FISH

As far as the fish goes it was pretty stupid that they threw anyone in the beginning of the game who threw a fish. An initial fish toss at the beginning should be aloud then after that toss them. Other stuff on the ice such as soda bottles was ridculous. As far as Gene Nighman goes he is only following orders he gets from above him. LIKE ANDY NOEL the Athletic Director. ANDY SAYS IF THE USHERS ARE NOT THROWING PEOPLE OUT FOR SWEARING THEY ARE NOT DOING THEIR JOBS. LET HIM THROW SOME OUT USHERS DON'T GET PAID ENOUGH TO DEAL WITH THIS SHIT.

My family works as ushers in 1 of the student sections and have never throw anyone out - As you say they feel they aren't paid enough to get yelled at.

They were told Friday night if they didn't throw anyone out they would either lose their job or the position. Also, 1 of the ushers did quit Sat. right before the game because of the things they were expected to do.

Can't always blame the ushers they do as they are told to.

[Q]They were told Friday night if they didn't throw anyone out they would either lose their job or the position.[/Q]

Hearing this from someone who seems to actually be in a position to know (ie. not just from some fan who's upset) really just blows my mind. I don't usually buy into arguments that people feel they aren't being paid enough to do their job...but for the ushers to be told this...someone must be having a serious disconnect with reality. I just don't understand what the Athletics department is trying to achieve--

In the four years that I've been here, the team has gotten at most very few penalties for crowd behavior (and if it was Friday night, presumably they meant that people must be ejected for language, not fish), which leads me to think that, whatever the ushers are doing now, it's already harsh enough to keep the NCAA and/or ECAC satisfied.

I don't understand why the Athletics department should really care about whether the game is a family atmosphere. There's clearly no problem selling tickets--in fact, they could probably sell out the rink just with students. Not to say that they should, just that I can't imagine that profanity is costing Cornell money. Plus, people who want a tamer crowd atmoshpere can always go to women's hockey. The women's hockey team has some very talented athletes who deserve fans, and except for checking and hair length, it's the same sport.

Lastly, I can understand people's arguments that the coach has expressed disappointment that his family can't come to see the games because of the profanity. However, if making things so that his family can attend necessarily means that each usher must eject at least one spectator per game...well, that seems like an awfully high price.

Assume that Athletics only cares about maximizing profits. The ticket line fiasco showed us that there was no shortage of student-purchasers, so, Athletics can in a sense have the pick of the litter and they're going to choose those who demonstrate a willingness to abide by their rules (it's irrelevant whether the rules are fair, they are their rules, they like them) and --I'm generalizing here-- don't alienate the relatively mild-mannered townie season ticket holders, who have proven to be more reliable fans anyway (the townies were much more faithful compared to the student body during the dark days of '92 - '95). Heck, they already have the students' season ticket money, driving some students away would probably accommodate the selling of more standing-room tickets for added revenue (like they do during breaks).

Now step back from the pure greed reasoning and we can probably safely assume that community perception/image are important, creating a welcoming (rather than alienating) environment is considered integral to the university’s mission and that Athletics is run by adults with a more conservative opinion when compared to students on such things as public profanity and answer to bodies (the university's administration, ECAC and NCAA) run by similarly minded adults. I don't think it's too hard to see why they've taken this stance.

Warning, Soapbox Time: It's easy to say, "It's just some bad words, what's the big deal". I used to be more sympathetic to that reasoning. Now I have a baby girl. She won't always enjoy the simple innocence she does now, but I sure want that to be prolonged as long as possible and I just don't agree that a college hockey game needs to be made into a "for mature audiences only" event. You're more apt to agree with me if you've ever seen one of the quarterfinal games when Cornell advances and fans go on the ice and among them are some young kids who absolutely beam when a Big Red player stops and gives them an autograph or, in the case of one little girl, get to give a piece of art they made to their favorite player (it happened to be Underhill).

Jason-

While I think I can, for the most part, understand your arguments, I have the following objections:

If you're suggesting that ushers are being required to kick out seated-ticket holders in order to accomodate what is essentially then a double booking of standing room tickets--while it's a type of practice that's far from unheard of in the business world, such a policy would greatly weaken Athletics' moral high ground.

While I'm not sure that college hockey needs to be, as you aptly label it, "for mature audiences only", I honestly think that, maybe, it really should be. Here's why:

There are many other athletics teams at Cornell. In fact, there's even another varsity hockey team. Nearly all of these teams play in stadiums/arenas with lots of excess capacity. If men's hockey were to allowed to run wild with profanity, driving out the family-oriented individuals, they could very easily attend some of the other sports instead. In fact, it might even be good to introduce your daughter to some of the excellent female sports role models on the women's hockey team. If you're not satisfied by that teams win percentage, may I suggest the lacrosse team (11-5 in 2003), polo team (7-1 this year, and last year won its 4th straight national title), or volleyball team (which just finished a 21-4) season.

Now consider the...err...anti-family oriented folks--the students who, apparently derive great pleasure from shouting obscenities. Besides people who are offended by the words themselves, I'd argue "no". In my opinion, the ushers do an excellent job of keeping physical violence out of the stands. And, at least in comparison to other sports venues (even Cornell's football stadium), there is a fairly low amount of drinking that actually takes place in the arena. Keep these students out of the reasonable safe and monitored environment and where do they go? I'd posit that quite a few of them end up going somewhere to binge drink. Some others (maybe with some overlap), instead of merely saying "fuck", actually partake in sexual intercourse (much to the dismay of Andy Noel). Others would go home to watch TV, and quite likely hear profanity spoken.

In the end, I suppose it boils down the perennial argument of whom the University really exists to serve. Is it for the students, for the alumni, for the Ithaca community, or for the administration? It has to be a compromise, of course, but many students, including myself, are frustrated by costs rising much faster than inflation, while services/liberties in seemingly every visible area of college life are rolled back.

Call me a jack-booted thug, but I actually don't think it's that unreasonable for the ushers to have a quota: one per night is enough to remind students that the rules exist and will be enforced, without resorting to tossing every person who breaks a rule every time. If an usher ONLY tosses one person, he's probably tossing people for less than 0.1% of the infractions he sees (100 people breaking a rule 10 times over the course of the game). You breaks the rules, you takes your chances of being that 0.1%

No personal attack on you, Shorts, but one can't tell someone to not come to the games anymore. No Cornell hockey fan could be as satiated by another sport.... We're supposed to be creative, innovative, and united as Faithful, I think we can avoid the profanity without complaining. Sure you have an amendment to back up your right to do so, but you should have some dignity enough to respect the innocence of the younger/other fans. A "mature audience" should be mature, sadly it's not that obvious. We're all rooting for the same team here last time I checked. We don't need to drive anyone out of Lynah...


...except bottle-throwers.

Mike Ack wrote:

We don't need to drive anyone out of Lynah...


...except bottle-throwers.

I wouldn't mind getting rid of the two annoying girls who were sitting in front of me that talked about stupid, non-hockey-related stuff throughout the Hahvahd game. Thankfully, I don't think they come to many games on the whole.

Well, my anecdote...I was tossed during a CU-Brown home game about 4 years ago for vocalizing the "See ya ------- You goon!" I put up a fight (with words, after leaving my seat), but ended up leaving the rink early.

Did it work? Sure...haven't used profanity in the rink since. (other than the occasional exclamation to myself when an opposing team scores). I still managed to taunt the opposing players with a large volume of words...just none bad enough to get me the boot again.

However, for the fish....come on...it's a tradition that I'm sure the players, the coaches, and almost all the fans never want to see die.

Jordan

---tries very hard to resist the large sucking sensation in the direction of this argument...yet...can't...resist

[Q]but one can't tell someone to not come to the games anymore[/Q]Um...that's exactly the issue here. Ushers are kicking people out of games, and my understanding of the official policy is that if you get ejected twice, you're told that you can't come to the games any more.

[Q]No Cornell hockey fan could be as satiated by another sport[/Q]Granted, Cornell hockey is a lot of fun. However, if you look at the sport itself, one season (or even a couple) at a time, I'd be reluctant to call it "unique". If you want good hockey, you can go see a pro (even minor league) game. If you want a raucous atmosphere, with some co-ordinated chants, you can go to a Jets game. If you want to see Cornell student athletes who work hard on their studies, but still manage to find time to develop themselves into successful athletes, you can watch just about any of the sports on campus.

What's unique, I think many people would agree, is the atmosphere in which one can scream threatening comments arbitrarily loud with a reduced fear of direct and immediate reprisals, in order to blow off some steam from the week. In the short time I've been here with the Pep Band, I've seen two examples demonstrating that students really can't act at other sports the way that act at hockey:

A few years ago, I believe it was at a field hockey game (possibly WLax), someone decided to make a disparaging comment at the opposing goalie. The comments were far tamer than most of the things said to goalies at Lynah, and were not in any way obscene.
Response: Andy Noel himself approached this individual, verbally reprimanded him, said he had no class, and essentially said that it is impermissible to heckle female athletes, at all.

A little under two years ago, at a men's basketball game, a band member heckled the opposing coach, who was standing on the court complaining to the ref.
Response: The coach personally approaches the heckler during the game, among other comments calling the student a "faggot". The incident gets lots of press, eventually making it into Sports Illustrated (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/inside_game/steve_rushin/news/2003/01/07/air_and_space/ ).

My conclusions from these incidents: even comparatively mild, non-obscene heckling is just not feasible at other Cornell events. If someone is looking for a place to verbally tear into the other team, Cornell Men's Hockey is really the only place to do it.

[Q]Sure you have an amendment to back up your right to do so[/Q]I'm not arguing that this is a Constitutional free speech issue (I'd like to think I'm at least slightly less ignorant than that). What I'm saying is that I think allowing the words "asshole" and "fuck" at Cornell men's hockey games is just the right thing to do.

[Q]A "mature audience" should be mature[/Q]Used in this sense, the word "mature" is used euphemistically. It's a very common usage. Frankly, I think that an audience so emotionally mature and sophisticated as to consider themselves morally above naughty words would also consider themselves above many of the other things that the Lynah crowd enjoys, such as seeing a member of the visiting team get smashed against the boards.

[Q]We don't need to drive anyone out of Lynah[/Q]The post I was replying to in the first place, which got me so upset, relayed that the official Athletics opinion is: in order to have the right kind of Lynah, yes, it is necessary to kick people out. What I'm trying to say is that I disagree.



Post Edited (12-09-03 10:12)

[Q]it is impermissible to heckle female athletes, at all[/Q]

I don't know... we seemed to get in a pretty good amount of heckling at most of the volleyball games this year, although it clearly was tamer than the usual Lynah fare.
Maybe Noel has changed his stance since a few years ago. Either that, or maybe it's only OK to heckle the opposition when the CU team is one of the conference leaders-

The sentence about "double booking" was meant in jest (which doesn’t come across clearly) as a lead in to my point that I don’t believe Athletics is motivated purely by profit maximization.

I’m familiar with the other sports played by Cornell student-athletes, so no need to suggest any. I dare say I was a "rabid" fan while at school (based on my attendance compared to friends and acquaintances). In addition to men’s hockey, I saw pretty much every football and men’s lax game (lax, much like hockey, was on a steady decline for my four years, but I still sat in freezing rain and watched them), as well as occasionally attending basketball and wrestling. But I grew up playing and watching hockey, and still love it passionately. As for women’s hockey, I’ve never been completely won over by it in part because of the restriction on checking. Women’s lax has developed with fundamental differences compared to the men’s game, one of them being no head protection and limited body protection and thus relatively no contact. But women hockey players play with full equipment, so I’ve never seen the sense in prohibiting checking (at the college level they may get away with more, but my impression of the women’s game formed watching high school friends play on the girl’s team and there it was called very tight). I’m sure my sentiment will change once my girl is old enough for her first pair of Bauers, but that’s still a little ways off.

But for me and many others, none of those other sports are going to generate the excitement and enjoyment that a Cornell men’s hockey game does. In light of Schafer’s request, Athletics’ request, and the typical sensibilities of the older crowd with respect to public profanity, I don’t think people should be driven away or made uncomfortable because some attendees insist on mindlessly shouting curse words (“mindless” is not meant as insult, but I do see a difference between the occasional “@sshole” when a player has truly taken a vicious cheap shot at one of our guys versus the incessant use of it after every penalty --are you really an @sshole when you’re guilty of too many men on the ice?). I see giving up the bad language akin to holding an elevator door or removing your bag from the bus seat next to you so somebody standing can sit down --it's a very slight sacrifice for the benefit of those around you.

I don’t think that Lynah serves as some sort of Boy’s Club for students. Binge drinking and casual sex among students doesn’t happen among Cornell students because they are without options in their lives. At best, attending a hockey game delays the drinking and sex for two and half hours (maybe a little more if the game goes into OT). A loss may even contribute to it.

As for who the University exists for, even if it is agreed that it exists primarily for the students that doesn’t mean the students have the run of the place.

Shorts, the way your 10:11 post reads, it sounds to me that the chance to be unruly in public while shielded by the anonymity that comes with an orchestrated mob effort is taking on more importance than the game played on the ice.

This might be a little off-topic from the current thread, but it's relevant...

Not that I necessarily want this to happen, but if athletics really wants to impose limits on students swearing, all the refs have to do is to start imposing penalties on the home team. I can guarantee you that will fix the problem real quick! In this case, I think it should only be for a gross problem, such as large portions of the crowd mouthing off. What can you do if somehow an opponent's fan sneaks into the regular section and starts causing a ruckus? Then you just throw out the one offending person. Then the ushers don't have to deal with throwing out tons of people.



Post Edited (12-09-03 12:32)

[Q][Q]No Cornell hockey fan could be as satiated by another sport[/Q]Granted, Cornell hockey is a lot of fun. However, if you look at the sport itself, one season (or even a couple) at a time, I'd be reluctant to call it "unique". If you want good hockey, you can go see a pro (even minor league) game. If you want... [/Q]Shorts, it's Cornell hockey. For some of us on this board that says it all.

This is not that complicated, folks.
They throw octopi at Joe Louis Arena.
We throw fish at Lynah.
Period.

It's a great tradition. It endangers no one so long as it is limited to the pre-game. No one should be tossed from the rink for throwing fish any more than for throwing newspapers. We should all be outraged that anyone was prevented from enjoying the Harvard game because they joined in a terrific tradition. That's not what Cornell Hockey stands for. If I was half the man I was ten years ago . . . I'd take a flamethrower to this place.

And melt the ice? =(

Personally, I've always liked the fish tradition (but not the accompanying smell). However, I don't think it's appropriate to throw fish AT the players. On the ice, yes. Right in front of them (if you can do it), yes. But hitting someone in the head with a fish is just disgusting and rude.

If the coach and Athletics feel this way as well, we may be seeing another case of a few individuals ruining things for everyone.



Post Edited (12-10-03 23:14)

The guy in front of me got hit right on the shoulder with an enormous fish. The disgusted look on the girl's face next to him made my night. Hitting players wtih fish, bad. Hitting enormous freshmen with fish who, while standing on a bench one row lower can still look me right in the eye, good. At least the guy smiled about it and it will make a great story for the grandkids...keep throwing fish.

Anne '85 wrote:

However, I don't think it's appropriate to throw fish AT the players.

Last I checked all the players wear full gear out on the ice. I find it odd that they can take a puck off the head or a check into the boards -- christ, Grumet-Morris takes slapshots all game -- what's the harm with hitting him with a snapper or pepsi bottle?

The sport of hockey is based on projectiles. I don't know what happened out in Section G last week (having decent seats and all), but I can tell you the guy in B that threw the bottle at Dwyer in the W. Michigan game deserves praise. Dwyer's a prick and (wearing full hockey gear) he can take a bottle off the head without sustaining an injury. If it was such a hostile environment where he feared for safety, all he had to do was get off the ice. Everyone should stop worrying about what everyone else is doing and saying and watch the game. If you are too worried about what the guy next to you is doing, than the game itself, you are nothing more than a FACETIMER.

That said, we should all start a new tradition of throwing fish at "Beeeej."

[Q]I can tell you the guy in B that threw the bottle at Dwyer in the W. Michigan game deserves praise.[/Q]

You're an idiot. Period. Nobody should ever throw anything on the ice besides fish, newspaper, octopi (in Detroit) and oranges (even if that is kind of lame).

Beat me to it, Alex!

Alex F. '03 wrote:

You're an idiot. Period. Nobody should ever throw anything on the ice besides fish, newspaper, octopi (in Detroit) and oranges (even if that is kind of lame).

You're an idiot.

You're saying that you can only throw things at players so long as it is tradition. Your argument makes no sense.

Someone should throw an orange at you.

Alex F. '03 wrote:
Nobody should ever throw anything on the ice besides fish, newspaper, octopi (in Detroit) and oranges (even if that is kind of lame).

Don't forget hats.

John T. Whelan '91 wrote:

Alex F. '03 wrote:
Nobody should ever throw anything on the ice besides fish, newspaper, octopi (in Detroit) and oranges (even if that is kind of lame).

Don't forget hats.

And toothpaste, at the Colgate game.

We used to throw kitchen strainers (i.e. sieves) at the goalies.

I'm guessing that's no longer acceptable.

JH

Facetimer wrote:
Everyone should stop worrying about what everyone else is doing and saying and watch the game. If you are too worried about what the guy next to you is doing, than the game itself, you are nothing more than a FACETIMER.

What are you if you care more about the right to curse and throw things at the players than the game itself? I've yet to read anything that even suggests you watch the games. If you want to throw things at the performers, see if you can find a honky-tonk bar with a chicken-wire stage.



Post Edited (12-11-03 10:33)

[Q]You're saying that you can only throw things at players so long as it is tradition.[/Q]

Are you really suggesting that throwing bottles at the opposing team becomes a tradition? I'm open to new ideas and all, but throwing bottles is neither creative, clever, nor up to the standards of the Lynah Faithful. Traditions are supposed to start for a reason. There's a story behind the fish, the octopi, and probably even the oranges, even if I don't know what it is. Throwing bottles stems from fans thinking it's a good idea to throw anything not nailed down at an opposing team, which is just asinine.

p.s. yes, I forgot hats, toothpaste, and some other items (rats in Florida a few years ago come to mind).



Post Edited (12-11-03 10:39)

Facetimer,
Alex only spoke about what was acceptable to throw on the ice, he never said that throwing anything at a player was acceptable. Nothing should ever be thrown in an effort to strike a player, including fish. I don't care if the player is a prick or not or how well padded he is.

Since I dared to challenge you I'll save you the time and just anoint myself a "facetimer".

Why are you folks even wasting your time?

Facetimer wrote:
That said, we should all start a new tradition of throwing fish at "Beeeej."

That's fine - fish is low-carb and high in omega-3 fatty acids.

Beeeej

All this talk of throwing stuff on the ice leads me to ask a separate, somewhat unrelated question, caused by my overall lack of experience with Cornell games on the road (I've only been to seven Cornell games outside of Lynah). Do people generally throw Big Red gum at our players (or, rather, just on the ice when our boys skate onto foreign ice)? I imagine that's what I would do if I wanted to mock the Cornell Big Red.

nope. not to my knowlege. I've never seen it done and i've been to almost as many games on the road as at lynah. perhaps in earlier years ... ?

I can't recall seeing anything thrown by opposing fans besides oranges (by the Union fans).

Cornell fans, of course, should never throw anything (other than hats) on the ice outside of Lynah. (Throw the newspaper at your friends in the stands.)

[Q] Do people generally throw Big Red gum at our players (or, rather, just on the ice when our boys skate onto foreign ice)? [/Q]

Gah! NO!!! Now someone from XXX school will use this brilliant creative Lynah faithful inspired idea on our own precious players! NOOOOO!!! *resounding echo fades into absolute silence*



Post Edited (12-11-03 11:56)

[Q]Don't forget hats.[/Q]

hats? i knew about the newspaper, fish, toothpaste before i came here, but hats?
i'm sorry...i'm a freshman...but you gotta learn somewhere! if you don't teach the freshmen, in 3 years there would be *gasp* no more Faithful. But you all are so nice, i'm sure you will inform me

Hats are thrown on the ice when someone scores a "hat trick".

Báby_Fan wrote:

Hats are thrown on the ice when someone scores a "hat trick".

riiight. thanks

For hat tricks =)

Anybody else interested in the idea of starting early, and trying to raise a fully-grown great white shark by the time we celebrate the 100th anniversary of Cornell/Hahvahd hockey in 2009-10?

Beeeej

Who uses the word "honky-tonk?" I doubt you watch the games you stupid facetimer. You are the reason the home-ice advantage has left Lynah this year. You stupid facetimer.

You wouldn't be planning on letting the shark swim free on the ice before line announcements, would you? Ha

Might be tough to hide the tank in my pants, that's for sure.

Beeeej

facetimer, you need to chill out. seriously. here, have a banana...

Make sure it's a mustachioed shark.