Youngsters ditching the visors

[Guest Shoreline]

You guys say that it should be optional.

Here's why it shouldn't.

NHL players, when at practice, or games of any kind (exhibition, RS, playoff) are at work. Doing their job.

Now think about that.

Think about how much their employers pay them.

Now consider that facial injury happens in hockey and is random and unpredictable.

A visor protects in many cases, but can exacerbate or even cause injury in some cases.

But a cage or a full shield protects the whole face, and would significantly reduce random puck and stick injuries.

Playing hockey can also exacerbate an injury.

I guess it comes down to how far one wants to go to protect players.

It certainly is true from a business perspective that the NHL is protecting their product by keeping players safe. It does seem like quite an unnecessary and easily preventable issue concerning facial injuries from errant pucks or sticks. That being said, part of collective bargaining includes player input, and if they don't determine in this agreement that it's mandatory to wear face shields, then I agree that it's entirely up to the player.

[Bring Back The Bruise Bros 1,029]

Sure, many of today's top players wear visors, but there are plenty good players that don't. It's not just the old guys and brawlers that go without a visor. Also, Many of the stars from the '80s and '90s wore visors too though. Jaromir Jagr, Luc Robitaille, Pavel Bure, Jarri Kurri, Teemu Selanne, Pat Lafontaine, Ray Bourque, Alexander Mogilny, Mike Gartner, etc.

[Carman 387]

It should be grand-fathered in soon. There is no sensible reason to not wear a visor.

[newfy 695]

It should be grand-fathered in soon. There is no sensible reason to not wear a visor.

Aside from it affecting the vision of the player and also not always preventing injury but causing some you mean?

[Finnish Wing 110]

Aside from it affecting the vision of the player and also not always preventing injury but causing some you mean?

I don't think those are the reasons players don't wear visors. Of course for most of the older players it's just a habit, but when it comes to the younger guys I think it just to make them look "tougher". Edited March 29, 2011 by Finnish Wing

[Carman 387]

Aside from it affecting the vision of the player and also not always preventing injury but causing some you mean?

It doesn't affect the vision dramatically.

It prevents far worse injuries then could be attributed to wearing one.

Once again, there is no logical reason to not wear a visor while playing ice hockey.

Edited March 30, 2011 by Carman

[WorkingOvertime 536]

You are working against your own argument here. You argue visors are bad, and then say that players should be able to choose whether to have them. That visors impair performance. Yet as you said, the younger players who have been exposed to them keep them and still manage to dominate the league. The majority of players without visors are older players who came up playing without a visor.

How many top players really even go visorless? Not many.

As for the "it's different fro a normal workplace" well sure. But that doesn't mean that available safety equipment shouldn't be made mandatory to protect the millions of dollars the owners have invested in these players. If Brendan Smith gets a career-ending eye injury in his fourth season as a Wing, what is that? Ilitch has just spent a few million to develop him to that point, plus however many millions are remaining on his contract.

It's not about should visors be mandatory. It's about when will it happen, because it will happen.

I think you are misunderstanding my argument. I'm not arguing that players shouldn't wear visors, just that they shouldn't be mandatory. I wear a visor when I play- therefore I'm not against them- but I have the choice, and I think NHL player should too. I point out that visors can cause injuries because some posters in this thread imply that they do. If protection is the number one priority, as some posters here imply, than cages are the next step. Where is the line drawn when it comes to player protection? T

Since more players are exposed to visors in the CHL, AHL, USHL, etc. I think they can now make an informed decision on visors.

My question is why shouldn't the players be allowed to choose? They can still choose what elbow and shoulder pads to wear, and there cause more injuries to other people. I'm all for making the game safer (while keeping the integrity- see my posts on head shots), but I believe the players should be able to choose when it comes to their own health if it doesn't have a negative impact on others.

[Carman 387]

If protection is the number one priority, as some posters here imply, than cages are the next step. Where is the line drawn when it comes to player protection

The same reason that these huge shoulder pads shouldn't be used. Protection sometimes leads to players taking more dangerous chances because their personal safety is better. There is a happy medium between protection that doesn't impact the players decision making on the ice, and the visor is just that.

[Finnish Wing 110]

The same reason that these huge shoulder pads shouldn't be used. Protection sometimes leads to players taking more dangerous chances because their personal safety is better. There is a happy medium between protection that doesn't impact the players decision making on the ice, and the visor is just that.

Exactly. You can break your nose or jaw many times, but it's one shot thing with your eyes. And your eyesight is much more important.

[WorkingOvertime 536]

The same reason that these huge shoulder pads shouldn't be used. Protection sometimes leads to players taking more dangerous chances because their personal safety is better. There is a happy medium between protection that doesn't impact the players decision making on the ice, and the visor is just that.

One could argue that visors created more facial injuries (less serious ones). In a recent interview (I posted it on here as a topic), Gretzky said that he used to be forced to practice without a helmet. This created a level of respect when it came to keeping shots and stick lower to the ice. Visors have allowed players to have less control of their sticks due to the added level of protection. I would bet that if you watch a game ~30 years ago, sticks and shots would be lower to the ice. Adding facial protection has mitigated the large injuries (especially going from no helmets to helmets), but the amount of cuts to the face is alarming IMO.

Your argument seems to support not having visors since that would reduce the amount of players using their sticks recklessly. I agree that shoulder pads should be limited- it is rare to see a shoulder injury result from a good hit (on the hitter). The 'classic' Sherwood series should pads are great IMO.

I agree with protecting players from each other (within the integrity of the game) but I don't think the league needs to protect the players from their own choices. Like in life, we are allowed to smoke, drink, etc because they are only harmful to ourselves (mostly) and I don't see why NHL players shouldn't have the choice. However, this is the same society that doesn't let kids walk 500 yards to school by themselves anymore, so I may be the minority (but that topic is better saved for the other forum).

Again, I'm not in support of no visors, but I don't see why players should have to wear them. I believe any GM could force their players to wear visors (I know Burke requires the Marlies to wear M11 helmets), but that hasn't happened. Who are we, as forum members, to suggest that Bert, Mule, Orr, Lucic, E, etc shouldn't be allowed to wear visors? Most have been forced to wear them at some time in their career, and have chosen not the wear one. Why is it debatable that they shouldn't have this choice? How is keeping the choice degrading the game?

[Buppy 1,720]

Personally, I think it's stupid to not wear a full cage, but I don't really care if players choose any facial protection or not.

However, the choice should really be with the owners. Or at least there should be contractual stipulations forcing players to pay their own medical expenses and/or forfeit their salary for any reasonably preventable injuries.

Safety regulations are as much about protecting businesses from unnecessary liability as they are about protecting workers. The NHL should be no different. You don't want to take perfectly reasonable measures to protect yourself; sign a waiver.

[Bring Back The Bruise Bros 1,029]

Personally, I think it's stupid to not wear a full cage, but I don't really care if players choose any facial protection or not.

However, the choice should really be with the owners. Or at least there should be contractual stipulations forcing players to pay their own medical expenses and/or forfeit their salary for any reasonably preventable injuries.

Safety regulations are as much about protecting businesses from unnecessary liability as they are about protecting workers. The NHL should be no different. You don't want to take perfectly reasonable measures to protect yourself; sign a waiver.

I agree with players covering their own medical expenses. They make enough that it wont break the bank. The only NHL player that wears a cage that I can think off is Ryan O'Byrne of the Avalanche. Some guys sport them immediately following a facial injury, but ditch it as soon as possible, it seems.

Edited March 30, 2011 by Bring Back The Bruise Bros

[cusimano_brothers 1,655]

[Hockeytown_Ryan 119]

Aside from it affecting the vision of the player and also not always preventing injury but causing some you mean?

Affecting the vision of a player like how? Like they cannot play the game effectively?

TOP 10 NHL scoring (as of 3-30-2011 9:58 a.m.)

Daniel Sedin Visor

Martin St Louis NO Visor

Henrik Sedin Visor

Steven Stamkos Visor

Corey Perry Visor

Alex Ovechkin Visor Tinted dark

Henrik Zetterberg Visor

Jarome Iginla Visor

Jonathan Toews Visor

Those guys are not having a problem playing the game with a visor on.

[WorkingOvertime 536]

.

Edited October 14, 2016 by WorkingOvertime

[Hockeytown_Ryan 119]

I don't think anyone is arguing that players can't succeed with visors. As I said earlier in this thread, most of the players wearing visors were forced to wear them when they were younger, and have decided to continue to use them.

Why does there need to be a visor rule is ~90% of the incoming players are choosing to wear them (this is a guess off the top of my head)? According to an article on NHL.com, 60% of players currently wear visors. This number has grown immensely in the pat 5 years, and it will likely continue to grow. If <15% are not wearing visors in 5 years, does this rule still need to be implemented? Less players are taking the risk, but I think they should still have the choice.

This applies even more to fighters. The CHL has stopped letting players remove their helmets to fight. If this rule also trickles up, then we would be seeing players always fighting with visors on. This is not safe- either is always having to remove a helmet with a visor. I have no problem with Abby, Iggy, etc ditching their lids to fight, but I'm not sure I'd like to see the players who fight 15+ times a year always ditching their lid, or (worse) having to fight with visors on.

the comment I quoted...he stated it affected vision. How is affecting vision different then having success?

If a player chooses to wear one fine, If a player does not...I will not shed a tear knowing there are ways to help prevent injuries and

they did nothing to help themselves because they are to proud to wear a visor. To me that's what it sounds like, "I don't wanna" instead of

"I don't HAVE to"

It was said....there is no good reason NOT to wear one.

[WorkingOvertime 536]

the comment I quoted...he stated it affected vision. How is affecting vision different then having success?

If a player chooses to wear one fine, If a player does not...I will not shed a tear knowing there are ways to help prevent injuries and

they did nothing to help themselves because they are to proud to wear a visor. To me that's what it sounds like, "I don't wanna" instead of

"I don't HAVE to"

It was said....there is no good reason NOT to wear one.

It does effect vision. Even the pro-visor posters on this forum have said that. It's not so substantial that a player cannot score, but there is an effect.

Saying there is no good reason to not wear a visor ignores the last half of my last post. For fighters, not having a visor is the safest thing. Serious eye injuries as a result of not wearing a visor are very rare, and so are serious injuries to a player not wearing a helmet while fighting (largely from the head hitting the ice). Therefore, requiring visors would also require (honorable) fighters to remove their helmet and thus increase the risk of this type of injury occurring. I would argue that it benefits their health to not wear a visor. The arguments here largely ignore this. I have been reluctant to comment on it because I know a lot of posters here don't like fighting or don't fully understand it in the NA game.

As I said in an earlier post, if most new players are choosing to wear visors, why is this an issue? Fighters will likely choose not to wear one, and this is probably beneficial to their health. All (or most) new NHL players have worn visors and can thus make an intelligent decision on them.

[Carman 387]

Shawn Thornton came centimeters away from taking a skate in the eye last night.

[Bring Back The Bruise Bros 1,029]

Shawn Thornton came centimeters away from taking a skate in the eye last night.

I'd be shocked if that changed his ways of playing without a visor. Even after Ian Laperriere took the puck to the face the first time, as soon as he could ditch the face mask/ shield, he did. After he got hit the second time in the face, he finally decided a visor was best for him. He has been out all year, and who knows if he will ever play hockey again.

[Carman 387]

I'd be shocked if that changed his ways of playing without a visor. Even after Ian Laperriere took the puck to the face the first time, as soon as he could ditch the face mask/ shield, he did. After he got hit the second time in the face, he finally decided a visor was best for him. He has been out all year, and who knows if he will ever play hockey again.

And you don't think that is tragically wrong? Wearing a visor doesn't make anyone weaker or less intimidating, which is apparently what some people here think.

[Hockeytown_Ryan 119]

It does effect vision. Even the pro-visor posters on this forum have said that. It's not so substantial that a player cannot score, but there is an effect.

Saying there is no good reason to not wear a visor ignores the last half of my last post. For fighters, not having a visor is the safest thing. Serious eye injuries as a result of not wearing a visor are very rare, and so are serious injuries to a player not wearing a helmet while fighting (largely from the head hitting the ice). Therefore, requiring visors would also require (honorable) fighters to remove their helmet and thus increase the risk of this type of injury occurring. I would argue that it benefits their health to not wear a visor. The arguments here largely ignore this. I have been reluctant to comment on it because I know a lot of posters here don't like fighting or don't fully understand it in the NA game.

As I said in an earlier post, if most new players are choosing to wear visors, why is this an issue? Fighters will likely choose not to wear one, and this is probably beneficial to their health. All (or most) new NHL players have worn visors and can thus make an intelligent decision on them.

Well with the NHL trying to get rid of fighting all together..(much to my and MANY others dismay) this would be a good chance to do so...

require a visor and then add a automatic game misconduct for removal of a helmet during a fight and then you slow the frequency of fighting.

that is the rule all the way to NCAA if I recall correctly. (I think)

[WorkingOvertime 536]

.

Edited October 14, 2016 by WorkingOvertime

[Bring Back The Bruise Bros 1,029]

Affecting the vision of a player like how? Like they cannot play the game effectively?

TOP 10 NHL scoring (as of 3-30-2011 9:58 a.m.)

Daniel Sedin Visor

Martin St Louis NO Visor

Henrik Sedin Visor

Steven Stamkos Visor

Corey Perry Visor

Alex Ovechkin Visor Tinted dark

Henrik Zetterberg Visor

Jarome Iginla Visor

Jonathan Toews Visor

Those guys are not having a problem playing the game with a visor on.

True, but if you look at some of the developing talent:

Jamie Benn (No Visor)- 22 goals, 28 assists, 50 points in 62 games

Chris Stewart (No Visor)- 27 goals, 23 assists, 50 points in 57 games

Ryane Clowe (No Visor)- 24 goals, 36 assists, 60 points in 72 games

Brandon Dubinsky (No Visor)- 22 goals, 29 assists, 51 points in 72 games

Brooks Laich (No Visor)- 16 goals, 26 assists, 42 points in 77 games

Brian Boyle (No Visor)- 21 goals, 12 assists, 33 points in 77 games

So I mean it's not all scorers wear visors. There are guys that can put the puck in the net that don't wear visors, but the majority do wear them. Just throwing it out there.

[Hockeytown_Ryan 119]

True, but if you look at some of the developing talent:

Jamie Benn (No Visor)- 22 goals, 28 assists, 50 points in 62 games

Chris Stewart (No Visor)- 27 goals, 23 assists, 50 points in 57 games

Ryane Clowe (No Visor)- 24 goals, 36 assists, 60 points in 72 games

Brandon Dubinsky (No Visor)- 22 goals, 29 assists, 51 points in 72 games

Brooks Laich (No Visor)- 16 goals, 26 assists, 42 points in 77 games

Brian Boyle (No Visor)- 21 goals, 12 assists, 33 points in 77 games

So I mean it's not all scorers wear visors. There are guys that can put the puck in the net that don't wear visors, but the majority do wear them. Just throwing it out there.

Touche.......

But!

when you look at the guys this year..rookies!

Skinner, Couture, Grabner, Ennis, Hall, Stepan

Eberle, Marchand, Shattenkirk, Fowler.

all top 10 Rookies in scoring and ....Visors.

The point is the same I guess.. Its not a Visor that makes a player...the talent does.

I am a believer that any protection that is available should be worn. Dentists can replace your teeth

surgeons can stitch you up, and make it look like it never happend...

one set of eyes is all your given. protect them!

Edited March 31, 2011 by Hockeytown_Ryan

[Bring Back The Bruise Bros 1,029]

Watched the Rangers/Isles game, and Vinny Prospal still looks weird without a visor on.