I can’t wait for this to be used as an argument against visors, no matter what logical fallacies have to be employed to make the point.  I’m counting on Mike Milbury to make this one happen.

Posted by bezukov from the kids are alright. on 11/08/11 at 02:16 AM ET

I can’t wait for this to be used as an argument against visors, no matter what logical fallacies have to be employed to make the point.  I’m counting on Mike Milbury to make this one happen.

I agree with Milbury on this one, to a point. Milbury’s stance is similar to the slippery-slope argument, but there’s no doubt that fighting will be reduced because the present fighters are not going to tear up their fists nor have their faces lacerated by half-shields while getting pummeled. Hopefully, the half-shield protected Paille’s eyes and he’ll be back soon. But I guess I’m a purist in the mandatory visor debate, and this is probably a similar dialogue to that of the mandatory lids in the 80’s. Not too many guys are going w/o face protection today, and even some of the older players are converting. I dabbled with a half-shield in my men’s league and I just couldn’t get used to it, so I certainly understand the resistance.

I think what Brooks Laich mentioned about how some players feel as though they’re being baby-sat is more fitting regarding this conversation. It’s a man’s game, and the players understand that.

Unless, the visor companies produced a visor that could be removed without taking off the helmet to tailor the design for fighters.

Posted by Jesters Dead on 11/08/11 at 04:05 AM ET

Unless, the visor companies produced a visor that could be removed without taking off the helmet to tailor the design for fighters.

Posted by Jesters Dead on 11/08/11 at 01:05 AM ET

Talk about complicated.

I have to be honest, I’ve always worn a full cage, and always will—even if I were in the NHL.  The whole “impairs sight” argument has never made sense to me considering players play with full facial protection all the way up through college.  Granted, I never quite made it to that level of play (understatement of the century), but I really don’t see how it can be that much of a hindrance to a full-fledged professional.

I also have an Itech FX-50 (but never used) that has a removable half-shield on top and a cage on the bottom:

Now if you’re just trying to be an uber-man and scoff at facial protection, well that’s another thing entirely.

Posted by RedMenace from aboard the Crazy Train on 11/08/11 at 02:44 PM ET

It’s their choice.  Every action has an opposite sometimes unintended reaction.  Isn’t it funny that sports with LESS pads and helmets etc have LESS serious injuries than those that do.

Posted by 13 user names on 11/09/11 at 05:40 AM ET