In the online debate over fighting, what if the combatants had to back their tweets with fists?
On and on it went, throughout the weekend.
My TweetDeck, hijacked by the high school debate team; Everybody smarter than the last guy. Each tweet a 140-character, sarcastic Wet Willie into the previous poster's ear, each reply a smarter-than-you tack on the chair of the originator.
After a Saturday of hair-pulling, we didn't even launch Twitter on Sunday, opting for peace.
Yet, on Monday morning at 7:31 a.m., there they were, still locked in mortal tweet combat.
"@Proteautype just so we're clear you're championing closed-mindedness? Gotcha," tweeted @JeffMarek.
Adam Proteau of The Hockey News is anti-fighting. Jeff Marek of the CBC, is pro-fighting. Or, we gather, he's not in favour of its banishment.
And so they chirped, er, tweeted. Back and forth, forth and back.
In came colleague James Mirtle from the Globe and Mail, raising the point that young players will fight if it helps them earn an NHL job, just as they may do steroids to attain the same goal.
Heck, I've even heard junior players say they'd "kill" for a chance to play in the NHL.
Of course, incongruous leaps are the stock in trade of the anti-fighting argument, illustrated by the way this topic seemed to begin with headshots - most pointedly Sidney Crosby's concussion - to banning fighting in the NHL.
No matter what side of the debate you're on, can you find a plausible link between Steckel's accidental hit and the role of fighting in the game? If you can, you're smarter than I.
Of course, everyone on Twitter is smarter than I.
And now, Mike Milbury, who was always a mark for the "knuckle-dragger" and "thuggery" labels from the anti-fighting crowd, is waffling, suggesting that perhaps we need to take a longer look at fighting in the game.
Immediately, Milbury's Mensa score rises on Twitter to somewhere between Copernicus and Bill Gates. It's funny how derision turned so quickly to admiration, as soon as Milbury agreed with a group's position.
Of course, we weren't the first to notice that. @wyshynski (a.k.a. PuckDaddy) tweeted that observation earlier Monday morning.
Ah, so much intelligence from those so young.
As esteemed Toronto columnist Frank Orr used to say, "It's amazing how they could ever play the game, before (these bright young minds) invented it."
The anti-fighting types have somehow made the term "hockey people" a derisive term. You know: "I love when (hockey people) say things like,…"
Or this one: "The Goon Crowd."
On the other side, the pro-fighting lobby fires back with shots at their opponents' manhood.
Then they direct them towards European hockey, which we know not to be nearly as compelling as our own.
"Dancing bears, chicken Swedes," and on and on it goes.
And so it struck me, as the playground snowball fight wore on, and on, and on….
Is this what the game itself would become if they banned fighting?
Is each tweet a jab in the back of the leg, each reply a glove in the face from a player who knows that - no matter how disrespectful he is of his opponent - there is no real, tangible price to pay?
Think about it:
During a NHL game, as the gratuitous slashes and cheap shots from players who never fight escalate, we look to the referee to "get the game under control."
When that doesn't happen, and the yappers and scrummers continue their game after every whistle, a fight tends to be inevitable.
Most times - not every single time, but most times - that fight serves to settle the game down and put an end to the scrums. It's like a valve through which the tension escapes. Once the fight ends - again, not every time, but most times - the teams settle back into playing hockey.
That is simply an observation folks, not a stance or position.
There is no mechanism to end the debate on Twitter, however. And so it rages on, and on, and on - far past the point of meaningful debate, settling into personal shots and embarrassing attempts at one-upmanship.
A goal-mouth scrum between @Proteautype and @JeffMarek that began sometime Friday burned like a coal bed throughout the weekend, still smoking when the new work week began.
Along the way others came and went, tossing in their two cents towards the conversation.
If you like Twitter - and how can you not like Twitter? - you would say that these kind of debates are exactly what it is all about.
When we are watching a hockey game however, where the mouthy debate and quiet stickwork continues ad nausea after every whistle, we like the fact that a Jordin Tootoo or a Steve Downie has to eventually close his mouth, put down his stick, and defend himself.
Then - not every time, but most times - everyone gets back to playing hockey.
If only Twitter could come up with a trend like that.
