from Pierre LeBrun of ESPN,

It occurred to me the other day as I observed the fuss in Montreal over whether the Canadiens had properly followed concussion protocol with Nathan Beaulieu after he took a hard punch in a fight with the Columbus Blue Jackets' Nick Foligno. (The NHL said the Habs properly followed protocol.)

What I couldn't help but think in the days afterward was that the wrong debate was being held. Shouldn't we be asking why the NHL still allows bare-knuckle fighting?

At a time when we know so much more about brain damage in sports, are we really still debating the merits of fighting in hockey?

There is no question fighting is way, way down and appears headed toward extinction, eventually. The game is about speed, and traditional enforcers can't keep up with the pace, so fights are disappearing by the day.

But why not push it there more quickly? Why not throw two combatants out of the game for a fight? Period. That would push it down to a sprinkling of fights a year.

I've said this before, but it just seems so hypocritical to have introduced Rule 48 (illegal hit to the head) in 2010 but still allow bare-knuckle punches.

continued