• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Holmstrom96

Visors Required - New NHL Players in '13-'14

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

What part of working for a team owner as part of a multi million dollar CONTRACT don't you understand? You waive many of your rights and become property upon signing the contact. Your thinking only applies to UFAs.

I was going to touch on this, I've never heard a specific case in regards to hockey, but many athletic contracts limit the player's freedom to do things outside of the sport as well, for example, not being allowed to ride a motorcycle. Think about Roethlisberger...he almost ended his career because of a motorcycle accident IIRC. This is just another aspect of teams protecting their assets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DeGraa55   
Guest DeGraa55

I was going to touch on this, I've never heard a specific case in regards to hockey, but many athletic contracts limit the player's freedom to do things outside of the sport as well, for example, not being allowed to ride a motorcycle. Think about Roethlisberger...he almost ended his career because of a motorcycle accident IIRC. This is just another aspect of teams protecting their assets.

It wasn't that bad but I know what you're saying.

But I think there needs to be limits. Not allowing a player to ride a motorcycle is going too far. Players should still be allowed to live their lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No Hit League

NCL N o C hoice L eague

grown up men being told what to wear lmao this league is becoming m,ore and more of a big fat joke.

I agree that the league is becoming more of a joke with a lot of that s*** that goes on, but this is a positive change. Player safety is important and with the amount of injuries that could have been prevented or at least minimized by the injured player wearing a visor is relatively high. I'm all for letting guys do their own thing, but a line's gotta be drawn in the sand on some things and this is one. Now we just need the new "hybrid' icing to be full no touch so we stop seeing guys ankles fold to their shins sideways. That s*** is gross and makes me want to puke when I see it.

I was going to touch on this, I've never heard a specific case in regards to hockey, but many athletic contracts limit the player's freedom to do things outside of the sport as well, for example, not being allowed to ride a motorcycle. Think about Roethlisberger...he almost ended his career because of a motorcycle accident IIRC. This is just another aspect of teams protecting their assets.

Maybe it's time to ban NHLers from driving any car worth more that 100K. Apparently that just reeks of disaster. :eh: I don't like that tree....it's gotta go!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it's time to ban NHLers from driving any car worth more that 100K. Apparently that just reeks of disaster. :eh: I don't like that tree....it's gotta go!

I think you would be surprised with some of the stuff that can make it's way into a contract. People are willing to give up all kinds of things when you offer them $5 million dollars a year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DeGraa55   
Guest DeGraa55

I understand mandatory helmets it makes sense. But mandatory visors does not.

If they make visors mandatory then I think a full cage should be an option.

I think a cage is better for vision than a Visor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not fun to be in Marian Hossa's shoes where you're high stick caused the end of someone's career, it can have a traumatic effect on how you go on in life. If a simple rule can cut down on those situations I don't see the big deal about it.

Edited by haroldsnepsts
removed non-hockey portion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we are going off-topic here but the other side of freedom is personal responsibility for ones actions. If a hockey player were to cover his own medical care and compensate team for the portion of his contract he is unable to fulfill because that player decided not to wear a mandated piece of equipment, suffered an injury and now unable to play that would be fair. But I doubt anybody is willing to go there to preserve their freedom from regulations.

Edited by haroldsnepsts
deleted non-hockey portion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not fun to be in Marian Hossa's shoes where you're high stick caused the end of someone's career, it can have a traumatic effect on how you go on in life. If a simple rule can cut down on those situations I don't see the big deal about it.

I support visors because vital body function, namely vision. But I think talking about psychological trauma caused caused to a third party is taking this way too far. In my opinion most of that "pain and suffering" stuff your hear about in court verdicts is plain garbage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is about visors in the NHL.

That involves a very select group of people in a very specific professional sport. Keep it about that and not larger social/political commentary.

Further posts derailing the thread into any political discussion or making personal attacks will be deleted and result in warning/suspension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also hate the 3 point game inflation

Me too. Cannot stand it! A loss is a loss.

A possible alternative I would entertain would be this:

Win - three points

Lose - Zero points

Win in OT\Shootout - Two points

Lose in OT\Shootout - One point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest The Axe   
Guest The Axe

Me too. Cannot stand it! A loss is a loss.

A possible alternative I would entertain would be this:

Win - three points

Lose - Zero points

Win in OT\Shootout - Two points

Lose in OT\Shootout - One point

I would actually like to see 3 on 3 for 5 minutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DeGraa55   
Guest DeGraa55

I would actually like to see 3 on 3 for 5 minutes.

Then when they getvteo penalties it can be three on one. And our pp still won't score.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest The Axe   
Guest The Axe

Then when they getvteo penalties it can be three on one. And our pp still won't score.

Cleary

Abdelkader-Filppula

The triangle of pure power play offense.

How many "it hopped over his stick" calls can we handle in 2 minutes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest mjtm77   
Guest mjtm77

I don't understand being against this.

the fact that not wearing a visor gives you way better vision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've did a little maintenance work in some Walmarts. I could be hanging a door or painting a wall, fairly low risk work but it is mandatory to wear gloves, steel toed boots, long sleeved shirt, hard hat, high viz vest and eye protection.

I don't have 6'3" 200lb men coming at me with sticks but its designed to help me go home in the same nick I left the house in the morning.

It's about changing attitudes, it's unacceptable for people to get seriously hurt in a life changing way in the workplace.

Used to be people wouldn't wear their high viz, now you can't get people to take them off. Give the visor rule time, if it helps one guy to be able to see his grand kids and tell them what it was like to be a Wing without being blind in one eye or have a scared face from an errant stick is that not worth it?

It's not about dressing like a 9th century Knight, it's about protecting bits of the anatomy that don't get better with rest and recouperation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the fact that not wearing a visor gives you way better vision.

Until you get a stick/puck to the eye.

The vision increase is not that significant, and easily adapted to. It's one thing to ask players that have played without one their whole career to suddenly wear one, it's quite another to keep making younger players wear it. The risk/reward is so evident, that's what makes it tough for a lot of people to understand why people are against visors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until you get a stick/puck to the eye.

The vision increase is not that significant, and easily adapted to. It's one thing to ask players that have played without one their whole career to suddenly wear one, it's quite another to keep making younger players wear it. The risk/reward is so evident, that's what makes it tough for a lot of people to understand why people are against visors.

because we are talking about perfectly trained adults here, they are the players and I would guess that they now exactly what is best for them and what is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

because we are talking about perfectly trained adults here, they are the players and I would guess that they now exactly what is best for them and what is not.

Which is why as a whole the players agreed to implement the new rule about visors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this