For
whatever reason, there’s been some controversy over mandating visors throughout
the league. Frankly, I don’t really understand it, as all the arguments against
mandating visors are more transparent than the visors themselves:
“Oh, well they fog up from the
sweat and breath and it really impacts your vision." Seriously? That’s your
argument? Grab a towel and wipe them off.
“Well, some players are used to
playing without them.” Alright, then grandfather it. All the new guys coming in
should be required to wear one, and eventually they’ll be worn by all players.
“Well, some of the fighters don’t
like wearing them. There’s a toughness factor involved.” Then take your helmet
off you goon! If you’re going to be so tough, then you can fight without a
helmet.
Did I get all of them? Alright, now
here’s a real argument. There have
been three incidents just this season where a player took puck to the face up
near the eye area, and only one did not suffer orbital fractures and a near
loss of the eye. Want to know which one didn’t? The one that wore a visor. Tampa
Bay Lightning center Nate Thompson took a slapshot from Washington Capitals
defenseman Mike Green in mid-April that shattered his visor, cutting his face
and leaving lots of blood on the ice. But guess what? Thompson’s eye was okay,
and just a few stitches later, he was back on the ice in no time.
Unlike Thompson however, New York Rangers
defenseman Marc Staal took a puck to the eye over two months ago, and just like
Mark Fraser, was not wearing a visor. Staal fortunately has made a fast
recovery, recently returning to the ice, though he has admitted that his vision
is not what it was before. Consider Staal lucky for suffering only from visual
impairment, and not the loss of his eye, but again, this all could have been
avoided with a little piece of plastic. And would you believe it? Staal himself
stated that he wished he would have been wearing a visor, and now agrees with
the grandfathering of them, saying if it comes down to a vote to grandfather
visors, he’d vote yes.
Taking a look back in the history
of hockey, how many consequences and injuries did players needlessly suffer
from before the mandating of certain equipment? When a player loses his helmet
on the ice, everyone in the stands shudders at every play, hoping he can just
finish his shift and get off the ice safe as soon as possible. When a
goaltender’s mask is knocked off, play is immediately stopped; not even taking
the chance a puck might come his way before he can put it back on. Remember
when there were no helmets? Remember when goaltenders didn’t have masks? Remember
when the arguments against them were “it’s a toughness factor” and “it’ll make
him too scared to stay in the crease”? Sounds absurd, but those were the
arguments then, and they’re all too similar to the arguments now. So why doesn’t
the league learn its lesson and grandfather in visors the same way they did
with helmets and goalie masks?
There is no way you are going to
get a player that hasn’t worn a visor for over a decade to suddenly put one on,
but there’s no reason to not require incoming players to wear them. Every
incoming player from junior leagues or college hockey is already used to
wearing full face-cages that are mandatory at that level, so what damage is a
visor to them? Actually, a visor is seen as an upgrade for many, as they’re
clear, weigh less, and still protect their eyes from wayward sticks and pucks…and
they look cooler. Just like a helmet, the minor “impairment” of visors is
greatly outweighed by the safety benefits, so why not make them mandatory as
well? It’ll take time with grandfathering, but 10 to 20 years down the line, we
might no longer have to worry about a young, upcoming player having their
career ended from a lost eye, because they wanted “to see better”.
No comments:
Post a Comment