On whichever side of the bench you sit regarding the presence of fighting in hockey, if you have an interest in the ongoing debate, re-ignited by the Don Sanderson tragedy, watch this must-see episode of CBC’s the fifth estate:  “The Code.”  The full episode, as well as individual segments, is available here.

Also features an interview with Donald Brashear.

On Monday evening, on the Fan590’s Prime Time Sports (free download on iTunes), host Bob McCown and the Globe and Mail’s Stephen Brunt further the discussion.  Really worth a listen.

They also tie in Don Cherry’s outrageous verbal assault against Alex Ovechkin’s joie de vivre, essentially advocating that someone give Ovi a comeuppance and severely injure him.    To wit, as quoted from the T.O. Star:

There’s somebody out there, some big defenceman is going to be sitting in the weeds as [Ovechkin] cuts across centre and he’s going to cut him in half.


Brunt’s comments on PTS suggested a question that I’ll throw out here:

If you support fighting in the game, is it just because you find fights entertaining in and of themselves (as many find boxing, MMA, other fight games entertaining), without regard to its perceived “necessity” in the game?  Does it simply provide bonus value to a game, especially one featuring less-compelling teams?

Or, conversely, do you believe that fighting is uniquely necessary to hockey, wholly aside from any intrinsic entertainment value of the bout itself?

(Admittedly difficult to separate the two in one’s mind.)