NHL players should all wear visors

[BigMac12]

To those who think hockey should have a helmet optional rule, would you say the same with football?

Apples and oranges.

I disagree. Both are physical sports, and both need some head protection with the amount of hitting both sports require. I find this notion of having helmets optional in hockey disturbing. Sure, there are concussions in hockey, but that will skyrocket with mandatory headgear optional.

[CC97]

To those who think hockey should have a helmet optional rule, would you say the same with football?

Apples and oranges.

I disagree. Both are physical sports, and both need some head protection with the amount of hitting both sports require. I find this notion of having helmets optional in hockey disturbing. Sure, there are concussions in hockey, but that will skyrocket with mandatory headgear optional.

Incorrect... there were fewer injuries in hockey without helmets than with helmets.

[BigMac12]

To those who think hockey should have a helmet optional rule, would you say the same with football?

Apples and oranges.

I disagree. Both are physical sports, and both need some head protection with the amount of hitting both sports require. I find this notion of having helmets optional in hockey disturbing. Sure, there are concussions in hockey, but that will skyrocket with mandatory headgear optional.

Incorrect... there were fewer injuries in hockey without helmets than with helmets.

Do you have proof?

[CC97]

To those who think hockey should have a helmet optional rule, would you say the same with football?

Apples and oranges.

I disagree. Both are physical sports, and both need some head protection with the amount of hitting both sports require. I find this notion of having helmets optional in hockey disturbing. Sure, there are concussions in hockey, but that will skyrocket with mandatory headgear optional.

Incorrect... there were fewer injuries in hockey without helmets than with helmets.

Do you have proof?

Do you?

[BigMac12]

To those who think hockey should have a helmet optional rule, would you say the same with football?

Apples and oranges.

I disagree. Both are physical sports, and both need some head protection with the amount of hitting both sports require. I find this notion of having helmets optional in hockey disturbing. Sure, there are concussions in hockey, but that will skyrocket with mandatory headgear optional.

Incorrect... there were fewer injuries in hockey without helmets than with helmets.

Do you have proof?

Do you?

Now, since you think that hockey players should not wear helmets, should football players not wear them, too? I can tell you there would be an uproar about possible head injuries. Again, the notion that hockey players should not wear helmets is very disturbing. If football players have to wear them, hockey players should too.

[CC97]

To those who think hockey should have a helmet optional rule, would you say the same with football?

Apples and oranges.

I disagree. Both are physical sports, and both need some head protection with the amount of hitting both sports require. I find this notion of having helmets optional in hockey disturbing. Sure, there are concussions in hockey, but that will skyrocket with mandatory headgear optional.

Incorrect... there were fewer injuries in hockey without helmets than with helmets.

Do you have proof?

Do you?

Now, since you think that hockey players should not wear helmets, should football players not wear them, too? I can tell you there would be an uproar about possible head injuries. Again, the notion that hockey players should not wear helmets is very disturbing. If football players have to wear them, hockey players should too.

It's not nearly the same thing.

Hockey got along fine without any helmets until the 1980s... some players were still playing without a helmet in the mid 1990s.

[DEAD!]

To those who think hockey should have a helmet optional rule, would you say the same with football?

Apples and oranges.

I disagree. Both are physical sports, and both need some head protection with the amount of hitting both sports require. I find this notion of having helmets optional in hockey disturbing. Sure, there are concussions in hockey, but that will skyrocket with mandatory headgear optional.

Incorrect... there were fewer injuries in hockey without helmets than with helmets.

Do you have proof?

Do you?

Well, how many hockey players were there when helmets were not mandatory?

In the case of eye injuries:

excert from Saving Sight in Sports By Dr. Tom Pashby

Statistics for hockey - related eye injuries alone, clearly show

that wearing protective equipment works. For example, in the 1974

- 1975 season, before minor hockey players were required to wear

face masks, there were 258 eye injuries , including 43 blinded eyes.

In the 1999 - 2000 season, only 13 eye injuries, including 1 blinded

eye were reported. Not one of the 308 blinded eyes since 1972 has

been suffered by a player wearing a CSA-certified full-face protector.

However, 8 players have suffered a blinding injury wearing certified

visors (half shields). In each case, it is suspected the players did

not have their visors properly positioned. Helmets need to be secured

to the head by a taut chin cup rather than a loose neck strap..

[NJTank]

Before the helmets came in there were no head hunters and tahst what the major problem is they think the helmet will protect you from all injuries it wont, so what you have is allot fo cheap shots where as before there was more careful play and a greater respect taht you injure someone. And teh same goes with the visor, these players in the visor love to come up high with the stick they dont fear getting hit and they dont care, if you made visors mandatory you will have a great epicdemic of high sticking.

Btw any one who start a fight where wearinga visor against a non visor player deserves to get his teeth knocked in.

[ROCHitman]

I don't dispute anyone's level of hockey fandom here, but I don't have any trouble recognizing players while they're wearing helmets.

Are you saying you could recognize every NHL player on the street if he walked past you? I know I couldn't and I watch hundreds of games per year. Sure, most of us can recognize the stars, but I was referring to the NHL player population in general. AS silly at it sounds.. fans could relate to players better if they played w/o helmets.

But it's irrelavanet cuz this debate has more to do with player safety than satisfying the fans.

CC is right. There are indeed more head injuries now than in the helmetless days of the league, but I believe most of that can be contributed to the faster style of play with some recklessness involved not to mention that shots MUCH faster these days. Blocking a slapshot isn't was easy to take as it used to be.

[BigMac12]

I find the idea that playing hockey without helmets as safe is totally wrong. I don't care if you guys think that these players should play without helmets. It's too dangerous to do so, since one good smash from a guy to another without head gear, and you're likely going to have a crack skull. If that happens, the can of worms just got it's lid pop off. I can't find any logical reason to have these players go without head gear.

[VitaminD]

Hockey got along fine without any helmets until the 1980s... some players were still playing without a helmet in the mid 1990s.

At that time:

- players were generally smaller;

- players were generally not in the type of physical shape that they are now;

- pads were softer and not covered with the hard plastic shell that offers extra protection when delivering hits;

- composite sticks were not commonplace;

- players policed themselves on the ice, which tended to mean fewer cheap shots, less slashing, and a little more respect for the opposition

I've never been hit as hard playing football as I was playing hockey. And I broke more bones playing hockey. Hockey players are the same size as many NFL linebackers - and they move faster being on skates. And they pound people into solid wooden walls. I can't imagine hockey without helmets as played in 2005 any more than I could imagine playing NFL football without a helmet.

[Andy]

I don't dispute anyone's level of hockey fandom here, but I don't have any trouble recognizing players while they're wearing helmets.

Are you saying you could recognize every NHL player on the street if he walked past you?

No, but I don't think I could say that about any sport, either. I would say it's just as easy to recognize someone on the ice as it is to recognize a player on a football or baseball field. As far as outside of the games goes, I would recognize Martin St. Louis on the street as easily as I would recognize Chipper Jones. I think if you're going to make an argument about people generally not recognizing players, it's because they're not in commercials (watch any NFL/NBA game and wait for the break) or videogames (Shaq Fu!) or movies or on billboards, not because they wear helmets.

[Shmee]

Players that have been wearing facial protection all their lives, and have known nothing BUT playing with facial protection, should adjust pretty easily to wearing facial protection, no?

Grandfather in the guys already in the league, make all newly entering players wear visors.

[Bearcats]

To those who think hockey should have a helmet optional rule, would you say the same with football?

And why stop there? What about baseball?

Researchers at the University of Montreal have conducted research that indicates modern visors don't impair vision at all.

"There is no statistically significant difference for visual acuity, color vision and sensitivity to contrast with or without eye protection," wrote optometry researchers Sheila Laplante and Sophie Pilon. "We wanted to know if [NHL players] were justified in complaining about this factor. Our conclusions are very clear; they are wrong.

[ROCHitman]

Don't get me wrong, I don't think this way, but some would argue by saying....

"what else would you expect from French-Canadian researchers at the Univ of Montreal?"

It's a well known fact some players and fans blame the European players for bringing the visor into the sport.

Researchers at the University of Montreal have conducted research that indicates modern visors don't impair vision at all.

"There is no statistically significant difference for visual acuity, color vision and sensitivity to contrast with or without eye protection," wrote optometry researchers Sheila Laplante and Sophie Pilon. "We wanted to know if [NHL players] were justified in complaining about this factor. Our conclusions are very clear; they are wrong.

[slapshot]

I don't understand why someone would risk their own health to play without a visor. Saying it's manhood or pride or whatever, I'd rather look a little over-protected but have the visor than not. When I played floor hockey, I saw a teammate get accidentally sticked in the face. Just missed his eye, but blood everywhere. The next day I bought my helmet with wire cage. Didn't affect my vision at all.

Players should have to watch Bryan Berard's history if they don't want to wear a visor. There was another player in the AHL who suffered the same career-ending injury because he didn't wear a visor.

[IronChefShark]

Players should have to watch Bryan Berard's history if they don't want to wear a visor.

kinda unrelated to the topic, but worth mentioning.

I was at a Sharks game and they were playing the team Bryan Berard happened to be playing for at the time (I forget which team though)

I was razzing them and I told Berard he was the model for the Raiders logo.

yeah, low blow.......but sometimes its necessary to be mean spirited

[NJTank]

loL CLASSIC

[HatCityEnforcer]

Players should have to watch Bryan Berard's history if they don't want to wear a visor.

kinda unrelated to the topic, but worth mentioning.

I was at a Sharks game and they were playing the team Bryan Berard happened to be playing for at the time (I forget which team though)

I was razzing them and I told Berard he was the model for the Raiders logo.

yeah, low blow.......but sometimes its necessary to be mean spirited

ROFL!

Same thing could be used on Shawn Bates of the Fishsticks....

==============================

As for the point of this, well, count me among those that feel it should be up to the players and NOT a league-wide rule.

However, there's a move towards this...I know the UHL is putting in a visor rule this year (with a grandfather clause, of course)..and I believe the Central has one already in place.

[pollux]

I think visors should eventually become mandatory. But the NHL should do as they did with helmets, forcing rookies to wear one and let the older players choose. That way there would still be a Rod Langway for the visor, but it would become mandatory. And every junior player has to wear it nowadays. I don't think it would be such a change.

I play with a half-visor and I haven't changed my play style a bit. But I wouldn't dare taking it off nor playing without a helmet, and it's a beer league. It is true that players showed more respect towards other players in the 70s, but they didn't wear gladiator-like padding...