Marc Staal takes a puck to the face

[dsjunior1388 81]

What are the chances his brothers put on shields?

They both played in the OHL in visors. They've had the time and experience to make up their minds, and I doubt this changes it.

[zachary 2]

What are the chances his brothers put on shields?

Zero, Jordan took a puck or stick near or in the eye last season I think it was and he wore a visor for maybe a game if even and took it off.

[Tailboard Jockey 25]

If a player doesn't care enough about protecting their eyes to use a visor, why should we care? If they feel that the risk is acceptable, I say let them have the freedom to take that risk.

[JR Boucicaut 3802]

There was an article in the NY Daily News today about Bryan Berard, and despite his injury, still feels that it's a player's choice.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/hockey/rangers/eyes-staal-injury-ranger-create-new-view-visors-article-1.1281672

If made mandatory, then you'd have to eliminate fighting, as players would have to drop their helmets, which increases the risk for injury. I'm of the thought that players coming up will end up considering staying with them, it'll just take a few years.

[EBondo 233]

I'm of the thought that players coming up will end up considering staying with them, it'll just take a few years.

Same here. I was wondering what the percentage of kids who have come into the league since the visor rule was mandated have kept it/ditched it.

[chippa13 1844]

There was an article in the NY Daily News today about Bryan Berard, and despite his injury, still feels that it's a player's choice.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/hockey/rangers/eyes-staal-injury-ranger-create-new-view-visors-article-1.1281672

If made mandatory, then you'd have to eliminate fighting, as players would have to drop their helmets, which increases the risk for injury. I'm of the thought that players coming up will end up considering staying with them, it'll just take a few years.

Not so sure they'd have to eliminate fighting. Major Junior, AHL, and ECHL all have mandatory visors and fighting is still alive and well in those leagues. Helmets are removed now in the NHL because you can't initiate a fight in a visor or you get an extra penalty. If everyone is wearing visors then the "advantage" disappears.

[strosedefence34 175]

i think it should be players choice, but as the article the JR posted the use of visors have gone up significantly in the past few years. There are so many improvements to visors since the early 90s and the itech RBE I half shield that players are just wearing it. I give it another few years before you have roughly 90% of the league wearing them by choice.

[Chadd 916]

Up to 73% this year according to this article on ESPN.com

http://espn.go.com/new-york/nhl/story/_/id/9022902/nhl-visor-use-mandatory

[chippa13 1844]

Funny thing about the argument against mandatory visors, there really isn't one. People simply say that players know the risks and it should be the player's choice. Like some of the NHL Network pundits have put it, sometimes the players have to be protected from themselves.

[wrangler 157]

I think you're confusing the lack of arguments against visors with the arguments against mandating them. It's simply a freedom of choice issue. If you don't see a value in freedom of choice, then there's no discussion, and Big Brother wins again.

This is a philosophical question. Where do you start from? The idea that society should force "good" ideas on people, and protect them from themselves? Or the idea that people should make their own choices for matters that affect them personally?

The players have all the available information, and see the injuries "up close and personal" in a way that can produce an impact that we fans will never appreciate the same way. Personally, I balk at the idea of forcing anyone to do anything against his will, when it doesn't deal with an act than injures a third party. I find the entire concept of imposing my will on others, simply because i judge that the result will be better for them, abhorrent.

[pizzakid13 5]

what about seat belts, should they be personal choice?

[chippa13 1844]

That was a bit of a jump from mandatory visors in the NHL to Big Brother and the Thought Police. When do we accuse Bettman of acting like Hitler and call the NHL the second coming of the Nazi Party? Then we'll have really nailed the internet hyperbole effect.

[wrangler 157]

Big Brother in the larger (not necessarily Huxley's) sense, the imposition of regulation because "I know what's best for you". My arguments explained my position, without Hitler, Nazis, and Thought Police.

[chippa13 1844]

Well I just finished a reread of 1984 recently and you can't have Big Brother without the Thought Police.

Visors aren't Michelle Obama and no sugar/fat/salt in school lunches, they are workplace safety. It will be no different than when helmets were made mandatory. Some folks will carp about it but 10 years later it will seem perfectly natural and kids will be amazed that any NHLers used to play without them.

[hamstercaster 2]

Wrangler, it's not necessarily about forcing someone to do something you think is best for them. It's also about protecting the players, yes, but it is also about protecting their investments. Most players are much more useful on the ice than on the Injured Reserve List. It's the same principle as making protective helmets mandatory on construction sites. I'm sure construction workers don't get hit on the head by a block, a 2 x 4 or anything else every single day they work but the helmet is there as a preventive measure to protect the player as well as to protect the employer's investment. That construction worker is much more useful on the job site than sitting at home recovering from getting hit on the noggin.

Many jobs out there have security requirements. Some people complain about but eventually understand why the rules are there and just abide by them. Eventually it just becomes second nature.

[wrangler 157]

You've got a point about the employer's investment, especially considering they spend high draft picks on some players. I had not considered that.

[dsjunior1388 81]

“I guess there really isn’t a valid excuse to not wear one anymore,” Orpik said.

“Some of the guys say that can’t see as well,” Orpik said. “Well, I look around and see Sid (Sidney Crosby), Geno (Evgeni Malkin) and (Tampa Bay star Steven) Stamkos wearing visors out there. They’re the best players in the game, and they have plenty of vision even though they use visors. There’s probably no excuse anymore.”

[shooter27 116]

Not to mention that every single player in the league wore a visor or full cage in minor hockey, juniors, college, the minors, etc. Requiring them to wear visors isn't going to force them to adjust when they get to the NHL, since they're already used to wearing them. I just don't see a valid reason for not wearing a visor in today's game when guys shoot so hard and the fact that you have to shoot high to beat butterfly goalies, it's just a risk that isn't necessary to take. The vision excuse doesn't exist anymore with today's optically correct visors and, as I said above, the forced adjustment argument doesn't hold water either, there just isn't a valid reason not to wear one.

[HockeySavants 5]

Majority of AHL callups will continue to wear their visor in the NHL, it's only a matter of time.

[bolt91 31]

“I guess there really isn’t a valid excuse to not wear one anymore,” Orpik said.

“Some of the guys say that can’t see as well,” Orpik said. “Well, I look around and see Sid (Sidney Crosby), Geno (Evgeni Malkin) and (Tampa Bay star Steven) Stamkos wearing visors out there. They’re the best players in the game, and they have plenty of vision even though they use visors. There’s probably no excuse anymore.”

Glad you posted this. There was also an article about how Chris Pronger is probably done because of his eye injury and concussion. Eye injury could've been prevented.

[bolt91 31]

With Marc Staal‘s frightening eye injury fresh on the minds of many, some are considering changing their stances on wearing visors.

Pittsburgh Penguins defenseman Brooks Orpik might be one of them, as he told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

“I guess there really isn’t a valid excuse to not wear one anymore,” Orpik said.

“Some of the guys say that can’t see as well,” Orpik said. “Well, I look around and see Sid (Sidney Crosby), Geno (Evgeni Malkin) and (Tampa Bay star Steven) Stamkos wearing visors out there. They’re the best players in the game, and they have plenty of vision even though they use visors. There’s probably no excuse anymore.”

Also, Pronger is probably done- http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=659057&navid=nhl%3Atopheads

[jsykes 35]

Yeah, there really should be no issue with requiring all new skaters in the NHL to wear the visor. You grandfather it in so guys that have never worn one do not have to get used to it, but like was said, all the new guys have been playing with it for years, so it should be no issue to require them to continue to use it and within 5 years or so, you'll have virtually everyone in a visor without requiring anyone to get used to something they dont want to.

[Morten 2]

IIHF rules mandate players born after 1974 to wear visors and cover to the tip of the nose, in IIHF tournaments, most(all) european leagues play under this, world champinship and olympics.
So mandate it, dont grandfather it in.

Joe Thornton with visor.

Only problem, the players are going to tilt the visor or the helmet up, unless the refs follow the rule.

But here in Denmark they dont, a few tilt the helmet up but arent called for it.

Like this.

[wrangler 157]

Reminds me of the way they let the NHL players wear the chin strap, so the helmets often go flying.

[tareatingrat 4]

You're not going to get someone to change if you don't force them.

You can't make an argument against protection, though. At least, there is no valid one for not wearing at least a visor.

If you don't want to, fine. I'm kind of torn, because I don't really care if guys don't want to wear one, it's their choice, they can deal with the consequences, even though it's a little crazy.

I mean, Christ, I get chirped constantly for wearing a cage in beer league. Somehow, hockey culture says you're not tough enough if you choose to protect yourself in that particular way. So if you're a pro, that's so ingrained in you throughout the years that I can somewhat understand the resistance.

BUT, if I were their employer, I would make it a condition of employment.

I realize it's not that cut and dry, especially with the 'PA, but the owners have quite the interest in making sure their stars continue to play. One would think, anyway.