Stevie Y

[Speedo]

Four hours of eye surgery last night. Thank God he's expected to make a complete recovery. (I don't mean in terms of playing again -- that would just be a bonus -- but in terms of retaining his sight).

[healer677]

I didn't get a clear view of the blow from the television, but;...

would a visor have stopped the puck?

This may be one of those cases the media could use to insite views regarding the mandatory use of visors.

[johnnyhandsome]

It's all fun and games till someone loses an eye.

[Don]

I may be in the minority here but I think it is just dumb not to wear a visor these days. A visor would have prevented the whole thing. But Stevie Y is a good ol' hard working Canadian boy so he can't wear a visor. I love Yzerman hope he makes a full recovery but I wish he wore a visor. There is so much pressure for our boys to not a wear a visor which I think is just stupid.

[DenWa]

A Visor would have almost definitely prevented the injury. What a goddam waste.

DW

[superquad1968]

Yep. Visors should be made mandatory. Anyone who denies it is a Cherry. :)

[healer677]

Barring a minor miracle, Stevie Y is done for the year.

Rumor has it that he has a scratched cornea and several fractures around his eye socket. What a shame - he'll more than likely need surgery and he ought to be done for the year.

[Kathleen]

Sad news, I hope Steve is alright. Myself, I'm a Cherry. I say no to maditory visors. More protection to me leads to less respect for other players. The hard shoulder and elbow protection is a perfect example. Add a visor, and there will be way more high sticking because people will say " But he has protection".

These guys are grown men, leave the choice up to them.. it's their risk.

Kathleen

[blitz]

come back Stevie Y, get well. we love watching you play!

[DenWa]

Kathleen,
Sometimes I am flat out astounded by the nonsense that spews out of your keyboard. Your logic and assumptions truly boggle the mind.

DW

[GlavaMan]

What's wrong with what she said? It's true, the main reason for a lot of the injuries in the NHL today is that lack of respect among players. Combine that with the size & strength of the players & the equipment today... no wonder there are so many concussions. Stevie Y got hit by a redirected shot, it is one of those things that can happen. A visor may or may not have helped. It also could have shattered causing other damage. Players should have a choice in wearing them.

[DenWa]

The assumption that mandatory visors would lead to a proliferation of intentional high sticking to the face is highly unlikely. I agree with you, GM, that it should be the player's choice. I was merely commenting on the flawed logic in Kathleen's argument. We all have opinions, but try to back up an argument with some semblance of common sense and reality. When the NHL made helmets mandatory, players didn't suddenly start chopping other players in the head with their sticks, now did they?

DW

[Speedo]

Well -- part of me wishes all players would use visors. They do in the OHL, and it takes nothing away from the game.

But I also agree with Grapes -- there is far less "respect" in this day and age of knight-like armour. What's more, I'm tired of the "we know what's best for you" approach -- both in hockey and government. The freedom to choose should be maintained, IMO.

[GlavaMan]

Kathleen says she is 'a Cherry' so she is reiterating what Don says but he\she is right. We didn't have these injuries when the equipment was smaller & didn't have plastic shells around it. When players respected each other, we didn't have all the stickwork. The players are not completely at fault because that is that way they have been coached to play.

[galt]

I've brought up this aspect in many other threads but I think that the decision to wear visors will not rest with the players, the teams or the NHL for that matter. The decision will end up falling to the insurance companies that hold the policies on the teams and the players. If a player doesn't wear a visor, insurance companies will not pay settlements on salaries for players that experience face injuries that either force them to miss games or injuries that end their careers. That leaves the teams holding the bag.

I believe that it should most certainly be the players' choice but I think that it will become the norm. (Much like the goalie mask). Hell even as late as in the 70s some goalies (Ken Dryden being one) were still wearing the Jaques Plante type mask that was just a few padded leather strips. When Plante began wearing the mask he was very much derided by his peers but could any of us imagine a goalie today not wearing one (I still have visions of Wendal taking Cujo's mask off with a wrist shot in the leafs blues series a few years back).

Visors will become the norm because of the financial implications not because of a rule change or desire by the players

[Speedo]

Originally posted by galt
When Plante began wearing the mask he was very much derided by his peers

Good points, Galt.

And I've always maintained that goalie masks never really gained acceptance until blood-and-guts Terry Sawchuk donned one at the start of the 1962-63 season. Plante was always considered a weirdo.

[DenWa]

I find the correlation between players respecting each other and the size of the equipment to be, again, somewhat far-fetched. I think the lack of respect amongst fellow players has more to do with the state of the modern athlete and the way they're brought up, and less to do with whether or not someone has a visor on. The introduction of new equipment is generally a reactionary result to a series of injuries. You're arguing the chicken and the egg here, and I just find it hard to believe that players are out to kill each other all of a sudden because they are wearing protective gear. Blame the restrictions on fighting for the frustration on the ice before you blame some guy wearing a visor.

DW

[blitz]

Here, here DW!

The top players in this game wear visors and many of them are tougher than tough. A visor doesn't make a player weak, they're in the NHL for goodness sakes.

However, an outdated idea of toughness, skill and economics suggests a weakness of mind for the game of hockey.

Cherry's could always build a time machine and drift back to when seatbelts, sun block and helmets weren't necessary but they may want to take some matches to build fire.

[roddy]

hey kat i like your style visors should always be a personal choice
more equipment more injuries i have played hockey for many years i use to wear a 1/2 visor until a stick came up and cut me
under the eye. I took it off years ago and i have never even had a
close call. why? because players respect you have no protection and they keep the sticks down. Watching all the violent play
in the nhl and ahl recently tells me the players have no respect for their opponents. Parents get so upset with cherry because
they fear that their kids should have all the safety . I agree but when my son is old enough and says i dont want to wear a shield
you make that choice. enough said leave it up to the individual
to decide

roddy

[Ranger68]

Stevie will come back.
I think it's almost a done deal that the league will do with visors what they did with helmets many years ago - mandatory for those entering the league, grandfathered for the rest.

[The Doctor]

Yzerman's injury could have been prevented by a visor. It should be the players choice, but I don't see how you can rationalize the risk of injury from an accidental incident like this or even place enough faith in your competitors to entrust something as important as your eye sight. roddy, you have been lulled into a false sense of security and you're only kidding youself if you don't think you could be next. The people you are playing with are not as skilled or experienced enough to know the difference between how to play against someone with protection and someone without.

Kathleen does have a point in that much of the lack of respect in the NHL now is equipment related. The player delivering the hit feels nothing and is invincible. As a result you get reckless attempts to "intimidate" you opponents and that's when players choose to retaliate in a manner that will be felt...usually a shot to the head. I went through a phase of invincibility as a result of a should injury experienced while playing lacrosse. After purchasing an NHL calibre set of shoulder pads I was able to hit anthing that moved without experiencing any discomfort on my part. Unfortunately during this period of invincibility, I hit someone, who coincidently was on of those people who chose not to wear any facial protection. Although the hit was clean, his helmet was dislodged and as we landed on the ground, his exposed head hit the ground knocking him unconscious while at the same time the plastic shoulder cap on my pads caused an 8 stitch gash under his eye. Bottom line...he had a headache for a while and still has a slight scar and wears a helmet with a full cage and a four point chin strap. I continue to wear a full cage and returned to more traditional protection and a finesse game... the pads are now a museum piece in my basement. It could have been much worse.

I find for the most part in leagues (recreational) where certain protective gear is optional, I find that the unprotected players tend to play bigger because they know most of their opponents will be reluctant to play them hard so as not to injured them. The unfortunate part is that one mistake (usually accidental and preventable) can be tragic.

[RemyMartin]

Kathleen is more than a 'a cherry' she got two

[midniteflite]

I found the way Steve went down to be an interesting aspect of this with all the diving going on elsewhere. If he could have continued on he would have. And tried to. Very sad to watch. He's sure a poster boy for toughness in this or any other sport.
toraudi

[Speedo]

Originally posted by toraudi
I found the way Steve went down to be an interesting aspect of this with all the diving going on elsewhere. If he could have continued on he would have. And tried to. Very sad to watch. He's sure a poster boy for toughness in this or any other sport.
toraudi

How true. Especially after watching the Porto-Deportiva soccer game today...

[Don]

Steve will be back but what is even more encouraging is his commitment to wearing a visor when he does come back:

``The first thing that went through my mind was, `I don't want to lose my eye sight,''' Yzerman said. ``I really believe guys should be wearing (visors). I didn't say that a week ago, but if I play again, or when I play again, I plan on wearing a visor.''

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=83080

Man look at that eye. People should take note that a visor could have prevented that.

Also thumbs up to Steve to step up and show that good Canadian boys can wear a visor. If someone of Steve Yzerman's stature wears a visor, then it will open the door because no one can accuse Steve of being a soft player or a cheap shot artist or a wimp.

[Ranger68]

Originally posted by DenWa
The assumption that mandatory visors would lead to a proliferation of intentional high sticking to the face is highly unlikely. I agree with you, GM, that it should be the player's choice. I was merely commenting on the flawed logic in Kathleen's argument. We all have opinions, but try to back up an argument with some semblance of common sense and reality. When the NHL made helmets mandatory, players didn't suddenly start chopping other players in the head with their sticks, now did they?

DW

High sticking majors have drastically increased since the last year when helmets were NOT mandatory.
The level of respect between players seems to have dropped at the same time.
What's wrong with this opinion, that increased protection leads to increased carelessness or outright flagrant use of sticks and elbows?