Why The Hockey Needs Fighting Analysis

In “Why the NHL Needs Fighting,” Brandon Keim (2012) states that fighting is a crucial element of hockey. Since the argument claimed by the author is located in the second paragraph and the reasons are situated after the argument, the article presents a deductive organization. The three reasons provided by the author to support his thesis statement are: Physical punishment applied by the own players is an effective measure to restrain condemnable behaviour during the match; Hockey is an aggressive game by nature; Brawling solves problems that laws or administrative measures cannot deal with. The first reason claimed by the writer is supported by his assumption that “[if] conducted honorably,” (para. 5 & 15) fights are not only right, but also necessary to the dynamic of the match, since the players have a kind of moral code established among themselves that says, “if …show more content…
7), meaning those which have an ingrained emotional factor, can be accepted. Once again, the author provides an assumption based on an ambiguity fallacy because he does not detail how the audience can distinguish between different types of brawling. The final assumption used by Keim to support his first reason is that fights inside the ice rink work as a “safety valve” (para. 11) and because of this characteristic of fights, the conflicts between players can be solved with some punches, broken teeth and swallowed faces with no hard feelings. According to the author, “Better to tussle and be done than worry about 220-pound men […] with vengeance on their minds.” (para. 11) By saying that, Keim appeals to a slippery slope fallacy, since he assumes that if one player practices some unfair movement, he will be chased by the players from the other team the entire match, and this hunting will have an end only when the guilty player receives his physical