Marc Staal takes a puck to the face

[bolt91 31]

Scary stuff... I hope his career isn't over.

Puck Daddy article here

Do you guys think the Rangers will start making visors mandatory?

[XveritasX 13]

Looks bad ....

If a team were to make visors mandatory I think it would be the Rangers since they already make their players wear the extra padding on the gloves.

[JR Boucicaut 3789]

NHLPA would fight it tooth and nail.

[AIREAYE 248]

Why? Out of curiosity, I'm not familiar with labor laws and regulations. Something to do with wanting the right to choose?

[bigdmac 12]

Yes it does look bad; however he seems to be turned just enough to avoid direct contact with the eye. My guess from that picture is most likely a shattered orbital bone which will likely need reconstructive surgery. He'll probably be out for the rest of the year, if not more, but thankfully I don't think it's career ending. Very unfortunate for the Rangers and Staal, and I just hope for a speedy recovery

[bolt91 31]

Yes it does look bad; however he seems to be turned just enough to avoid direct contact with the eye. My guess from that picture is most likely a shattered orbital bone which will likely need reconstructive surgery. He'll probably be out for the rest of the year, if not more, but thankfully I don't think it's career ending. Very unfortunate for the Rangers and Staal, and I just hope for a speedy recovery

I was afraid of a shattered orbital bone as well. Hopefully he makes a speedy recovery.

[Chadd 916]

If a team were to make visors mandatory I think it would be the Rangers since they already make their players wear the extra padding on the gloves.

Unless it is in their contract, they couldn't force the players into wearing them. Frankly, I'm surprised that it isn't mandatory yet. I guess fighting over money has been more important to the owners and they haven't wanted to create extra ill will with the players. I wouldn't be surprised to see them start working on it again soon.

[wrangler 157]

Well, it took a while, but they eventually managed it with the helmets.

[ibeck 38]

Stuff like this happens once a year and kickstarts the same debate. Until somone get seriously injured ala brian berard, this debate wont get any traction. At some point "they're professionals, they are big boys, they can decide" those lines will get hold and visors will become mandatory. Same thing happened with concussions. Now you arent viewed as soft if you leave the game with head problems and the nhl even has a whole safety check program.

[Apes44 7]

Gruesome! Watching him just shake in pain on the ice! That should make players think twice about putting the visor on!

[RadioGaGa 162]

Grandfather it, just like helmets. If you are in the League as of X date, you still have a choice....any new players coming in, visors are mandatory. I can hardly think of any young players recently, other than Ryan White in Montreal, who has come from Jr (visor mandatory) to the AHL (visor mandatory) and gotten to the NHL and taken it off. I'm not thinking of veteran guys like Jim Vandermeer who never wore one, but have to when they are in the AHL. I'm talking about players who have never known the game without one, then suddenly get to the Show and decide not to wear one, because they can....I bet you could count them on 1 hand.

I would curious to know what guys who wear them are saying to their team mates who don't today! It won't be League or PA pressure....I think when guys who don't (and haven't for a long time) start putting them on, that will lead a revolution of face protection. But it will be a player lead thing...not a mandated rule.

[hamstercaster 2]

I don't see the problem with imposing visors to players. Maybe the insurance companies should get involved? The fact that they are professionals and adults should not change a thing. Many jobs require that the employee wear safety glasses, a helmet and steel toe shoes/boots and you don't see the unions having their panties in a bunch about it. We are talking about a sport with a projectile being thrown around at speeds up to 100 miles per hour and sometimes a bit more. Just look at football and the full face mask. Why is a full face mandatory in the NFL but a visor isn't in the NHL when there are far more occasions to get hit in the face in hockey than football?

If the NHL worries that much about player safety and wanting to crack down on dangerous hits, wouldn't the next logical step be to impose the visor, perhaps like Radiogaga suggested, by grandfathering it the same way it was done when the NHL imposed helmets on its players?

[RadioGaGa 162]

Don't give me too much credit for the suggestion...it's been made looooong before me...I'm just echoing it!!!!!

[chippa13 1844]

Each time the topic comes up you hear a bunch of players say that it should be up to the player and the discussion fades into the background again. This is another case where the PA tries to flex its muscle and unprotects its membership by "protecting" them.

[wrangler 157]

They know the risk; it's an informed decision.

[Scopes 4]

It's all about taking something away that they already have, "doesn't matter what it is, if it's mine I'm not giving it up." Eyes are one of the most important elements of the game, I don't know why anyone would leave their safety to chance.

[wrangler 157]

Eyes are also quite handy off the ice.

[AIREAYE 248]

I don't see the problem with imposing visors to players. Maybe the insurance companies should get involved? The fact that they are professionals and adults should not change a thing. Many jobs require that the employee wear safety glasses, a helmet and steel toe shoes/boots and you don't see the unions having their panties in a bunch about it. We are talking about a sport with a projectile being thrown around at speeds up to 100 miles per hour and sometimes a bit more. Just look at football and the full face mask. Why is a full face mandatory in the NFL but a visor isn't in the NHL when there are far more occasions to get hit in the face in hockey than football?

If the NHL worries that much about player safety and wanting to crack down on dangerous hits, wouldn't the next logical step be to impose the visor, perhaps like Radiogaga suggested, by grandfathering it the same way it was done when the NHL imposed helmets on its players?

I was thinking the exact same thing! Odd, but then again, I have no background in sports law. I actually have a Sports and Business conference held by my university soon, with a speaker panel in sports law (Newport etc.) I will try to ask them about this issue.

TSN'S Eric Macramella posted a nice writeup on this issue, including why insurance companies might not play a huge role as well as a curious segment on composite sticks:

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=417509

edit: Didn't get a chance to ask Don Meehan, sorry!

[pizzakid13 5]

This is another case where the PA tries to flex its muscle and unprotects its membership by "protecting" them.

Chippa's Usual anti-union rhetoric. They want to protect their RIGHT to decide.

That being said, i believe the union should be on board with an update to the uniform. It makes sense and they would grandfather the guys in just like the helmets.

I really hope Marc staal is ok because he made a bad decision. I am Not sure how long juniors have mandated shields but him and all of these young guys came up in a system with either shields or cages. To take it off at the pro level is insane.

[chippa13 1844]

So what you're saying is they want to protect their right to decide against something that you then say it would make obvious sense to not be against, to the point of being insane.

[pizzakid13 5]

First, I am correcting your inaccurate statement which was meant as a shot at unions which you obviously despise.

Secondly, yes, I think the union should support a shield requirement and work out a fair deal with ownership.

Are they on record yet?

[chippa13 1844]

My statement was not inaccurate. The NHLPA has taken stands on issues and negotiated against provisions which in the end would make its membership safer. Pretty much everyone agrees that getting head shots/defenseless hits out of the game would take stiffer fines and longer suspensions and yet the maximum fine in the CBA remains a joke and the Union appeals any suspension of substantial length.

[Chadd 916]

That is because the league is not consistent with penalties on head shots, or most other serious issues. They hand out minimal penalties until there is a huge cry in the media and then they hand down an abnormally long suspension that is out of line with the precedent. All the league has to do is be consistently harsh and they would be fine.

[bolt91 31]

Update

[pizzakid13 5]

What are the chances his brothers put on shields?