Comments on: Daly: NHL wants mandatory visors

By: spiciercheez

spiciercheez — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 12:52:37 +0000

Well, they are the ones that face the consequences not you, so maybe that’s why they should have the choice

By: spiciercheez

spiciercheez — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 12:50:37 +0000

Misterchain, how much tape do you put on your ankles when you play you bender? Can you cross over both ways?? I bet you wear Tacks and use a Coffee BC stick.

By: gillette2112

gillette2112 — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 01:56:22 +0000

Yes do it

By: buckyblackhawk

buckyblackhawk — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 01:12:49 +0000

Playing in a old man leagues without a visor is pretty stupid. I do not get it how one wants to improve there vision without a visor during a Tuesday night at 10 pm after 2-3 beers.

By: hockeyflow33

hockeyflow33 — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 00:49:53 +0000

I know, it’s terrible that the players could want free choice

By: hockeydon10

hockeydon10 — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 00:33:18 +0000

The union is there to protect its members.

Oh… wait.

By: boisehockeyref

boisehockeyref — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 22:24:51 +0000

I’ve been involved in the game for over 40 years and have never pkayed out nor played goalie without a cage. For the last 16 years as a referee. About 6 years ago I went to a visor to referee. Best move I ever made and do not regret it one bit. That visor has saved my eyes on a number of occasions. There is no shame in using one.

By: 8man

8man — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 22:12:09 +0000

Yes to all of that. Full cages and body armor. Goalies wear the cages and it doesn’t seem to impair their vision.

By: mattybo

mattybo — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 21:40:42 +0000

Well if they do cages for all they can be like goalies and every other sport position where equipment technology is rapidly evolving for both safety, utility, and player specifications.

What, a billion dollar industry isn’t well funded enough?

By: misterchainbluelightning

misterchainbluelightning — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 20:11:42 +0000

Figures guys who never played hockey in their lives wouldn’t know what Gentlemen league rules mean. Because im sure that most here closest experience with hockey is having some beer and fun on skates with friends.
These wannabe tough guys would be crying home to mommy about not wanting to go back to play a 2nd game of real competitive hockey.

By: lionstigersandwingsohmy

lionstigersandwingsohmy — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 20:08:31 +0000

Craig MacTavish thinks this rule is silly and refuses to wear a visor.

By: ibieiniid

ibieiniid — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 19:58:46 +0000

well, since we’re on a post about Staal getting hit, there’s one. Lappy is 2…. that’s more than you gave right there.

I understand that they WANT the choice completely… I don’t understand giving them the choice, considering the consequences.

By: spiciercheez

spiciercheez — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 19:55:43 +0000

Haha you didn’t give any examples you just tossed a number out. Either way, it is still not very frequent. With the number of guys in the league that already wear visors why is there a need for mandatory? I don’t get how you can’t understand that they want this choice.

By: hockeyflow33

hockeyflow33 — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 19:49:40 +0000

You’re surprised because you have no understanding of the NHLPA dynamic and what a players union is there for.

By: hockeyflow33

hockeyflow33 — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 19:44:07 +0000

I don’t understand this either?

By: hockeyflow33

hockeyflow33 — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 19:41:33 +0000

That would be fine if you ignore the fact that goalies continually try and develop new cages to open up the sight-lines from the cage. Whether it’s a cheater, cat-eye, or some other similar form, goalies try and and avoid a player-like cage at all costs.

By: ibieiniid

ibieiniid — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 19:18:02 +0000

i’ll go with at least 10, yeah. i can think of several (more than the amount of examples you gave) off the top of my head. including one that ended a career. Laperriere

By: spiciercheez

spiciercheez — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:56:37 +0000

Ok you says theres been at least 10…in about 13 years? Once a year huh?

By: ibieiniid

ibieiniid — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:48:53 +0000

here’s the difference… you had to go back to 2000, 13 years ago, to find a neck injury from a puck. you can go back to yesterday to find a high-face injury from a puck. there’s probably been at LEAST 10 players getting moderate to serious facial injuries from pucks or sticks since that neck injury happened. for whatever reason, serious high-face injuries are far more frequent than serious neck injuries from a puck.

and just to cover all my bases, I put aside skate injuries to face/necks for this argument because those are even more rare, freak injuries. plus, too small of a sample size to analyze how i analyzed the puck injuries.

By: spiciercheez

spiciercheez — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:35:03 +0000

How about this story from a while back:

“On January 29, 2000, the Habs were playing the Flyers at the Molson Centre. Habs right wing Trent McCleary hadn’t logged much ice time (only 4:02) but he played aggressively. It was no surprise that he attempted to block defenceman Chris Therien’s shot.

The shot hit him directly in the throat, and McCleary fell to the ice, unable to breathe. He struggled on the ice for a few moments, then his instincts drove him to skate to the bench, where he tried to tell the trainer he couldn’t breathe before collapsing.”

Why don’t they have to wear hard-shell neck guards to protect from that? Where does it stop?

By: ibieiniid

ibieiniid — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:27:10 +0000

as far as the fights: i would think actually, we’d see more quality fights. if a player wanted to fight somebody, he’s not gonna be as compelled to just start swinging on a guy. he’s gonna step back, challenge, and they’ll remove their lids as we’ve seen a lot of guys do before fights lately. I, for one, don’t even like the fights that start when one guy is not expecting it. the fights where they square off 10 ft away from each other always end up being better fights.

and as far as tilting the visor: the rule wouldn’t simply be you have to have a visor on your helmet… it’d be you have to have a visor on your helmet that’s clearly protecting your eyes. if they tilt their helmets back, the ref will say something and possibly give them a penalty… as they do already if any player isn’t wearing their protection properly

By: hockeydon10

hockeydon10 — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:25:33 +0000

I’m kinda surprised more GMs/owners aren’t putting mandatory visor use in the offers they put forth to players. After all, the investment in in the millions of dollars and one would think they would like to protect that as much as possible to get the return they’re expected for all that money.

By: phillyphanatic77

phillyphanatic77 — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:23:59 +0000

I don’t think there should be any question that visors should be mandatory starting with years draft class. Implementing a grandfather will keep the vets happy and create a precedent for all young players to wear them. Like others have said with frozen pucks flying all over and sticks flailing it’s amazing that this doesn’t happen more often. And remember, the puck that hit Staal was deflected so imagine the damage if it had been a straight slapshot to the eye. Maybe if Pronger had been wearing a visor the stick that hit his eye and re-agitated his concussion symptoms could’ve been stopped. I understand that with the grandfather clause he probably wouldn’t have been wearing one anyway, but those types of incidents can be avoided with future generations. Just like with Goalies wearing masks, this is common sense. Especially with Staals history with concussions.

By: ibieiniid

ibieiniid — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:22:04 +0000

you’d just rather them not make changes to the game for player safety at all and continue with the high-as-hell serious injury rate…

By: spiciercheez

spiciercheez — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:20:27 +0000

misterchainbluelightning – Mar 6, 2013 at 12:25 PM: You should lace em up and come on out to the rink for a real game without Gentleman Rules. I doubt you would come back for more.

Huh?

By: spiciercheez

spiciercheez — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:18:35 +0000

It’s obviously not what it’s about, but injuries happen in contact/high speed sports. Get over it.

By: chanceoffleury1

chanceoffleury1 — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:18:03 +0000

Teeth are replaceable, eyeballs are not.

By: dipspit55

dipspit55 — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:12:50 +0000

Obviously the players know the risk that they take by not wearing a visor it’s part of the game and the type of player. If they don’t want to wear a visor let them. If they do make it mandatory your going to see less fights and the players will just tilt the visor all the way up anyway . No point

By: ibieiniid

ibieiniid — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 17:54:49 +0000

lol, this guy. remember how they curved the glass to make sure another Chara/Pacioretty didn’t happen. they constantly do things that make it safer for the players… fact of the matter is, it normally takes an incident like this for them to see how necessary some of these things are.

visors.

but in your world, I guess you’d like to see the losing team line up at one end and let the other team take shots at them from the blue line… because injuries are what hockey’s all about

By: ibieiniid

ibieiniid — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 17:48:38 +0000

the slippery slope: worst argument mechanism in history.