|
Post by Dirty Afanasenkov on Jun 28, 2006 16:47:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by animals on Jun 28, 2006 16:53:04 GMT -5
Next CBA? I was hoping they would make it mandatory next season. Eye injuries are becoming a day to day issue, and a very serious one. I'm gonna hate to see the day when an up-and-coming superstar such as Crosby, Ovechkin, Nash (just to name a few) must retire because of an accidental high stick or a puck near their eye.
|
|
MikeC
Full Member
Posts: 454
|
Post by MikeC on Jun 29, 2006 9:16:00 GMT -5
Next CBA? I was hoping they would make it mandatory next season. Eye injuries are becoming a day to day issue, and a very serious one. I'm gonna hate to see the day when an up-and-coming superstar such as Crosby, Ovechkin, Nash (just to name a few) must retire because of an accidental high stick or a puck near their eye. Don't those 3 already wear visors?
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Jun 29, 2006 9:32:57 GMT -5
Next CBA? I was hoping they would make it mandatory next season. Eye injuries are becoming a day to day issue, and a very serious one. I'm gonna hate to see the day when an up-and-coming superstar such as Crosby, Ovechkin, Nash (just to name a few) must retire because of an accidental high stick or a puck near their eye. Koivu had a visor on.
|
|
|
Post by CrazyJoeDevola on Jun 29, 2006 9:39:43 GMT -5
Next CBA? I was hoping they would make it mandatory next season. Eye injuries are becoming a day to day issue, and a very serious one. I'm gonna hate to see the day when an up-and-coming superstar such as Crosby, Ovechkin, Nash (just to name a few) must retire because of an accidental high stick or a puck near their eye. Koivu had a visor on. Thats the thing, it seems most major eye injuries are when the stick comes up under the visor... although I beleive Yzerman was hit by that puck straight on a few years back.
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Afanasenkov on Jun 29, 2006 10:21:33 GMT -5
Thats the thing, it seems most major eye injuries are when the stick comes up under the visor... although I beleive Yzerman was hit by that puck straight on a few years back. Koivu's visor was one of the smallest ones you can purchase, had he had the same visor as Ovechkin he may not have suffered the injury. Plus, if he used Ovechkin's visor, he'd look like a rock star!!
|
|
MikeC
Full Member
Posts: 454
|
Post by MikeC on Jun 29, 2006 11:13:35 GMT -5
Thats the thing, it seems most major eye injuries are when the stick comes up under the visor... although I beleive Yzerman was hit by that puck straight on a few years back. I don't know about that. Beauregard lost his eye in junior even though he had a visor, and you mentioned Koivu, but it's hard to list injuries that didn't happen because players were wearing a visor. Berard wasn't wearing a visor when he got hurt. Neither was Mark Deyell when he lost his eye in an AHL game, nor the Smith guy who lost his eye this past season in the AHL. And the numerous times Sundin has been hit in the eye/forehead area, injury could have been avoided/reduced if he were wearing a visor. I'm sure I'm forgetting a few.
|
|
|
Post by Cristobal Huet on Jun 29, 2006 11:33:13 GMT -5
Thats the thing, it seems most major eye injuries are when the stick comes up under the visor... although I beleive Yzerman was hit by that puck straight on a few years back. I don't know about that. Beauregard lost his eye in junior even though he had a visor, and you mentioned Koivu, but it's hard to list injuries that didn't happen because players were wearing a visor. Berard wasn't wearing a visor when he got hurt. Neither was Mark Deyell when he lost his eye in an AHL game, nor the Smith guy who lost his eye this past season in the AHL. And the numerous times Sundin has been hit in the eye/forehead area, injury could have been avoided/reduced if he were wearing a visor. I'm sure I'm forgetting a few. You can still get an eye injury with a visor, but I'm sure the odds are much better wearing one than not wearing one.
|
|
trouty
Full Member
Newfoundland Hothead
Nattie Neighart,Trouty and Sweet Sara Stock
Posts: 344
|
Post by trouty on Jun 29, 2006 22:09:40 GMT -5
it just shows how carless players are,and the lack of respect for safety each player has for one another
funny thing in the 70's and 80's most players wore no helmits and their were less eye injuries and less hitting from behind, i guess the respect factor was their,as most players never wore armour as they do now
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jun 30, 2006 5:42:51 GMT -5
I don't know if they feel like they are invincible with all the technology in the equipment or what but there is a lot of checking from behind and high sticking going on. But how are you going to curb the trend? In my opinion if you high stick a guy or check from behind and injure the player you are out for as long as he is.
|
|
|
Post by wingman on Jun 30, 2006 6:01:00 GMT -5
I think if the players had more respect on the ice for each other I think that the high sticks, hits from behind, etc will not be as bad. Instead of putting visors on them, perhaps make helmets optional like it was years ago. When players weren't wearing visors, helmets etc, you used to never see some of the crap you see now. The more protection that a person has, the more fearless they become.
Like Bigfan I used to think that if you injured a player, you do not play until the injured player returns. The only downside to that is if a skilled player injures a less skilled player, the less skilled player might take extra games off just to keep the skilled player from playing, especially if they are playing each other in a playoff series. Wish I had the answer to stop the cheap stuff, but either way they have to do something about it, especially the hitting from behind, it has gotten worse. But I find what players are doing now is that if they are along the boards and see a player coming they will turn their back to the player and face the boards. They do this figuring that the player won't hit them to keep from getting a hit from behind penalty. Things like that have to stop also.
The other week I was watching a hockey game from the 80's on tv, I think it was Oilers/Flyers in the finals. One big change I noticed was the glass around the rink. Except for the ends it was all low glass and the players had no problem keeping the puck in the rink, but today they whine and moan about getting a penalty for shooting the puck over the high glass. I think that it was a good rule by giving a penalty to a player who shoots the puck over the glass, intentional or not.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jun 30, 2006 8:02:07 GMT -5
Didn't they implement the high glass to protect the fans? Not that it bothers me cause I am usually following the puck (wounldn't hurt my head anyways).
|
|
|
Post by wingman on Jun 30, 2006 8:11:13 GMT -5
Didn't they implement the high glass to protect the fans? Not that it bothers me cause I am usually following the puck (wounldn't hurt my head anyways). Yeah they did, but was surprised how well they kept the puck in the rink back then with the shorter glass as compared to today where at times they have a hard time keeping the puck in the rink with the tall glass. I wouldn't want to see them play today with the shorter glass, the penalty box would be filled with players who got called for delay of game.
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Jun 30, 2006 8:28:22 GMT -5
Didn't they implement the high glass to protect the fans? Not that it bothers me cause I am usually following the puck (wounldn't hurt my head anyways). I think the main reason was to speed up the play by keeping the puck in play rather than constant whistles for pucks in the stands ... fan safety was just a bonus by-product I think...
|
|
|
Post by catnut on Jun 30, 2006 8:34:32 GMT -5
I think if the players had more respect on the ice for each other I think that the high sticks, hits from behind, etc will not be as bad. Instead of putting visors on them, perhaps make helmets optional like it was years ago. When players weren't wearing visors, helmets etc, you used to never see some of the crap you see now. The more protection that a person has, the more fearless they become. Like Bigfan I used to think that if you injured a player, you do not play until the injured player returns. The only downside to that is if a skilled player injures a less skilled player, the less skilled player might take extra games off just to keep the skilled player from playing, especially if they are playing each other in a playoff series. Wish I had the answer to stop the cheap stuff, but either way they have to do something about it, especially the hitting from behind, it has gotten worse. But I find what players are doing now is that if they are along the boards and see a player coming they will turn their back to the player and face the boards. They do this figuring that the player won't hit them to keep from getting a hit from behind penalty. Things like that have to stop also. The other week I was watching a hockey game from the 80's on tv, I think it was Oilers/Flyers in the finals. One big change I noticed was the glass around the rink. Except for the ends it was all low glass and the players had no problem keeping the puck in the rink, but today they whine and moan about getting a penalty for shooting the puck over the high glass. I think that it was a good rule by giving a penalty to a player who shoots the puck over the glass, intentional or not. One big difference in the style of play of the time helped avoid the pucks in the crowd. The D-men of the era were more likely to try to skate up the ice before making a pass than just shooting it on the glass to get it to the centre.
|
|