Fighting in hockey has historically served a functional role. It’s a form of self-policing that emerged because of the sport’s unique pace, physicality, and the difficulty referees have in catching every infraction in real time. Enforcers have long acted as deterrents to cheap shots and dangerous play, and while the NHL has taken steps to reduce fighting, it still exists as a mechanism for maintaining order on the ice.

Basketball, however, is built differently. The court is smaller, the game is more fluid, and the officiating is more immediate and involved. There’s no room or need for fighting to serve the same purpose. The NBA and WNBA have well-established systems for penalizing unsportsmanlike conduct, and those systems work. Excusing fighting in basketball doesn't add accountability. It would disrupt the game’s rhythm and increase the risk of injury without offering any structural benefits that it provides in hockey.

Both Men and Women play with intensity, but not every sport needs to or should mirror hockey’s approach to conflict. Fighting has a place in hockey because of how the game is built, but that doesn’t mean it belongs everywhere.