At some point, insurance premiums may force the issue; something like wear a visor or the added premium comes from the pay check. Ultimately, the money to pay for the injury comes from the players' percent of revenue; it would be in the players' interest to consider a mandate themselves.
Construction workers: Well, how many times is something going to strike somebody on the head when on the job? Might never happen. Good thing they get to choose whether to wear hard hat or not. Oh, wait, no they don't.
Visor doesn't prevent lifethreatening injuries like hard helmet worn by construction workers. Neither are hockey players in a situation where them getting injured because of not wearing visor might physically harm other players unlike construction workers injuring themselves because of not wearing a helmet.
Just like to add Patrick Sharp to the list. A Maple Leaf player's skate caught Sharpie in the visor. He said after he looked at the visor there was a scratch right where his eye would be. It took thirty stitches to close up the gash so it's almost suprising that he didn't lose his eye.
Regardless of whether a player's time on the injured reserve counts against the cap or not, the point is that this kind of pointless and preventable injury based on one's own selfishness is a disservice to his team. Sure, in the abstract, we can say that this is a matter of individual choice, but that would be short sighted. It's a team game and also a business and at some point, hard decisions about mandatory safety equipment must be made to trump those individual choices - just like the decision was made years ago to require helmuts. I hate the Leafs, but I think it's unfortunate Sundin wasn't able to play against my Habs for two games. All because of a stupid, preventable injury that he himself admits has made him think about wearing a visor from now on. I hope for his sake and his team's that he does.
The way it was touted to work in Sweeden, with it being mandatory for all players after a certain age, should be put in place here. Granted, some malcontents are going to bellyache about it endlessly, but I would rather hear them mouth off than see a legend like Yzerman bleed from his eyesocket again
There are, and have been, a lot of times when a shield would be a saving grace, but what about an injury like when the visor was absolutely shattered by a puck? If memory serves me right, didn't one of the Montreal players have his face shield disintegrated by a shot?
If you want to wear one, you should...if you don't, well, like anything else, you pays your dime, you takes your chances.
If the owners want the players in visors, then there should be no stopping them. They fork over the large amounts of cash to them and the players are like an investment, what smart business doesnt want to protect their investments especially when theyre bringing in revenue. Its only a matter of time before someone takes a hard slapper from a guy like Phanuef, not the most accurate yet so ill use him considering his booming shot from the point, and gets seriously injured. One can only hope the younger kids see these pucks in the face, and also see the young stars in the league that wear visors like Phanuef, Crosby and countless others and begin to think its cool to wear one and if theyre lucky enough to make the league continue the trend.
The visor wearing would also end the whole french canadian and european arguement that some hockey guys talk about. Hockey is a tough sport. Imo if you play and are taking checks from the huge hitters in the league youre tougher than most. Taking a shot to the mug doesnt make you tough or a man, if anything it makes a player look stupid for something that could have been prevented or atleast not as harmful by wearing a piece of protective gear you wore growing up.
To answer a couple of earlier posts, yes Kevin Lowe's helmet was an old JOFA model. And no guys like Gretzky and Lowe did not wear it illegally to my knowledge. I believe after the Goulet injury the NHL decided that all players entering the league from that point on could no longer wear those old JOFA helmets. Basically, they grandfathered out the old JOFA model helmets, which shouldn't be confused with the current JOFA helmets.
As far as this silly notion that they should have the right to choose, I don't think this is the appropriate circumstance to wave the freedom-to-choose flag. I am anti-censorship more than most people, but when you're employed by an NHL team you are not just in it for yourself and your family. You have responsibilities to your coaches, teammates, owner and most importantly your fans.
Besides, as has been stated ad nauseum, NONE of these guys have ever gone through minor hockey without wearing cages and later on half-visors. It's just a matter of re-adjusting. The lazy way out would be to do nothing. It's time to be pro-active about the visor issue.
It's their health, it's their career, it's their game, it's their profession, it's their livelihood.
It's their choice.
Wow yeah that's a great attitude. Not at all or naive or anything.
While we're at it we can skip all the alcoholic and drug rehabilitation centers .. I mean, they chose to drink and do drugs. Not much we can do. Or just because teenage girls who're getting younger and younger in age when they dress try their first thongs have chosen to do it themselves...then it's ok. We shouldn't be thinking about that either, it's their choice. Or how about old people that have chosen to isolate themselves in their homes. Yeah they like it, let em rot.
Human nature..always thinking she does good when she's aiding someone who needs to be aided and has been forced upon with trouble and misery. Makes us feel good about ourselves.
It's the same things with visors. If we at least don't want it to be up for discussion, because it's their choice, then I think this world will be in trouble. We have this much trouble with sports, a fraction of how many other problems we have in the world. But such a fine example as to why we have em.