Following the gruesome and scary video of Marc Staal taking a slap shot directly in the eye, the debate over the use of visors and shields has re-surfaced. The issue was raised during the recent CBA talks in January that the players should be made to wear visors to prevent injuries to the face, inparticular the eye area. NHL players are currently not required to wear them and it remains a ‘Players Choice’, however the league has been looking to make it mandatory for some time.
As of now, according to Katie Strang of ESPN (I was shocked that they reported on anything NHL too!) the NHLPA has said that 73% of players wear visors in todays NHL, up from 69% in 2011-12. That could be related to the fact that more younger players, who are accustomed to wearing visors and cages in juniors and college, are used to the feel and are comfortable.
Bill Daly via ESPN New York: “It’s a continuing discussion we have with the Players’ Association and among our general managers. We have consistently been in favor of a rule mandating visors. The PA has historically been in favor of maintaining ‘Player choice,’ coupled with continued education and sensitization.”
Education and sensitization? It’s not gun control.
Courtesy: Getty Images
As a player myself, obviously not professionally, I can say that visors are an obstruction for a lot of players. I personally don’t like them. I’ve caught pucks high in my face, busted my lip and broken my nose from errant sticks many times, but I still won’t wear one mainly because I can’t see as well. Now if I were a professional and the puck and stick speeds were multiplied 100x and I caught a 100 mph deflected slap shot to the eye like Staal did, I’d definitely think about it. Try the latest visor out in practice and see if I like it. But in the end, I’d probably opt out as it is my choice to put myself in harms way, not the leagues.
“And, in fairness, the use of visors has continued to increase at a significant pace over the last several years,” Daly said, “So, I’m not sure a single incident will materially change or impact the ongoing discussion or approach.”
And he’s right. It won’t. Visor usage might spike again after this, but I don’t think it will be a mandatory thing in the NHL. In 2006, the AHL made the use of visors mandatory after Portland Pirates defenseman lost his vision after a puck to the eye. Manny Malholtra almost had his career ended with a high stick. Same with Chris Pronger when he received a stick to the face which resulted in a concussion and blurry vision. I remember when Bryan Berard caught a high stick from Marian Hossa and lost his sight. He was able to come back to play after 7 surgeries to repair his detached retina, but he was obviously never the same player. He is still legally blind in his right eye, but he had something to say about the issue:
Bryan Berard via Daily News: “I still believe it should be the players’ choice. We step on the ice and you know what injuries are out there. Obviously it’s a freak accident, and guys are shooting the puck harder and there are more deflections now. Those things can happen.”
I don’t want to see players get hurt in this fashion. I agree that player safety is important. But I also agree that it’s the players choice whether or not they protect themselves. However, if the NHL wants to make it mandatory then they should grandfather the rule in like they did with helmetless players and players who wore the old Jofa helmets. I’d definitely go along with that.
Marc Staal will be fine though. The swelling was, and is, so bad that he couldn’t be diagnosed until yesterday. The Rangers opthalmologist and a maxillofacial surgeon both said that he has “improved significantly” and he make a “full recovery”. Let’s hope so. More will be determined when the swelling subsides.
It’s a tricky debate because you can’t bubble-wrap the NHL. With all the concussion problems and the fact that you can’t hit anyone anymore without being called, the game is becoming different. The ‘No-Touch’ icing debate is still going on, and I think we’re going to see it in the NHL. I don’t mind the rule, but I think it dumbs the game down. You can’t take certain aspects out of the game of hockey. It’s a tough sport. It’s hard, it’s fast, and it can be dangerous. But it’s up to the players and the officials to determine that. Not the league. Not the suits who are worried about their investments. The game is faster and the players are stronger than ever before, and it’s up to them to protect each other. Put aside rivals and egos and you have a brotherhood stronger than any in sports. The last thing they want to do is deliberately end someones career or season.
But it’s not up to me or the fans to decide. I think something will be decided over the summer when the NHL and the NHLPA meet to discuss this and other issues, but I think we’re going to see a different game next year.
More to come…
