looking for an explanation out of 100% for sports violence, I would say that Biological Theory represents 5-7% of the incidents that we see in arenas and stadiums.
Psychological Theory
This theory argues that aggression is caused by frustration. It is situational and tends to result when one's efforts to reach a particular goal are blocked.
In sports, frustration can be caused through a variety of means such as questionable calls by officials, the failure of a team to make a particular play, injuries that impede an athlete’s ability to participate in a match, heckling from spectators, or taunts by coaches or players.
Hockey, for example, is a fast paced game in which numerous frustrating situations happen all the time. Applying this theory, we can see how two players might “lose it” if they are psychologically pushed to the brink.
Teams that ascribe to this theory have “agitators” on their rosters so as to throw opposing star players “off of their game;” provoke others into fights; or incite “stupid penalties.”
Frustration can also come from the NHL’s notorious record for providing inconsistent judgments on players who commit fouls. One player might receive a seven game suspension while another merely two games for an equally violent offence. This inconsistency promotes “vigilantism.”
Players, coaches and general managers have stated off the record that if the league will not enforce its rules then they will through vigilante style “justice.”
Again, though, in other hockey leagues where fighting has been banned; many of these same “situational” scenarios exist. And, yet, players do not engage in fighting with remotely the same frequency. Likewise, as the NHL has moved away from fighting to a speed oriented game, we have seen a similar pattern. Frustration alone, then, cannot be a factor that determines whether two players will fight or not.
Social Learning Theory
This theory argues that aggressive behavior is learnt socially through modeling and reinforced by rewards and punishments. Young athletes take sports heroes as role models and imitate their behaviour- good and bad. Parents, coaches and team mates are also models who may demonstrate support for an aggressive style of play.
Those who ascribe to Social Theory argue that a player who watches his heroes fight, is more prone to emulate this behaviour when he enters the big leagues. Those who disagree with this theory counter that these young players are not “social robots.” Mere observation is not enough to make someone drop his or her gloves and fight. If this were true, then everyone there should be killing each other. After all, the Japanese watch more violent programming per capita than any other nation on the planet and yet, their murder rate is incredibly low. The link involving violent behaviour and observation therefore, is not ironclad.
Most social scientist will acknowledge that violent behaviour is also heavily influenced by other important factors such as family upbringing, peer influences, availability of social support groups and services, socio economic status and drug/alcohol usage- just to name a few.
Which of These Theories Applies to Fighting in Hockey?
Would it be fair to say, that all three theories apply in some measure? To a certain degree yes-but like most sociological issues, the answers here are not entirely clear-cut.
Where Does Self-Restraint Fit Into These Theories?
How often do players fight with referees? If anyone can cause repeated frustration over the course of a season, it would have to be an official. How many “bad calls” do they make for each team on any given week? At least 3-5. If fighting is triggered by situational or “environmental” causes, then how does one explain the lack of violence meted-out at referees?
In addition, why is there so little fighting during the NHL playoffs or Olympic competitions? Wouldn’t these theories apply during “important” competitions where so much is riding on the results? When restraint is necessary, players clearly possess it in bushels.
Some would argue that restraint can be lost for a fraction of a second and result in near deadly consequences. Several years ago, then minor league Montreal Canadien prospect Alex Perezhogin (who had only a handful of penalty minutes all season), was knocked down to the ice by a cheap shot. He immediately jumped back up and swung his stick in baseball bat like matter at Cleveland Baron’s Garrett Stafford who fell to the ice and went into convulsions. Fortunately for Stafford, no serious long term damage resulted. It’s amazing how quickly a person not known for violence can snap. I’m not sure which of the theories discussed above would best apply her. What do you think?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=rwPfuLnYwBc
The Significance of “Consequences” in Fighting
How much of violence is simply the result of what is allowed? In U.S. college or European hockey, fighting is banned outright. In these leagues, if you fight, you get an automatic game misconduct. If you do this on repeated occasions, you are banned from competition. In other words, there are huge consequences for this type of behaviour and players seem to practice enormous self-restraint in abiding by the rules.
There is an expression, “give an inch and they’ll take a yard.” For hockey players, if a league allows players to slightly “push” a referee then they will gain a new foothold into what is permissible in terms of self-restraint. From a “push” they will likely move to a “shove.” And from a “shove” they just might move to a…
The NHL has generally been quite vigilant in the protection of its referees. Players know that there are huge consequences if they misbehave- just in the same way that you and I know better to not scream and yell at our boss no matter how much we want to lose it. How much of our “inherent” aggression then is related to what is “socially permissible?”
What Purpose Does Fighting Serve For The NHL?
Attracts Fans?
Some argue fighting attracts fans who enjoy a good “scrap” or two. Hockey is a business. The game of professional hockey is an “entertainment product” and those who run it are providing their patrons with a service that they want. It gives this game an unruly “edge” that helps differentiate it from the other major league sports such as football, baseball and basketball.
Adds Spice To A Bland Product?
Others feel that fighting “spices-up” generally bland contests. Let’s face it; hockey has become a very dull sport to watch. Many people only tune in during the last 5 minutes of games because nothing really happens in the first 2-2 ½ hours.
There are many reasons for this. To begin with, there are way too many games played per season. Why? Because the NHL is a gate, rather than television revenue driven league. Second, over-expansion has significantly watered-down league talent. The pool of hockey players worldwide to draw from is nowhere near that of the number of baseball, basketball, football or soccer players plying their trade. For example, for every McDavid, there are 40 Messi counterparts. On top of this, are the NHL’s talent crushing defensive strategies implemented by coaches. Who would have imagined in the 1980s that the next generation of star players would score 30-40 goals a year?! And thanks to parity initiatives such as salary caps, each team can now only afford to have 2-3 of these types of scorers on their rosters- supplemented by very green junior hockey drafted prospects.
Put all these factors together and you can see why a good fight appeals to hockey fans. It is like a shot of java. It electrifies those in attendance or watching on TV.
Energizes Players?
Many players argue that a fight “energizes” both fans and teams during boring contests. Fighting also has the potential to change the “tempo” of a game. I thought that these guys were professionals. A fact is a fact though, sometimes, a timely fight can motivate a team to greater heights.
It Brings Justice?
More often then not, the NHL goes very soft on brutal hits to players. Referees tend to turn a blind eye to infractions- especially during the playoffs because they “do not want to affect the outcomes of games.”
With no justice to be found, players need to resort to vigilantism.
This is probably, the strongest argument in support of fighting. There seems to be 3 seasons in the NHL. The first (right up to January) has the referees calling all infractions. The second, January to April is when they start to loosen-up on their calls as teams are vying for the playoffs and the refs do not want to be the deciding factors in terms of who gets in and who doesn’t. Then there are the playoffs- especially the first two rounds where the rules are BARELY enforced and savagery takes place. This is where shoulders are popped, hands are broken through deliberate slashes and the heads of star players get concussed with little to no league punishments.
The simple solution is for the NHL is to actually enforce its rules. But why cloud the issue with logic? ;-)
Enforce The Rules On Rats
At the very least, the National Hockey League needs to go after its agitators. That is, the rats/pests who goad players to do stupid things.
As Globe and Mail columnist, Tony Keller argues,
“Remember how the NHL reacted when Sean Avery decided to screen an opposing goalie by facing him while waving his stick in the air? The league immediately made that a penalty. What happened? The practice stopped. Calling penalties is an amazing deterrent. And nobody had to rip Mr. Avery a new one.” (Keller, “Want to end”)
Keller tries to compare the NHL’s rule enforcement with the NBA’s. He argues that “stars like Stephen Curry are not given face washes by opposing players, because it’s a foul. In the NBA, the enforcer is not a teammate. It’s the referee.” (Keller, “Want to end”)
Give the refs more power to punish these annoying idiots and the need for fighting will rapidly decrease. Just make sure that this happens not only in the regular season but in the playoffs as well.
Repercussions
Another important aspect of fighting is its repercussions. What happens when a player gets seriously injured as a result of engaging in a fight? Should any player who deliberately injures another be given a suspension that lasts the length that the other player is out of the line up? Or is this unreasonable since the fight was the result of two players who agreed to fight in a game that allows it to take place?
In recent years, the police have begun to intervene on this matter. Is this appropriate? When, if ever, would it be right for the police to press charges related to a hockey fight or a vicious life threatening hit?
Is it fair to say that if two drunks are beating each other up in a bar that this would constitute grounds for police intervention? Why then, shouldn’t the law step in when two sober men are trying to punch each other out?
What about extreme fighting incidents such as the vicious stick attack Marty McSorely levelled on Donald Brashear back in April of 2000? Was it appropriate that the police charged McSorely for assault and battery? Did McSorely deserve a longer jail sentence than the one that he received? Check out the hit for yourself at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnP18StCoHA
What about the infamous Todd Bertuzzi incident in which he nearly paralyzed Steve Moore in May of 2004? Should Bertuzzi have been charged or were the circumstances different here? Or Zdeno Chara’s hit on Max Pacioretty?
The NHL Concussion Lawsuit And The End Of Fighting?
The NHL has dramatically changed since I first started teaching this course. There was a time that every team’s 4th line consisted of unskilled “goons” or “enforcers” whose only job was to beat-up players on opposing teams. Then the law suits starting coming in from grieving widows or former players suffering from severe brain trauma. Within a few years, the NHL changed its game to a speed oriented European/NCAA style. Fights are very rare now.
In general, then, law suits are pushing the NHL and other contact sports leagues away from the “bigger is better” mantra. “Speed and skill” is where such sports seem to be heading.
There is no doubt in my mind that legal challenges by former players are forcing this sport to phase out fighting. It is quite possible that you might be telling your children, definitely your grandchildren, about the times when players used to beat up one another whenever they were annoyed and the NHL promoted it. It will be equally as strange as when I tell my kids and my students about how smoking was allowed in airplanes (at least ¾ of the passengers smoked). In my first job in the office that I worked, most staff members lit up. There was no need for an outdoor smoke break. There were even teachers in public schools who smoked right in front of us and we did not view any of this as being weird.
I know that the concept of losing fighting in hockey bothers many of you. You want to “Make Hockey Violent Again.” Lawsuits though, are getting in the way.
Injuries Are VERY Costly
There are also huge financial costs. Back in December of 2011, someone on CBC’s Hockey Night In Canada, added-up all of the salaries of players on the injured reserve list due to violent incidents. League owners had 87 million of their dollars either sitting-out games or in hospital beds.
One has to wonder if team General Managers should stock-up their rosters with a bunch of large sized second line players. That is, such players will likely not be as targeted by cheap shot artists as star ones. After all, what’s the point of having a star laden roster if there are very good odds that your stars will not be playing due to injuries brought on by dirty plays?
As I said above, this makes as much sense as buying Royal Dalton china for a frat house.
If you are interested in reading articles written by NHL fighters on this topic, then visit the Players’ Tribune.
Here is what Brandon Prust had to say:
http://www.theplayerstribune.com/why-we-fight/
Here’s an article by John Scott:
http://www.theplayerstribune.com/a-guy-like-me/
Despite the use of salty language here, the two provide some unique insights concerning fighting in hockey.
Improved Equipment Leads to More Aggression
Another issue related to violence in sports concerns the influence that improved player equipment has had in the promotion of aggressive behaviour. In football, the helmet with its incredible shock absorbing padding and steel-like exterior shell has literally become a weapon used by 300-400lb players who charge at one other with enormous force- often with the intent to injure.
One can also argue that these advances in protective equipment have made players feel less vulnerable and thus, less restrained in terms of taking liberties on others. They must feel like car-jacking teenagers who smash vehicles against walls to feel impact with air bags.
Hockey players accelerate at incredibly fast speeds. In full flight, top-end NHLers go as fast as you and I can on a bike going down a big hill. Now basic physics states that: Force = Mass times Acceleration. This means that a 6:3, 230lb player hockey player using today’s state of the art skates charging at another at full speed will inflict a tremendous amount of force- a lot more than his equivalent from the 1950’s who was just 5:10 and weighed 175 lbs.
Physics, likewise, explains the degree of energy produced when a monster sized football player hits another- especially in the head area. The energy of impact concentrates in one spot. What do I mean by this? Think high heels for a second. Not that way! ( When they strike the ground, they do so with about 1,500 pounds of pressure. That’s why hard wood floors get brutalized by these fashion statements. The energy of impact when concentrated on such tiny points is immense- even by those who weigh 115lbs. That’s what concentrated energy can do. The helmet in football has become a modern day battering ram. And a helmet to helmet hit affects both players.
Now, yes, the helmets are super strong (so no skulls are crushed) and are increasingly being designed to dissipate the impact; but the reality is, inside these helmets is a skull that houses a very delicate brain floating in fluid that has not be designed to snap about. The same can be said about ligaments. Sure, shoulder, elbow and knee pads provide great protection but they do nothing in terms of holding ligaments together. Humans were simply not designed for the pivoting and displaced energy from hits received in most competitive sports.
To paraphrase orthopedic surgeon Dr. Robert Ray, who takes care of superstar athletes,
“If God had wanted people to play organized sports, He would have created stronger ligaments.”
Did you know that, “On the line contact between opposing players produces impacts 20 to 30 times the force of gravity...Statistics show a player getting blindsided and not bracing himself gets 100 Gs.” (Maki, “Life expectancy of) The average G-force experienced by military fighter pilots is 9 G's.
What are the results of repeated 100G’s of energy on someone’s head? According to a University of North Carolina study,
“Repeatedly concussed National Football League players had five times the rate of mild cognitive impairment (pre-Alzheimer’s) than the average population,” while “retired NFL players suffer from Alzheimer’s disease at a 37-per-cent higher rate than average.” (Maki, “Life expectancy of)
Even more disturbing were findings “that the average life expectancy for all pro football players, including all positions and backgrounds, is 55. Several insurance carriers say it is 51 years.” (Maki, “Life expectancy of)
A growing number of studies are finding from donated brains of 50 something year old dead football and hockey players resemble those of senior citizens in their late 80s and 90s.
Back in September of 2010, 21 year old Penn State football captain Owen Thomas committed suicide. After conducting a study on his brain, doctors found that as a result of multiple head traumas, it had deteriorated to that of an 80 year old with dementia. Some people are more vulnerable to brain injuries than others. Sadly, Thomas was one such example.
Interestingly, studies are also pointing to repeated concussion-like trauma in the supposedly more genteel sport of soccer. There is a reason goalies wear padded gloves in this sport. If they don’t, their palms will welt-up with bruises. Now if such hard shots smack you on the head enough times- especially for young people whose brains are still developing- the potential dangers here can be quite significant. Think of the long term consequences on society. After all, this is a sport played by several billion people.
According to recent studies from McGill University in Montreal, those who are at greatest risk are females. They have a 64% higher risk of suffering a concussion than males. Interestingly, the longer the neck of a girl or woman, the greater the odds of her being vulnerable to getting a concussion.
The “T Train”
I’m not sure where to put this next item. It goes well with the theme concerning the degree that athletes are willing to mask the pain they receive from their violent sports. It could also fit nicely with my lecture on Performance Enhancing Drugs (PEDs). I’ll let you decide. For now, I’ll keep it here.
Back in 2016, Baltimore Raven Eugene Monroe, wrote a very informative column for the Players Tribune website. One thing that really stuck with me was the degree that players are drugged-up before games in order to ignore pain.
Monroe described the line up for the painkiller Toradol (a super strong Advil/Tylenol like medicine) as the “T Train.”
As he stated, this is where “a bunch of really large guys wait to pull their pants down to get shot in the butt with Toradol.” (Monroe, “Getting off the”)
This extremely powerful pain killer blocks-out the pain and reduces inflammation. According to Monroe, “some guys don’t feel any pain for two days.” Toradol temporarily masks injury. The problem is, according to Monroe, “if something really serious has happened to you, you don’t know it. You feel nothing, so you do nothing.”
For example,
“When I [Monroe] was playing college ball at Virginia, I tore my shoulder up in a game against UConn in 2007. I was blocking Dan Davis, a defensive tackle who had been my high school teammate in Plainfield, N.J. At some point in the game I had hit Dan and felt something shift in my shoulder — but there was no immediate pain. Why would there be? I had gotten a T-shot before kickoff.
The team doctors examined my battered shoulder on the sideline. My labrum was destroyed. I played the rest of the year while being treated with a combination of pharmaceuticals and physical therapy. When the season was over, my labrum was surgically repaired,” said Monroe.
As he sees it,
“Football is pain. There’s no way around it, and by no means am I complaining; it’s the sport I love. But make no mistake about it: For 60 minutes every Sunday, millions of fans are watching men in helmets and pads literally put their bodies on the line for the game.” (Monroe, “Getting off the”)
So, it’s not just improved equipment but it’s also improved pain management that is leading to more violent hits on players.
A Helmet Safety Innovation?
Shield-X Technology, a Vancouver tech company in partnership with Simon Fraser University has developed a decal product called BrainShield that are placed on football helmets to reduce the force of impact that normally twists the head when struck during games and practices. The material used significantly reduces the friction when someone takes a head-on-head blow. The opponent’s helmet slides off faster. This in turn, means that the head twists less causing a lower jolt of the brain and fluids inside the player’s head. I wonder if this same technology can be used for knee and elbow pads? That is, if a knee on knee hit happens, perhaps both player’s knees would slide away from each other faster thus reduce their impact. Sorry, this is just me thinking out loud.
I also wonder if future nano technologies might create ways of absorbing and then transferring the energies of impacts away from the body? Think of this like a lightning rod analogy where the energy is diverted to the ground. For those of you unfamiliar, nanoscience involves atomic sized machines doing a variety of tasks. Some can go into your body and splice away bad genes or attack viruses. Some scientists are using this technology to make mind bogglingly fast computer processers. Others can be used to create super strong materials.
Some nanofibres- no larger than a hair’s width, are stronger than one inch steel cables. I wonder if someone will create “smart” undergarments that tense up upon impact to prevent ligament tears? They will be like “invisible airbags” for athletes.
So what should the NHL do? It should impose a zero tolerance policy on head shot- with virtually no discretion room for referees. Specifically, it should be similar to the one that it uses when a player draws blood from a stick- though I would go one step further. That is, if a player is hit to the head, then the perpetrator must receive an automatic 5 minute major plus a game ejection
regardless
of intent.
Depending on the severity of the injury, the player who committed the infraction (again, regardless of whether it was by accident or not) will be suspended for the length that the concussed player is out of action plus an additional 5-10 games depending on intent; 5 for accidental and 10 for incidental.
I could go really crazy here and suggest that for next 3 games that the team of the injured player’s plays the club of the one who committed this infraction, each match would start with an automatic 5 minute major penalty assessed against the perpetrator’s squad.
O.K. that’s crazy but it would send a real message to every club that the consequences for playing dirty are that you could suffer three potential losses; which translate into 6 less points at the end of the season. Given the extreme parity of today’s NHL, this likely will amount to making or not making it into the playoffs.
I am not in favour of having a player of equal skill on the opposing team being suspended as he had nothing to do with this incident. The actions of any player on any squad though, impacts the entire team through penalties and as such the three 5 minute majors just spreads out this punishment in a more meaningful way as the price to be paid, especially during the playoffs, where such an infraction would be significant. I know that this is radical but you have to send a very powerful message that you just can’t smash people’s heads. Period.
To keep things honest, the concussed player cannot play for at least one full period and can only be allowed back on the ice if a doctor O.K.'s it. This would prevent faking.
That’s step one. After the incident, I would have independent physicians (appointed by both the league and player’s union) estimate how many games the player will be out of action. If it is 5, or more, the player who caused this to happen will face a minimum 10 game suspension- more if it is a season or career ending injury. I doubt you would find repeating offenders on this get tough policy.
I also believe that the referees should be made more accountable. Have them do post game press conferences where they explain their missed calls or head scratchers? The league should also publish stats in terms of the number of players injured during their watch. If a certain ref has a higher injury count that the league average, maybe it’s due to his poor officiating in terms of keeping players under control.
Of course, better training techniques also need to be incorporated. European soccer is light years ahead in terms of preventing knee and head injuries. Some teams have had a 60% reduction in these areas. What do they know that North American sports leagues in hockey and football don’t? If you’re interested, go on YouTube and type in, “FIFA 11 exercises.” They are quite helpful.
O.K. I know, some of you totally disagree with my assessment of this game and my zero tolerance approach to headshots. That’s what discussion boards are for. If you like, go ahead and hit me with your best shot eh. ;-) I welcome your input. Feel free to let me know what you think.
Food For Thought
Are we becoming a modern Rome with our love of violent sporting events, video games and films? Ten years ago, Extreme Fighting- where the objective is to either force your opponent to surrender by virtually any means- including the breaking of limbs or knocking him unconscious- was an underground movement. It now outdraws hockey in terms of television ratings. Can you name something that shocked you say, 5 years ago, that through desensitization no longer does? What do you think will not shock you 5 years from now?
A Hail “Caesar” Political Pass?
What’s interesting about violence is its appeal and potential for tyrants. Augustus Caesar invented gladiator fights to keep the Roman populace's mind on entertainment rather than his tyranny.
Emperor Nero would later build the Coliseum and continue the practice of throwing Christians to the lions. He kept one-upping the previous emperor's violence. The reason being that the Romans increasingly became “desensitized” to the violence of the contests in the Coliseum. That is, the emperor needed to increase the blood and gore content in order to satiate the desires of the masses. Ultimately, Nero flooded the Coliseum with water and threw in hippos and crocodiles and simultaneously staged full scale “to the death” naval battles within it. Do you think that producers of reality based television are ancestors of Nero? (
Here’s another interesting historical factoid:
In sixth century Byzantium, a riot that broke out involving the supporters of two chariot teams. This riot turned into a revolt when government officers tried to arrest some of the hooligans. 30,000 people died and the emperor was overthrown.
Today, modern day dictators allow their citizens attend sporting contests and as you will see below, allow unruly behaviour to take place in stadiums. They could easily machine gun to death these spectators. They certainly have no qualms about killing their own citizens in order to show them “who’s in-charge.” Perhaps they must believe that allowing hooligan-like behaviour in the stands is a useful safety valve that helps preserve their dictatorships.
Another fascinating area involving sport violence is Hooliganism. The origins of this word can be traced back to 1898 after an Irish man named Patrick Hoolihan (or Hooligan), had killed a London policeman.
The case gained such notoriety that the London press soon coined the expression "hooliganism."
As outlined earlier, hooliganism is not a new phenomenon. It can one trace this anarchistic behaviour to ancient times. And contrary to popular myth, it’s not, and never has been an “English disease.” It is a problem that spans the globe. Just as an interesting note, English newspapers in the 1960s used to complain about Italian supporters, and compared those from England quite favourably.
In extreme instances, spectators in Europe, Latin America and the Middle East have brought to games home made missiles and scores of weaponry. Russian hockey games have gained notoriety for the boisterous and at times riotous behaviour of many of their drunken fans.
There are many theories. This is a very complex issue. Here are but a few.
Some have argued that hooliganism can be traced at the visceral level. That is, there is a sense of awe in destruction in participating in reckless behaviour. For some individuals, there is a drug-like “high” in engaging in hooliganism. If you have ever torn down a wall during renovations, levelled a hard check, tackled an opponent, or smacked down a piñata as a kid, you know the “visceral” “anarchic” pleasure that these actions might evoke. Now throw in some alcohol or drugs, youth rich testosterone, and a sense that there simply are too many of you for the police to control, and the door for a “free for all” becomes wide open.
Few would advocate that hooliganism is “natural” and thus justifiable. People tend to learn violent behaviour through a variety of social reinforcers such as parental influences, peer groups and a society’s permissiveness of aggressive behaviour. Few would argue that this behaviour is genetic in origin. Most believe that it is sociologically based.
Some analysts contend that certain communities place a great emphasis upon the ability to demonstrate “toughness and masculinity.” They are socialised into these norms and values and can gain status is by demonstrating their ability to fight.
But, then again, what about the United States? In this country, its people have intense exposure to media violence, easy access to weapons and munitions, a very high murder rate, a plentiful supply of inexpensive alcohol and drugs, and higher poverty and crime rates. As a result, one would assume that hooliganism would be even more prevalent in this country. And yet, it does not suffer the same problems of hooliganism as many other nations around the globe.
On a national scale, some have argued that it is a result of nationalism gone too far. Some fans take their love of country too seriously and when things turn sour for their team, they lapse into a form of temporary insanity. Let’s also underscore the intense sense of territoriality that many hooligans possess. For people who find it hard to control themselves, this can easily lead to hatred for the opposing team. Their team is THEIR team and must be cheered for with full vigour.
Dunning is certainly right when he argues that religious bigotry and sectarian strife often acts as a catalyst for hooligans. If you ever enter a pub in Scotland and would like to see some heated words exchanged- if not more, then ask a patron if he is either a Celtics or Rangers fan.
Others argue that hooliganism is the result of frustrated citizens venting-out their lack of political power. During the heydays of British soccer hooliganism in the 1980’s, there were enormous dislocations within this society. Through the competitive pressures of globalization, free trade policies, and Thatcherism, factories closed at alarming rates. Many unskilled workers were found either unemployed or underemployed with very little to do. They were also “threatened” by their country’s significant push towards multiculturalism. Indeed, it was around this period that the neo-Nazi movement was making dangerous inroads into the United Kingdom.
We need to keep in mind that young people of the 1980’s were raised under the intense influence of post World War II nationalism which at times bordered on jingoism. Simultaneously, institutions such as the Church of England- which in the past played a role controlling social tensions- was quickly collapsing in terms of its influence and perceived relevance. Is it any wonder that angriest music ever to come out of the U.K.- punk rock- emerged during this era?
When you are bitter and have little to do, a door to potential trouble tends to open wide. In many respects, being a member of a group of fans supporting a soccer club became the new “religion” for many of these individuals. They could pin their identities on the successes or failure of their favourite teams. They could also find some commonality in their embittered and delusional lives.
Hooliganism was an expression by some of their pent-up anger to changes that took place within Britain’s society. In similar ways, this anger finds itself expressed in repressive cultures. As mentioned earlier, rioting at soccer stadiums is common place in some very totalitarian regimes. Why dictatorships allow it to happen is open to considerable speculation. One theory might be that a stadium is a perfect venue to form a “rebellion” involving mass numbers of people pitted against the local police and army. There are so many fans involved that perhaps some might feel that the odds of being caught and arrested are quite slim. Again, though, this is mere speculation.
Some might also argue the “Fight Club” theory in explaining this behaviour. That is, hooliganism is the result of the “demasculinization” of society. Those who believe in this theory argue that acts of hyper aggression are a means of “expressing manliness” in our post modern society. The theory argues that many males have not had male role models to emulate and instead have gravitated to extreme versions of what constitutes manhood. Hooliganism, is just one of these forms of identity and expression. I think this is a bit of a stretch but I’ll let you decide the validity of this social psychology theory.
An alternative theory explaining the causes of hooliganism come from social conservatives who feel that it is the result of a “decaying society” that has lost its “moral compass.” They feel that our post modernist society in which there are no longer any absolute rights and wrongs is the culprit.
Would a ban in the sale of and possession of alcohol at sporting events control fan violence?
Almost everyone will agree that the sale of alcohol only exasperates the problem of hooliganism. There is nothing more dangerous than a throng of drunken fans who feel invulnerable. Alcohol numbs pain, and it just might make a potential trouble maker more “courageous?!” in terms of taking a few hits from a police officer’s Billie club.
At the same time, in countries where possession of alcohol is very difficult to obtain such as Saudi Arabia or Iran, hooliganism still exists. In addition, there have been surprisingly few documented cases of rioting in the United States from fans who regularly partake in “drunk-fest” tailgate parties at major sporting events. We should also keep in mind that many of these revellers take full liberty in their constitutional right to possess firearms. Indeed, what about New York City on New Year’s Eve with over a million people- many drunk on hand? How many riots have taken place for this event? How many riots have happened during New Orleans’s Mardi Gras arguably the biggest drunk fest on the planet.
Nevertheless, commonsense still dictates that the possession and sale of alcohol at games should be strictly controlled. After all, the best way to stay out of trouble is to stay out of trouble and not add some alcohol into the fire.
The problem with controlling its sale or outright prohibition at sporting events though is that it is a major revenue generator for teams or stadiums. At $6 a draft beer, and approximately 7,000 fans out of a crowd of 20,000 drinking 2-4 suds, a considerable sum of money is made through this revenue stream. The last thing that teams want to do is turn off the taps. Governments that earn revenues through taxes also do not want to see this lucrative cash cow go.
Author Bill Buford, wrote a book entitled, Among The Thugs. It is a first hand account of soccer hooliganism in the UK. Over eight years Buford was involved in numerous fights with both rival supporters and police. Here’s what he had to say on this matter,
“Why do young males riot every Saturday? They do it for the same reason that another generation drank too much, or smoked dope, or took hallucinogenic drugs, or behaved badly or rebelliously. Violence is their antisocial kick, their mind-altering experience, an adrenaline-induced euphoria that might be all the more powerful because it is generated by the body itself, with, I was convinced, many of the same addictive qualities that characterize synthetically-produced drugs.” (Among The Thugs, Bulford)
“[Vancouver] Canucks’ fans didn’t smash windows and turn over cars because they loved their team and were mad about having their moment ruined. They did it for the same reason fans in arenas yell at players words they’d never even whisper to anyone else; why bloggers scream at the world; why David Letterman drops TVs and watermelons from the top of a building to smash on the street below. Because they can .. for us the sound of breaking glass and [the] heat of blazing cars is interesting, forbidden fun. And we can hide – from ourselves and others – in the moment and amid the thousands around us from any consequences.” (Dryden, “Riots driven by”)
This quote leads to my next point.
Bring it Terry:
How many people trash their home when their team loses? Not many. In a soccer stadium though, things are very different.
· These same people do not have someone at home to tell them to calm down.
· They may be drunk.
· They feel like they are part of an anonymous mass of human beings who can let loose on their morals and go about damaging property that is not their own.
· They may also feel fearless because the odds of a police officer hitting them with a billy club in such a large crowd are very slim.
In social psychology circles, this type of behaviour is classified as de-individuation, which means when in a group, members think as one person lessening self-regulation and the sense of responsibility (Diener).
Different group settings determine how we can behave. In a giant soccer stadium, people are encouraged to lose their individuality and become a part of the mass crowd. Part of this includes screaming their mouths off until their throats go horse and being free to utter obscenities with reckless abandon.
Police officers surround the bus for the Chilean team outside the stadium following the semifinal of the FIFA U-20 World Cup Thursday July 19, 2007 in Toronto.
The way police behave towards hooligans may also be a factor in what might transpire. Some argue that the police have actually inflamed some volatile situations by either abusing or taunting irate fans. Others argue that hooligans in response to the tough measures taken in stadiums now carryout their destructive behavior outside these places where they are less likely to be picked-up by surveillance cameras. Indeed, many try to be one step ahead of the law by using sophisticated technology such as Internet chat rooms, pagers, cell phones and the like to coordinate their activities.
In response, police are now tapping cell phones. This raises some ethical issues related to the privacy of citizens. Did you know that in Canada, the average person walks by 20 surveillance cameras every day? In the United Kingdom, this figure is approximately 200. Should “Big Brother” be watching over us in order to protect us from Hooligans? In the post 9/11 world that we live in, is there any choice?
I have two daughters in rep soccer. One of them plays for a team in which many of the parents are a complete embarrassment to town that I live in. Parents from other communities have a very low regard for us; and quite frankly, I don’t blame them.
These people swear at the ref and sometimes at players- right in front of very young children. They smoke right next to you without even caring if what they are doing is offensive. Some stand right in front of other parents who are sitting down on their chairs and act as if those behind them do not exist.
Others think that it’s O.K. to yell at their kids and undermine what the coach is telling them.
One game, some of these parents got so out of hand, that a 15 year old girl on the opposing team said, “who’s the adult here?” This was after a teammate was viciously pushed to the ground and injured by one of our players and the parents were yelling “faker.”
Yes, this is not fan hooliganism along the lines described above but I seriously wonder why I have my daughter playing this game under this classless atmosphere. Yes, it’s “rep” but it is beyond delusional to think that we are watching future World Cup players here.
There is an expression, a fish stinks from the head on down. If the parents are behaving this way, is it any wonder so many players on our roster get repeated yellow cards? I just wish there were more referees out there with the guts to throw out yellow cards left right and centre to get back control of this supposed beautiful game. If they start taking care of bad behaviour from the get go- both on the field in and the stands. Then the kids might be able to focus on playing soccer.
If this topic interests you, feel free to provide you comments on this issue on the discussion board. I’d like to hear what some of you have experienced on or off the field. Alternatively, you might want to discuss some of the classiest opponents that you have played against- those who have shown great sportsmanship.
Technology is seen as the main panacea (cure all) to control hooliganism. This is understandable considering the fears that many of us have concerning terrorism. One major terrorist strike could lead to the deaths of tens of thousands of individuals.
Advanced policing methods are now being applied to many sporting events including the hiring of "Eye in the Sky" security officials in the press boxes who routinely scan the crowd for possible trouble makers- in the same way that the U.S. Secret Service does when a President visits. Face recognition technology and weapon detectors are being used at entry gates to spot potential trouble makers or terrorists. Undercover, plainclothes officers with hidden communication devices and concealed weaponry are regularly employed at games. Bomb sniffing dogs are also utilized. Visibly armed riot officers mounted on horses let their presence be known at games. And this only scratches the surface in terms of measures currently being used at sporting events.
Zero tolerance measures have been enacted by many stadiums such as the ejection of drunken fans from their facilities who behave in an unruly fashion. Of course, not one stadium is willing to lose its enormous beer revenues.
Other suggestions include penalizing home teams if they provide slack security from their misbehaving fans. If they throw rats onto the floor, the home team receives an automatic technical foul. If a coach or an umpire is attacked, perhaps a game should automatically end with the home team losing. Though the problem with this idea is: what if the “misbehaving fan” was really cheering for the opposing team?
Would Stiffer Jail Sentences Control Fan Hooliganism?
Possibly. The problem is, when a mass of individuals engage in hooliganism, they are literally playing with odds that are highly in their favour. What are the chances that they will be caught when thousands of others are engaged in similar behaviour? Those who do go to jail tend to be bitter angry individuals. Will incarceration rehabilitate them or make them even more dangerous?
This is Expensive, But Safety Costs Money
Ultimately, someone has to pay for a stadium’s security. Invariably, this cost will come through increased ticket prices. Are you willing to pay more to make sure that what is happening abroad does not take place in your own back yard?
The Media’s Role in Spectator Violence
In the early 1980’s, there were documented reports of tabloid newspapers and television stations actually paying hooligans to throw bottles and start fights before their cameras! The Late pop artist Andy Warhol, coined the phrase that “everyone is famous for fifteen minutes.” Many hooligans look at the media attention that they generate as their “Warholian fifteen minutes of fame.” That is, this is about as far as they will ever go in their lives to generate significant public attention. If this is what it takes to get recognition for a brief moment in time, regardless of whether it is positive or negative, they pursue it. Why? Because for once in their very drab lives, people are actually watching/listening.
Here in North America, a tradition was started by the late Howard Cosell
Why Has Hooliganism Been Less Commonplace in North America?
As mentioned earlier, it is reasonable to assume that genetics is not at play. We also know that North America- particularly the United States has garnered a reputation as being a violent culture both through its media products and gun violence. So socialization alone does not appear to explain why hooliganism is less common on in this country.
Perhaps the main reason that North America has not experienced the same degree of hooliganism as found abroad is that unlike Europe, soccer is not the “only game in town.” Yes, Europeans watch other sports- particularly basketball, Formula 1 racing and rugby, but not with the same intensity of soccer.
Fan allegiances in both Canada and the United States are diluted through numerous professional sports leagues that exist- namely hockey, baseball, football, NASCAR, and basketball. As crazy as one may get about his or her team over here, there are plenty of other sports that we are passionate about that simultaneously running. These other sports act as a safety valve for some of this fanaticism. For example, if your Leafs lost at the ACC last night, no problem, the Raptors won one on the road.
Within major European cities you can have as many as three teams per soccer league- all with intense fan followings. And where there are intense followings, you will find intense rivalries.
There are few similar scenarios here in North America- other than in New York, Los Angeles and Chicago and even here, these places are multi-professional sport cities. Imagine though, if the Detroit Red Wings and Montreal Canadians opened-up shop in Toronto? Yikes!
Economics also has a say in this matter.
Professional sports in North America, particularly at the venue arenas and stadiums are targeted for business people. These types of patrons are less inclined to “wrasssle”- especially when wearing a business suits.
Many corporations buy seats to entertain clients. As a general rule of thumb, it is not a good idea to come into a stadium with a client with a concealed circular saw!
For those who attend using their own money, it is hard to imagine that someone who just spent two hundred dollars to see a game would be foolish enough to get ejected in the first period by trying to start a riot.
Let’s also keep in mind the difficulty of buying group clusters of tickets. Rival city fans are less likely challenge local supporters given that they are considerably outnumbered when visiting another stadium.
Summary
The issues of violence in sports are important sociological phenomena that require intense analysis. Your position on fighting in hockey may boil down to your perspective on the “nature versus nurture” debate. Or perhaps it boils down to a “give em what they want” philosophy. One should not underscore the importance of “self-restraint” in this highly charged debate. Players have proven over and over again that they can restrain themselves from fighting- if they choose to do so. Analysis of the root causes of the complex problem of fan hooliganism has only recently begun. This is not merely a British phenomenon. What really makes it interesting from an analytical perspective is that there are other countries exposed to considerably higher violence- the United States in particular- that thus far, have not emulated this behaviour. One answer to this enigma might be that fans on this side of the Atlantic do not have a single sport to be as passionately drawn towards. Fan frustrations in one sport can be alleviated by watching the successes of another favourite professional team playing in the same city. Again, though, this is mere speculation. More scholarly analysis needs to be conducted though, before we can draw more verifiable conclusions.
Works Cited
Alderman, Tom. “Excerpts from a field interview with Lance and Rob McGregor.” CBC News Online Sept. 2001 <http://www.cbc.ca/national/magazine/hockey/mcgregor.html>.
Abdal-Haqq, Ismat “Violence in Sports.” Educational Resources Information Centre 1.89 (1989)
<http://www.ericfacility.net/ericdigests/ed316547.html>.
Buford, Bill. Among The Thugs The Experience, and the Seduction, of Crowd Violence. New York. WW Norton and Company. 1992
Diener, Ed. "Deindividuation, self-awareness, and disinhibition ." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (1979): 1160-1171 .
Dryden, Ken. Riots driven by more than Stanley Cup loss. The Globe and Mail. Friday, Jun. 17, 2011
Dunning, Eric “Why Fans Fight.” BBC News Online Sept. 2002 <http://www.footballculture.net/fans/feat_fanviolence.html>.
Hall, Joseph. "Collars Around The Neck May Save Athletes' Heads." (2011): n.pag. www.thestar.com. Web. 25 Jan 2012. <http://www.thestar.com/sports/hockey/article/1079268--collars-around-the-neck-may-save-athletes-heads>.
Keller, Tony. Want to end fighting? Want fewer concussions? Get hockey out of the Dark Ages. Globe and Mail. 30 March 2016.
Kelley, Steve. “Violent fans make tighter security our only option.” Seattle Times Online 23 April, 2003
<http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/stevekelley/134681097_kell23.html>
Leonard, Wilbert Marcellus. A Sociological Perspective of Sport. 3rd ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1988.
Kerasotis, Peter. “Ballpark hooliganism must be stopped.” Florida Today 23April 2003
<http://reds.enquirer.com/2003/04/19/wwwred3a19.html>.
Kulfan, Ted. “Enforcers necessary, but numbers dwindle.”
The Detroit News Online 18 Oct. 2001
<http://www.detnews.com/2001/wings/0110/18/e01-321923.htm>.
Letters to the Editor, “Problems with NHL include fighting.” The Sporting News Online Feb. 2002 <http://www.hockeyzoneplus.com/abov02_e.htm>.
Letters to the Editor, “Still Brewin' Time to tone it down?” Sporting News Online Feb. 2002
<http://tsn.sportingnews.com/voices/voice_of_the_fan/20020208-p.html>.
Maki, Allan. “Life expectancy of 55 shocks CFLers into push for safety.” Globe and Mail. Tuesday, Apr. 05, 2011
<http://www.theglobeandmail.com/subscribe.jsp?art=1972521>.
MacQueen, Ken. “Bobby Orr: How we’re killing hockey.”MacLean’s. October 17, 2013.
McGran, Kevin. NHL's internal email reveal troubling disregard for subject of concussions. 30 March 2016. 1 April 2016
<ww.thestar.com/sports/leafs/2016/03/30/nhls-internal-email-reveal-troubling-disregard-for-subject-of-concussions.html>.
Monroe, Eugene. “Getting off of the T Train.” The Players Tribune. March 23, 2016.
<http://www.theplayerstribune.com/2016-5-23-eugene-monroe-ravens-marijuana-opioids-toradol-nfl/>.
Terry, Peter C. and Jackson, John J. “The Determinants and Control of Violence in Sport.” Quest 37.1 (1985) : 27-37.
Summary Checklist
Did you:
· Read the online materials for this unit?
· Review the potential Discussion Board topics that you may select on for this week?
Are you now able to:
· Articulate the major theories explaining violence in sports?
· Better articulate your position on whether fighting should be banned in hockey?
· Understand the main causes of fan hooliganism and articulate your position on suggested measures undertaken to control it?
If so, you are now ready to proceed to the next unit.
