HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Injured Players Thread (3/6: Staal Out Indefinitely; Not Career Threatening)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-05-2013, 11:19 PM
  #876
Whoot Whoot
Biased-NYR-Homer
 
Whoot Whoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 2,683
vCash: 500
That was brutal - put the game into perspective for a dangerous and lingering moment.

Whoot Whoot is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:22 PM
  #877
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garian Maborik View Post
Apparently Staal didn't have to go to the hospital so that is a huge sigh of relief that he did not need emergency surgery.

We have to be thankful that it was at least a deflected puck which took some velocity out of the hit. (I know if there was no deflection he would not have been hit at all but still). It looks like it just missed hitting him square on the eye. Worst thing I've witnessed watching hockey.
Its a miracle if there's no broken bone or damage to his eye.

Kreider had a similar incident and broke his jaw.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:26 PM
  #878
h0ckeyman
Registered User
 
h0ckeyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 2,057
vCash: 500
Him not going to the hospital is huge. He really dodged a bullet.

We as humans are naturally empathetic, and to see such a big tough guy in pain that looks so unbearable is always extremely tough to watch. Really hoping he is ok.

h0ckeyman is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:29 PM
  #879
The Torts Identity
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 94
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR510 View Post
This was probably posted already, but the gif makes it look like it BARELY missed:

A bit reassuring to see that. As nasty as it looks, it seems like it got him above the eye and even got a small piece of his helmet. Hope he's ok...don't want to know what that feels like.

The Torts Identity is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:41 PM
  #880
IceBear86
Broadway Pride
 
IceBear86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Regensburg, Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 412
vCash: 500
Well, if he had worn a visor, he would have gotten his helmet fixed and would habe been back on the ice for the next shift.
If you don't wear a visor in a hockey game and you get injured, it's your own fault.

IceBear86 is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:41 PM
  #881
Punxrocknyc19*
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 10,233
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Torts Identity View Post
A bit reassuring to see that. As nasty as it looks, it seems like it got him above the eye and even got a small piece of his helmet. Hope he's ok...don't want to know what that feels like.
Maybe he will start to wear a visor. Some players do switch after they have been hit.

Punxrocknyc19* is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:43 PM
  #882
Boom Boom Geoffrion*
CarciLOL
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Country: Greece
Posts: 7,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guess What View Post
Why? Because we don't wanna see our guys injured is a reason why we can be concerned. This is laughable. Stop whining.
Players are going to get injured regardless. Yes, minimize the things that lead to injuries, but don't force players to wear something they might not want to wear; or like wearing; or have ever worn before.

Maybe the NHL should ban slap-shots going forward.

Boom Boom Geoffrion* is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:46 PM
  #883
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,479
vCash: 500
Part of the game. Contrary to popular belief, you cant prevent everything.

For every Bryan Berard, there have been 10,000 Dan Giardi's.


Staal is a grown man capable of making decisions. Something tells me that in his 22 years of playing hockey, he's had his fair share of experiences.

Fighting is now "bullying"
Cursing is called "harassment"
Having an opionion is "bias"

Without getting political, I think hockey is one of the last bastions of pure and classic "toughness" in society. Can we at least let the men who put their bodies on the line worry about their bodies, and not be influenced by others?

From a purely hockey standpoint, adult players should be allowed to make their own decisions and live or die with them.


Two words:

Rocket

Richard.

I hope Staal comes back and decides what HE wants to do, and does what HE thinks will make him a better, effective hockey player. The Rangers pay him like an adult...hopefully they treat him like one as well.

GWOW is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:49 PM
  #884
nevesis
#30
 
nevesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 8,469
vCash: 500
“@NYDNRangers: Rangers say as of right now Marc Staal hasn't been sent to a hospital. Hopefully that's good news but can't say for sure”

nevesis is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:49 PM
  #885
mschmidt64
Registered User
 
mschmidt64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
Part of the game. Contrary to popular belief, you cant prevent everything.

For every Bryan Berard, there have been 10,000 Dan Giardi's.


Staal is a grown man capable of making decisions. Something tells me that in his 22 years of playing hockey, he's had his fair share of experiences.

Fighting is now "bullying"
Cursing is called "harassment"
Having an opionion is "bias"

Without getting political, I think hockey is one of the last bastions of pure and classic "toughness" in society. Can we at least let the men who put their bodies on the line worry about their bodies, and not be influenced by others?

From a purely hockey standpoint, adult players should be allowed to make their own decisions and live or die with them.


Two words:

Rocket

Richard.

I hope Staal comes back and decides what HE wants to do, and does what HE thinks will make him a better, effective hockey player. The Rangers pay him like an adult...hopefully they treat him like one as well.


^ winner

mschmidt64 is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:51 PM
  #886
Hockey Team
Hunger Force
 
Hockey Team's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,485
vCash: 920
I'm sure the rangers will pressure staal to wear a visor, which is fine.

But ultimately it's going to be staal's decision, which is also fine (and how it should be).

Hockey Team is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:52 PM
  #887
Silence Of The Plams
All these feels
 
Silence Of The Plams's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Lancaster, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 17,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Geoffrion View Post
Players are going to get injured regardless. Yes, minimize the things that lead to injuries, but don't force players to wear something they might not want to wear; or like wearing; or have ever worn before.

Maybe the NHL should ban slap-shots going forward.
Of course you need hyperboles to make yourself sound intelligent here. Pretty soon organizations will make it a requirement to use extra safety measures to minimize injury. Just like helmets, many years ago. As the league progresses so will the value of on ice safety. Nothing wrong in thinking safety should be increased. Nice hyperbole though. One that doesn't make much sense. How does suggestion of more visors equal banning shots? Please educate me on the hyperbole.

Silence Of The Plams is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:53 PM
  #888
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,479
vCash: 500
Hundreds of players have been hit in the face and broadcast on ESPN and TSN and CBC etc. I'd like to think hockey players completely understand the dangers of not wearing a visor.

Did everyone where Kevlar neck guards after Steve Tuttle sliced Clint Malarchuk's neck?

Nope.

As a fan, accceptence is the key. You have to accept the fact that no matter how much you love your team or love your favorite players, they are in fact human and they are at risk of getting hurt.

Has anybody stopped to think that Staal doesnt wear a cage or visor because it detracts from him vision?

But you'll see -- some player will get his face sliced from a cracked visor and everyone will cry about how dangerous visors are.

GWOW is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:54 PM
  #889
Doctor King Schultz
Garian Maborik
 
Doctor King Schultz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: NYC
Posts: 2,173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevesis View Post
“@NYDNRangers: Rangers say as of right now Marc Staal hasn't been sent to a hospital. Hopefully that's good news but can't say for sure”
I have to believe that if he couldn't see out of one of his eyes he would have gone to the hospital, but I'm no doctor.

Doctor King Schultz is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:58 PM
  #890
Hockey Team
Hunger Force
 
Hockey Team's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,485
vCash: 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garian Maborik View Post
I have to believe that if he couldn't see out of one of his eyes he would have gone to the hospital, but I'm no doctor.
If he had an issue with his vision, or a broken orbital bone, there is a 100% chance he would go to the hospital to get it checked out.

So assuming that report's accurate he should be available for thursday.

Hockey Team is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:58 PM
  #891
mschmidt64
Registered User
 
mschmidt64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 828
vCash: 500
The league as a private employer has every right to mandate that all it's employees wear certain gear.

But as of right now, the league doesn't mandate that.

As such, Marc Staal has every right to not wear a visor if he doesn't want to. And not wearing one isn't "ignorance." The guy has been playing hockey for most of his life. He knows the benefits of it.

If there was literally no downside to wearing a visor, and all safety benefit, then everyone would wear them.

That clearly is not the case. Players are deciding not to wear them because they are somehow otherwise distractions to them. They should not be judged for coming to the conclusion that they prefer to take a small risk with their personal safety in exchange for being more comfortable with their gear.

mschmidt64 is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 12:02 AM
  #892
Rust Heisenberg
Registered User
 
Rust Heisenberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,586
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garian Maborik View Post
I have to believe that if he couldn't see out of one of his eyes he would have gone to the hospital, but I'm no doctor.
Well, its a good sign cause it would imply that the Rangers medical staff believed that sending him to the hospital wouldn't be worth it.

If his eye had been damaged, like feared, I'd also believe that going to the hospital would not be optional. Hopeful, but still tempering my expectations. Hoping for the best for Staalsy.

Rust Heisenberg is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 12:03 AM
  #893
bobbop
Henrik's Pop
 
bobbop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Suburban Phoenix
Country: United States
Posts: 4,829
vCash: 500
Players didn't put helmets on voluntarily. There was quite an outcry and players not wearing helmets were grandfathered for the balance of their careers. Wayne Gretzky wore a helmet that wasn't much different from what you would buy in a toy store. Sometimes you have to legislate safety. The big push for visors in junior came after Greg Neeld lost an eye playing junior hockey in the 1970s.

For us old timers, tonight's incident was eerily similar to the play (at the 8th Ave. end of The Garden) on which Flyer defenseman Barry Ashbee lost an eye in the early 1970s. Praying for a much better result tonight.


Last edited by bobbop: 03-06-2013 at 12:13 AM.
bobbop is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 12:04 AM
  #894
Hockey Team
Hunger Force
 
Hockey Team's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,485
vCash: 920
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschmidt64 View Post
The league as a private employer has every right to mandate that all it's employees wear certain gear.

But as of right now, the league doesn't mandate that.

As such, Marc Staal has every right to not wear a visor if he doesn't want to. And not wearing one isn't "ignorance." The guy has been playing hockey for most of his life. He knows the benefits of it.

If there was literally no downside to wearing a visor, and all safety benefit, then everyone would wear them.

That clearly is not the case. Players are deciding not to wear them because they are somehow otherwise distractions to them. They should not be judged for coming to the conclusion that they prefer to take a small risk with their personal safety in exchange for being more comfortable with their gear.
Yeah, really. If I were an employer, I'd rather take the .1% chance (there's maybe 1 player out of hundreds each season that suffers a debilitating injury that could've been prevented with a visor) that my employee suffers an injury that's going to make him miss serious time from the game, then the 100% chance of reducing his performance by forcing him to wear something HE DOESN'T WANT TO WEAR.

There are a handful of players in all of hockey's history who suffered debilitating eye injuries. It's hardly a good reason to make visors mandatory. If someone's not concerned enough to wear a visor to protect their own safety, then why would I be concerned about it?

Hockey Team is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 12:07 AM
  #895
SnowblindNYR
Registered User
 
SnowblindNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 17,237
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Geoffrion View Post
Craig Mactavish thinks otherwise. He was clearly going for "cool" and "tough guy".



I ****ing hate visors, personally. I hate them when I play paintball. I hate them when I test my buddies helmets. And I know for a fact that a lot of hockey players feel the same way. It's a comfort thing.

I sometimes drive without my seatbelt. I sometimes text and drive to. Regardless, driving with my seatbelt on and my complete attention is still dangerous. Do you propose we all drive tanks that can't exceed 30MPH, because they're safe?

I saw a hockey player knocked out once during a fight. Let's ban hockey.

I also saw a players skate slice human flesh. Let's enforce duller skates.

Relax dude.. **** happens. Hagelin wears a visor. If Staal had an arched visor like Hagelin's, it wouldn't have made any difference. Sticks rise up. Pucks typically do to. Visors do help limit facial injuries, but they don't prevent them completely.
Are you going to brag about drinking and driving too? I think saying "ignorance" for a guy bragging about putting lives at risk is a little too soft. Do you want to kill some kid before you take this **** seriously? Disgusting.

SnowblindNYR is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 12:09 AM
  #896
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschmidt64 View Post
The league as a private employer has every right to mandate that all it's employees wear certain gear.

But as of right now, the league doesn't mandate that.

As such, Marc Staal has every right to not wear a visor if he doesn't want to. And not wearing one isn't "ignorance." The guy has been playing hockey for most of his life. He knows the benefits of it.

If there was literally no downside to wearing a visor, and all safety benefit, then everyone would wear them.

That clearly is not the case. Players are deciding not to wear them because they are somehow otherwise distractions to them. They should not be judged for coming to the conclusion that they prefer to take a small risk with their personal safety in exchange for being more comfortable with their gear.
No body called the players ignorant.

The league has been in debate about grandfathering visors for years.

The CHL has mandated them. The NCAA has a mandate on full masks/shields. The AHL mandates visors. The ECHL mandates visors.

So, every level of Canadian and American minor pro and junior levels ALL require visors. They're all ignorant?

http://www.buzzonbroad.com/2011/10/i...mandatory.html

This is not the first injury Marc Staal sustained that would have been avoided had he been wearing a visor.

If he's wearing a visor when his brother hits him, his face doesn't impact the ice the way it did. If he's wearing one tonight he doesn't get hit in the brow by the puck.

There are countless examples of what protective gear can do to prevent these injuries.


Last edited by Bob Richards: 03-06-2013 at 12:15 AM.
SupersonicMonkey* is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 12:10 AM
  #897
Bob Richards
Mr. Mojo Risin'
 
Bob Richards's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 45,975
vCash: 50
Let's cool it down in here. This is going to ferment into a flame war.

__________________
"New day, new hope. Richards Buyout 2014". -Ail
Bob Richards is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 12:11 AM
  #898
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Team View Post
Yeah, really. If I were an employer, I'd rather take the .1% chance (there's maybe 1 player out of hundreds each season that suffers a debilitating injury that could've been prevented with a visor) that my employee suffers an injury that's going to make him miss serious time from the game, then the 100% chance of reducing his performance by forcing him to wear something HE DOESN'T WANT TO WEAR.

There are a handful of players in all of hockey's history who suffered debilitating eye injuries. It's hardly a good reason to make visors mandatory. If someone's not concerned enough to wear a visor to protect their own safety, then why would I be concerned about it?
Gee that visor sure is prohibiting Stamkos from scoring more then 60 goals on a season. Someone should tell him to remove the visor, he might score 90!

SupersonicMonkey* is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 12:14 AM
  #899
nevesis
#30
 
nevesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 8,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garian Maborik View Post
I have to believe that if he couldn't see out of one of his eyes he would have gone to the hospital, but I'm no doctor.
Also, if it was a broken orbital bone, I would think he would be at the hospital prepping for surgery.

Can we keep dodging LT injury bullets this season?

nevesis is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 12:14 AM
  #900
mschmidt64
Registered User
 
mschmidt64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Team View Post
Yeah, really. If I were an employer, I'd rather take the .1% chance (there's maybe 1 player out of hundreds each season that suffers a debilitating injury that could've been prevented with a visor) that my employee suffers an injury that's going to make him miss serious time from the game, then the 100% chance of reducing his performance by forcing him to wear something HE DOESN'T WANT TO WEAR.

There are a handful of players in all of hockey's history who suffered debilitating eye injuries. It's hardly a good reason to make visors mandatory. If someone's not concerned enough to wear a visor to protect their own safety, then why would I be concerned about it?
From the league's perspective, I'd agree.

Not the same as the concussion issue, where players left and right are getting their brains scrambled. You couldn't do away with the helmet for that reason.

Pucks to the eye happen how often? Once every couple years? A career ending eye injury like Brian Berard's happens once in a generation? Players suffering career ending injuries to things that happen off the ice is probably more prevalent, even.

The argument that it is a pressing safety issue is unconvincing. The only possible way it would make sense if there was literally no reason whatsoever not to wear one. If you could slap a visor on every player in the league, and there would be no difference in performance whatsoever, then sure.... why not? If it has no other effect, of course you'd prefer safety.

But if the players aren't comfortable wearing them, and the safety benefit only makes you 0.000000000001% more safe, then it's needless worrying.

Guess what, if you play hockey, there will occasionally be a freak injury that seriously hurts someone. The only way to 100% prevent that reality is to fundamentally change the way the game is played, which I'm not interested in doing. And every player who signs up to play the game and then chooses to do so without a visor understands and accepts that reality. Nothing wrong with that any more than any of the day to day minorly risky things us humans do every day, like jaywalk or drink alcohol or whatever.

But if the league wants to water down their product my mandating that, putting everyone on the same level, fine. It's their call.

Until they make that call, it's the individual players' decision.

mschmidt64 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:09 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.