Follow Paul on Twitter: @paulstewart22
Hockey players fight for different reasons. Back when I was playing the role of an enforcer in the NHL, WHA and other leagues, it was a different than what the job has become in more recent years.
Back then, our primary role was to protect the skill players on our teams and make sure no one took liberties with them. We would usually fight spontaneously if one player did something that raised the other's ire. We'd also fight for reasons personal pride and reputation against a rival.
The Broad Street Bullies era Philadelphia Flyers were the first club to use fighting as a specific game tactic. It was designed either to intimidate an opponent or to infuse some energy into their own side. As the Flyers won two Stanley Cups and went to three straight finals, that tactic spread throughout hockey.
What we did NOT have in those days was staged fighting between two enforcers. In a staged fight, the players talk out ahead of time when and whether to go and, if both parties are agreed, they go at it. Over the years, hockey has lost a lot of its spontaneity and genuine emotion, which I think is a shame.
Nowadays, there is so much more emphasis on the coach and the system being employed than there is in players using their own brains and hockey sense to make decisions. That includes the fighting realm.
For example, an interesting situation unfolded in Phoenix on Saturday night. The Coyotes were leading 3-1 near the midpoint of regulation. There was a neutral zone faceoff near the Coyotes bench. Phoenix enforcer Paul Bissonnette found himself lined up next to his Philadelphia counterpart, Jay Rosehill.
Rosehill asked Bissonnette if he was willing to go at the drop of the puck. Bissonnette hesitated, not because he was afraid of Rosehill but because he was apparently concerned that head coach Dave Tippett would not approve. Fighting at that moment may not have been of "strategic benefit" to his team and could be an emotional spark for the other side.
Bissonnette turned around to his bench and asked Tippett if it was OK if he fought. Tippett gave him the OK, and off Bissonnette and Rosehill went at the drop of the puck. It was a real good fight, and an even one.
As things turned out in the game, Philadelphia went on to score four unanswered goals and won 5-3. Afterwards, Tippett was widely second-guessed for telling Bissonnette it was OK to fight.
My take: It should have been Bissonnette's decision all along. When I was playing, I never asked for a coach's advice on whether it was OK to fight, nor did anyone else. I'm not blaming Bissonnette and I'm not blaming Tippett here, because it's just part of the way the culture of the game has changed (in my view, for the worse).
What Bissonnette ended up doing here was to put his coach on the spot and try to absolve himself of any potential blame for the aftermath. If Tippett said no -- in reality,he had no choice but to give the OK to his player -- it was the coach and not the player who refused the fight. If Tippett gave the OK and Phoenix went on to lose the game, well, the coach himself said it was all right in that situation.
If I had been refereeing the game and had developed a rapport over time with the player, I would have told Bissonnette afterward, "Biz, you know what you're doing out there. Fight or don't fight. It's a cop out to leave it up to your coach to decide for you."
But in the bigger picture -- and this is coming from someone whose job it was to fight and throw my weight around -- I do not believe that a fight is the main thing that changes a game. I WISH I could have had that sort of impact that some people are saying that the Rosehill-Bissonette fight did on Saturday. To be totally honest, though, a fight does not create a four-goal turnaround.
The truth of the matter is that the cream rises to the top. For example, Jean Beliveau didn't need two other guys fighting to get himself going even after a slow start in the game. Even if there is an emotional spark and a window of opportunity created by a tough guy fighting as a strategy for rallying the team, it's really up to the team itself to do something with it.
Story time: When I was playing for the Quebec Nordiques, we had a road game against the Islanders. In the second period, I fought Gord Lane. In the third period, Garry Howatt basically jumped me and he ended up with a five-minute penalty while I only got a roughing minor. Our team got a three-minute power play.
The power play amounted to zilch. We didn't score. We lost the game. Even if we had won, I would have thought it was pretty weird if I'd gotten the credit for it. It would have been Real Cloutier or Michel Goulet who seized control of the game. I understood my role. I understood what I could do to help the team. But I was not going to be one to single-handedly change the outcome.
As a referee, I think I had a better understanding of fighting and fighters than many of my counterparts, simply because I had done that job for a living and understood the psychology of it in a first-hand way. At the same time, I also understood what my task was as a referee.
Hockey referees are like lion tamers. We have various tools -- a whistle, a rule book and our own psychology -- to take control of a situation. We can't stop the lions from being lions but we can do things that make them less lion-like for a while.
Part of the psychology of controlling a game is knowing when the LACK of a fight is becoming a distraction. It has the potential to escalate tensions to the point where it becomes more difficult for the officials to keep control of the game.
Late in the 1991-92 season, I was refereeing a Quebec-Boston game. Quebec's Wayne Van Dorp and Boston's Lyndon Byers had a history with one another, having fought multiple times before in the past. (By the way, this is something that a referee should know before the game, and discussed by the officiating team before the game as part of their own preparation).
As the game got underway, Van Dorp and Byers continually chirped at one another. Finally they were lined up against each other on a faceoff.
I looked at Van Dorp and asked him, "Wayne, do you want to fight Byers?"
He said yes.
I looked at Byers and asked, "Lyndon, do you want to fight Van Dorp?"
He said yes.
I said, "Then enough already. Just fight. Right now!"
Van Dorp said, "We can't fight yet; not til the puck is dropped."
The game was in a timeout while the television broadcast was in commercial.
"Good point," I said, and motioned to my linesman. "Drop the puck now!"
Off they went. Afterwards Byers thanked me.
"I had to get that out of the way," he said.
"No problem," I said. "Are we done with this for tonight?"
He said yes, and was true to his word.
On the other hand, sometimes players need a little more forceful encouragement to get their fight out of the way before it holds up the game or becomes a distraction. I was doing a Detroit-Ottawa game one night in Joe Louis Arena where Jim Cummins and Mike Peluso chased each other all over the ice, talked trash and, for whatever reason, kept waiting and waiting to start the inevitable fight.
It got to the point where even their own teammates were getting annoyed. I knew it was time to move things along.
"Fight or I'm going to fight both of you!" I said.
They fought. The game got back on track.
************
Recent Blogs by Paul Stewart
Gettin' Your Kicks
Hockey in the Great Outdoors
New Years, Broken Whistles and the Ol' Goal-in-the-Pants Trick
From Body by Dunkin' to Body by Smitty
The Red Line, O'Rourke Injury and the Two-Ref System
A Christmas Blog
Romeo and that Fox-y Glow
On Wilson, Kamikaze Attacks and Red Herrings
************
Paul Stewart holds the distinction of being the first U.S.-born citizen to make it to the NHL as both a player and referee. On March 15, 2003, he became the only American-born referee to officiate in 1,000 NHL games.
Today, Stewart is an officiating and league discipline consultant for the Kontinental Hockey League (KHL) and serves as director of hockey officiating for the Eastern College Athletic Conference (ECAC).
The longtime referee heads Officiating by Stewart, a consulting, training and evaluation service for officials, while also maintaining a busy schedule as a public speaker, fund raiser and master-of-ceremonies for a host of private, corporate and public events. As a non-hockey venture, he is the owner of Lest We Forget.
Stewart is currently working with a co-author on an autobiography.
Blogger •Former NHL Referee • 
Join the Discussion:
»