Bruce Bennett/Getty Images
On Monday night, Philadelphia Flyers captain Chris Pronger took a stick to the eye courtesy of Nikolai Kulemin of the Toronto Maple Leafs. Soon after, it was determined that Pronger would miss 10 days, and would be restricted to bed rest, which was announced by Philadelphia GM Paul Holmgren. This sparked a firestorm among the media outlets of the NHL, and the hot topic of the week has been making helmet visors mandatory. Popular among European players, not to mention mandatory at the college level (full face shields) and in the AHL, the visor hasn't been so quick to catch on with North American players. However, progress is being made according to a tweet by Darren Dreger which stated that roughly 70% of NHL players wear a visor. This is not good enough for some people; there are many out there calling for a mandatory visor rule and just as many that think that notion is a bunch of hogwash. We'll cover both sides of the debate, and you'll hear my opinion as well. See the great helmet visor debate after the jump.
For Visors: A few years ago, I was watching a Florida Panthers game with my father one fateful night as they took on the Buffalo Sabres. Florida's Richard Zednik chased down a puck into the corner, and teammate Olli Jokinen lost his footing, slicing Zednik's neck wide open (warning: graphic video). Zednik thankfully survived because of the heroic efforts of trainer Dave Zenobi who still works for the Panthers. But the damage was done. Like the Pronger incident, this incident sparked a debate as to whether neck guards should be mandatory. In the end, the NHL ruled to make neck protectors a matter of choice. But many remain convinced that the safety of the players needs to be assured by implementing both neck protectors and visors. "Sometimes you have to save the players from themselves," said Pierre McGuire, he of the Versus network and NHL on NBC affiliation. Many players believe that having a visor reveals a lack of toughness, and many also find playing with one uncomfortable. Pronger's teammate Ian Laperriere seems to share that sentiment. The Flyers though, have many different cases and opinions when it comes to this subject. Philadelphia's Scott Hartnell took a slapshot to the face earlier in his career and has been wearing a visor since. Other incidents regarding slapshots to the face have also occured just as recently as last season, see: Malhotra, Manny. However, one thing is consistent: whenever a player happens to be a victim, his attitude immediately changes. This is where McGuire's insight comes into play; the players need to be protected so that they aren't hurt by their own hubris. Better safe than sorry.
Against visors: The other side of this discussion has been previously touched upon in the preceding argument. There are some players who experience discomfort, and there are those who just think it wearing a visor makes you a pansy. If you take away a player's right to choose, it just makes them a drone to the organization and this will lead to continued clamping down. Many players and analysts believe that if a player is that concerned, he'll take it upon himself to wear a visor. There's nothing preventing a player from wanting to make himself feel safer on the ice by wearing a visor. But as this video shows, you can even be injured with a visor on. Matthew Barnaby of ESPN also argues that visors will reduce and eventually kill the art of fighting in the game. Not only that, but the vast majority of these injuries are freak accidents and isolated incidents. The players have the right to choose whether to wear a visor or not and it should be left at that. Don't take away the players' right to a choice, safer or not.
My opinion: I'll keep this short and sweet: let the players do what they want. Let them wear a visor, and don't hold it against them if they choose not to. As I heard a versus analyst say earlier this week, it's a man's game. People get bumps and bruises and get injured, and that's a part of the game. The 70% that wear the visor will continue to wear one each game, and the 30% that don't shouldn't change anything. Let the players play and leave this decision to a matter of personal choice.
Don't forget to like Toe Drag on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/pages/Toe-Drag-Hockey-Blog/165548556864436?ref=ts
No comments:
Post a Comment