Penalty for Throwing Fish

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

When I was on Campus (78-82), the fish were thrown between the second and third period - after the figure skater and just before Harvard came out for third period warm-ups.

I also remember that when Brock Treadway got a hat trick in the third period in '79 and everybody threw hats on the ice, they called us for delay of game.  After all "we'd been warned."  What it really comes down to is how much of an asshole the ref wants to be.

[CUlater 89]

[Q]jtwcornell91 Wrote:

 [Q2]calgARI '07 Wrote:
Like ten years ago when harvard had an amazing team and Cornell did not have such an amazing team, someone threw a fish onto the ice at the beginning of the second period and Harvard scored on the ensuing powerplay, breaking the 1-1 tie.  Harvard would hold on for the 2-1 win.  McCutcheon was outraged.[/Q]
It was the last game he ever coached against Hahvahd and the last game of the ten-year RS winless streak against the Crimson.  For more, see[/q]

But his team won the two most important games against Harvard durign his tenure, in the 1990 ECAC quarterfinals, sending Bill Cleary into coaching retirement with two defeats.

[billhoward]

[Q]calgARI '07 Wrote:

That is totally unfair, considering that newspapers are thrown on the ice every game without any penalty called.  ... I understand that it takes longer to pick up the fish and it hurts the ice ...
... Whether people think it's stupid or unnecessary is insignificant because it is a tradition that has long been embraced by the Cornell students..[/q]

In shorter form, the argument is equally well put, although it may speak more eloquently to the other viewpoint.

Stupid traditions are both. Being longstanding doesn't make a tradition more proper.

Newspapers don't equal fish. Tennis balls (while projectiles) don't equal fish. Thank goodness the med school is in New York City or who knows what parts would be tossed on the ice.

Some believe the first Cornell-Harvard fish pelting, or maybe it was a live chicken tied to the cage (wonder how many Harvard men it took to capture and subdue it?), or both, was done by Harvard to Cornell goalie Dave Elenbaas circa 1972 in Boston. Since then, massive retaliation has been the order of the day and we kind of forget who fired the first shot. Are we going to be like Air Force Gen. Curtis LeMay and bomb them back to the Stone Age?

The first time you see fish go on the ice, it's kind of cool. But the second and third and tenth and twentieth time, it's a been there, seen that re-run. It's not original. To outsiders, perhaps it says, Only Ag School Boors Would Do This. And so the Cantabrigeans get to feel superior in defeat.

Sure, we (fans) are supporting Cornell hockey and we've paid our way to get in, but the game is first and foremost for the players. What do the players think ...
- thanks for supporting Cornell hockey and for demoralizing Harvard?
- maybe it's okay but not if Cornell gets a penalty?
- sheesh, there are a couple prospects in the stands with their parents and what does that say about Cornell?
- NFW; just cheer after the goals and yell "Sieve."  
- other?
... my money is on "Don't do it" or "If it's going to cost us 2 minutes in the box, don't do it."

Ask Mike what he thinks. Ask Jeff.

What if everyone holds up cardboard cutouts of fish before the game and after each goal? The first two rows of Lynah Faithful could dangle them over the dasher boards on strings.

Why don't we take the fish-on-the-ice energies and put it into getting Harvard to make more seats available for the 1/08/05 game at Harvard? Maybe go to Friday's (1/07) game against Colgate, root for Colgate, and hold up signs, "This is nothing compared to Cornell." How would Harvard players feel in Boston if more people stood up Friday before the third period to salute the Cornell alma mater than struggled to their gout-laced feet for whatever musty Episcopalian hymn Harvard uses?

Maybe for that away game, Cornell could wear a special edition true-Carnelian red jersey.  

It's important to blow them out in Boston because the Globe has some small impact on what the hockey world thinks of Cornell. I would hope for a 5-0 shutout with all the goals scored by freshmen, indicating Harvard is in for many more years of bad luck.

[Will]

[Q]billhoward Wrote:

- sheesh, there are a couple prospects in the stands with their parents and what does that say about Cornell?  [/q]

I don't know what the players are thinking, but the prospects are probably thinking, "Maybe we shouldn't go to Harvard." :-D

[calgARI '07]

All your points are valid, but I disagree on one of them.  I've seen the fish thrown on the ice 9 or 10 times and everytime I get the chills.  The delay, although hindering on the players, is really awesome because the crowd just goes nuts and farther demoralizes Harvard.  To me, it is almost he epitomy of Lynah's reputation.

[Greg Berge]

It's a great tradition, and it has been tempered over time with some intelligent limits.  I don't understand why the league has decided to kill it off, but in the end, we have to keep our guys out of the box.

Sad, but true.

[Jessica]

  Everyone is so worried about being allowed to throw fish and what the ramifications will be in terms of penalties and such.  
  I think we all agree that we don't want to get any penalties, yet we definitely want to throw fish.  So the simple solution is to wait until the end of the game and then throw the fish.  It will be a much sweet reward to throw the fish after we have already beaten them...just to make them feel more worse than they already did.

[calgARI '07]

The last couple years, Cornell does not get a penalty if fish are thrown when Harvard comes out for the first period.  People who were seen throwing fish were thrown out last year but only about 1% of the people who threw were thrown out.  After the fish are thrown the first time, the warning announcement comes and every fish thrown on the ice from that point on results in a Cornell penalty.

[Beeeej]

[Q]Jessica Wrote:
So the simple solution is to wait until the end of the game and then throw the fish.  It will be a much sweet reward to throw the fish after we have already beaten them...just to make them feel more worse than they already did.[/q]

I kept a fish in my pants for an entire hockey game once.

Once.

Beeeej

[Beeeej]

[Q]calgARI '07 Wrote:

 All your points are valid, but I disagree on one of them.  I've seen the fish thrown on the ice 9 or 10 times and everytime I get the chills.  The delay, although hindering on the players, is really awesome because the crowd just goes nuts and farther demoralizes Harvard.  To me, it is almost he epitomy of Lynah's reputation.[/q]

I have to agree - almost seventeen years since the first time I saw it, and I'm still tickled.  I've insisted on a travel plan for this Friday that will get me, my parents, and my girlfriend into our seats by 6:45 just because I don't think they should miss this.  Granted, the whole thing is kind of gross, but every year someone manages to think of a new twist on "fish" that's amusing enough to make it worth being there on time.

On the other hand, I think the "How Dare They?!" attitude is a little overblown.  If the refs and ushers were trying to take away the newspaper-throwing tradition, that'd be one thing - or, say, trying to get everyone to sit down during play.  There's no call for something like that.  But seriously, people - several pounds of dead fish are raining down around these people, sticking to the ice, requiring a significant delay and potentially endangering skaters.  I'd hate to see the tradition end because it's just so bizarre and over the top, and because it's ours, dammit - but I would completely understand it.  Y'all are acting like Congress is trying to infringe on your free speech rights.

Beeeej

[DeltaOne81]

Here's the thing, honestly... no matter how much they announce it or threaten, or whatever... what's the chance that no fish will get tossed? At most like 0.00001% .

They can threaten all they want, but they know as well as we do that absolutely, positively, no doubt there will be some number of fish on the ice when the Hahvahd players step out there.

So they can give us a penalty for the inevitable, or they can restrict it to after that. We'll see.

[billhoward]

You cannot call a penalty after the game ends ("two minute minor to be served Jan. 8 in Boston by the Cornell bench"?) and there's some leeway 15 minutes before the game starts because it's less clearly delay of game. But still.

The "1% of fisher tossers get tossed statistic" really means that of the few people who do get tossed, they're 100 percent out of the game. How badly do you want to miss seeing Cornell play Harvard?

[Give My Regards]

[Q]Jessica Wrote:
I think we all agree that we don't want to get any penalties, yet we definitely want to throw fish.  So the simple solution is to wait until the end of the game and then throw the fish.  It will be a much sweet reward to throw the fish after we have already beaten them...just to make them feel more worse than they already did.[/q]

Um, no.  Sorry.

If you throw the fish at or after the end of the game, you're interfering with the Cornell players' tradition of saluting the fans after the opposing team has left the ice.  Which is not as old a tradition as fish-throwing, but it's still not one you want to mess with.

I'd have to look it up again, but I don't think NCAA rules permit minors to be called on the fans unless a warning has been announced first.  However, a warning may be announced before the game starts, at the ref's discretion.  That has happened at past Cornell-Harvard tilts.

[Sweetthing]

Just throw your fish in the beginning it is much more fun to watch.  

[CowbellGuy]

[Q]Sweetthing Wrote:

 Just throw your fish in the beginning it is much more fun to watch.  [/q]
Did you bother to read any of this thread?