The visor debate renewed

Lots of talk about visors and their advisability today.
Hands up everyone who's feeling a little deja vu.
Yes, back here again. Mats Sundin has escaped with his eyeball intact, but still may require surgery. The Leafs are without their captain and No. 1 centre for at least a month, and that's the best-case scenario.
It's all so preventable. All so repeatable, too, given the chirping out of Leafs practice yesterday: "As sick as I was watching Mats last night, I just don't believe it's for me," was Darcy Tucker's reaction, and to a man, the Leafs -- the shield-less ones, anyway -- nodded.

CP PHOTO

Remember this?

The question for you to debate today is -- is it time to make visors mandatory in the NHL? (It's long overdue, given the line stretching back from here thru Berard and Neely and beyond, isn't it?)
Paul Hunter takes a look at one central issue in that process: the NHL Players Association, which has to sign off on any such legislation. According to an NHLPA spokesman, the organization recently "advised player representatives to initiate conversations with their team on the use of visors". Continuing the diplomaticspeak in an email to Hunter:

"The union seemed amenable to giving the matter serious consideration but indicated there still existed fairly significant resistance from their membership."

Hmm. Do you get the impression, reading that, that the next line would be something about "frank and cordial" discussions?

The Sun's Lance Hornby notes the salary cap implications of bringing up a player to replace Sundin -- or bringing one in, as it were -- and talks to a doctor about the type of injury Sundin has, and the typical scenarios around it. And Steve Simmons takes us back full circle, and how avoidable this injury could/should be.
Hey, goaltenders equipment is mandated by the league. Helmets have been standard issue for 25 years now, after similar resistance leading to their legislated use -- the world kept turning. Citing studies and statistics that indicate the effectiveness of visors, just about every medical authority has called for mandatory eye protection, and for some time.
It's time, isn't it?

Some other items of interest this morning: Damien Cox goes over the NHL's "dizzying" opening, Rick Westhead looks at the fate of salary cap cheats in this new environment, and Mark Zwolinski reports on the AHL Marlies, set to open their season.

I'm off to JABS now. Spencer will be back a little later with some links from around the NHL. The Comments, meantime, are open. (CY)

---

Thanks, Chris. Some quick links so we can get right back to the visor debate.

Lost in the shuffle is the shoulder injury to Jeff O'Neill - we'll try and update that situation in this space if there's news. And here we were thinking that Lindros and Allison would be the ones going down quickly. In yesterday's posting on Sundin, Chris reminded us that Steve Thomas is standing by. We'll keep the Stumpywatch ticking here as well. (Update: The Leafs announced this morning they have recalled Kyle Wellwood)

Around the league:

The Ilya Kovalchuk situation isn't looking very good. He spoke for the first time in North America about his contract situation:

"It's my intention to go back to Russia on Sunday," he tells the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.I haven't heard from (Thrashers') management. I don't know (what is going to happen). If they call right now and offer something then maybe (a contract can be completed). But otherwise I'm going back to Russia."

Chris Zelkovich covers the NHL's glorious return to the tube in Canada. Zelko reports that TSN recorded its third-largest audience in the network's 21-year history. And from reports around the league, attendance was very good for opening night. In the U.S., not so much. According to the Washington Post:

The Capitals received more than 1,000 e-mails yesterday from DirecTV subscribers in the greater Washington area who were unable to watch Wednesday's season opener. The Capitals' first game in 18 months -- a 3-2 victory over the Columbus Blue Jackets at MCI Center -- was broadcast by Comcast SportsNet but was blacked out inadvertently by DirecTV because of a technical problem, according to Bob Marsocci, DirecTV's vice president of communications. DirecTV customers in parts of New Jersey, San Jose and Long Island experienced similar accidental blackouts.

Fans in Long Island had it worse. From Newsday:

Marsocci said customers were given a free look at games around the league under the NHL Center Ice package, and several fans who spoke to Newsday confirmed they were able to watch every opening night game other than Islanders-Sabres and Devils-Penguins.

On the local angle, thank goodness we don't have blackouts here and yes, I'm really enjoying the free NHL package right now.

In Boston, the Gah-den was rocking on opening night:

"I think the year away made a lot of people realize how much they missed hockey," Bruins play-by-play man Dale Arnold tells the Boston Globe. ''The game probably will take a hit in some markets, but Boston isn't one of them. I was shocked at how few no-shows there were (at the TD Banknorth Garden)"

TD Banknorth Garden. Suddenly the Rogers Centre isn't such a bad name. Television viewership in Beantown was another story, according to the Globe, the Bruins telecast was crushed going up against the Red Sox playoff game -- a much better excuse than those technical blackout problems.

Ratings in Pittsburgh, however, were a different story. According to the Post-Gazette:

Television ratings for the game on FSN Pittsburgh were an absolute smash. The overall rating number was 7.5, which comes close to tripling the number of viewers watching the team when it last played at the end of the 2003-04 season. The Pirates averaged about a 4.5 rating for their recently completed season.

Does Sidney Crosby get a cut? (SW)

Comments

[Ken]

I think the excuses to not wear visors are ridiculous! It sets a horrible example. I wear a full-face shield when I played varsity and that is what I would classify as obstructive. When I wear a half-visor it’s extremely clear. I don’t see how Tucker is having problems. The vision around the ice is great and it actually takes away some reflections. The modern visors are truly better than the ones ten-years ago. I don’t see why they still have to keep the tough man image when it comes at the expense of their well being for the rest of their lives! You lose an eye now to look macho, but when you’re sixty I’ll bet you will regret doing it.

[Daniel Tucker]

Dear Toronto Leaf Fans
Just a query here, but don't you think that if Sundin had been watching the
puck instead of doing Domi's Job, by trying to crosscheck another player in
the back from behind , that maybe just maybe he would have seen the puck
coming and avoided that nasty eye injury.
D. Tucker
Vancouver
Former Toronto Toro Fan and hate the Canucks Too.

[Airport Inn]

Wow,

The one player the Leafs couldn't afford to loose for any significant time, Mats Sundin, gone for at least one quarter of the regular season. Why can't the league enforce a rule that actually protects the players from themselves. Why can't the league really help there fans by preventing there superstars from making an ego decision that ends there career. Hey Steve Yserman, you wearing a visor now? Bryan Berard, how about you? What about you Carlo Coloiacovo, you putting yours back on? Dany Heatley seems to be thriving behind his. To Mats Sundin and any other player who chooses not to protect themselves, you look like an idiot for not wearing a visor, not the other way around.

Frustrated NHL Fan.

[mm]

Oh Danielle Tucker you silly thing! He was watching the puck, why do you think it hit him in the eye! To you I would suggest watching the game before making such foolish statements. (I smell a sens fan here! or maybe Mcgratton himself - nah, the spelling is too good)

As for the Visor debate...I agree with yesterdays post of grandfathering it in just like they did with helmets. Another bigger question for Leaf fans (or better yet Big E himself) why doesn't Lindros wear a mouth guard? He said it himself that it (concussions) come from the jaw. Well chances of you going down then when 'big Chara' hits you hard are lessened when you have some protection in the mouth there big guy. I think this all comes down to comfort for these players. Like a stubborn old man, they refuse to change their ways as that's the way it's always been done. As for Carlo taking his off...what are you thinking. If you are concentrating on 'Feeling the game' as the breeze blows into your face as you skate you are not concentrating on your job...which for you Mr. Coloiacovo is very tenious at best.

[James]

It all boils down to money. If teams said that the players would not get paid while injured from preventable eye injuries, then all players would wear them. They would still get paid if they wore a visor but still got a facial injury.

What insurance company would insure someone if they said that they wouldn't wear a seatbelt ever? Make it a monetary issue, and the players will listen.

[Carla]

And he STILL won't commit to wearing one when he returns. He's said he'll TRY to keep wearing one after he comes back:

'"Definitely when I start playing I'm going to have to wear one for sure and hopefully I can continue it. That's my goal, for sure."'

(http://tinyurl.com/8w37s)

Yeesh, what is it gonna take, Mats? We wanna see you play, but we don't wanna see you blinded.

[Nick Mercouris]

I can't believe how stupid some hockey players are when it comes to visors. In 2003-2004 season 7 out of the top 10 and 12 out of the top 20 scorers wore visors. I'm sure hockey players would not stop wearing atletic supporters even though they would probably be faster without them.

[Chris Corrigan]

Mandatory? Yep.

Phase them in like helmets if you like, but there is no way anyone should be playing this game at any level without eye protection.

Mandatory pads for elbows, but no protection for the face? Crazy.

Wear the window boys.

[FlamFlim]

The NHL should make visors mandatory. Period. Or, if they wanted players to take them up voluntarily, let the players who refuse to wear the visors pay for their own disability insurance policies in the event of a serious eye injury. If you're a welder who refuses to wear a shield while welding and you blind yourself, do you think your employer, workman's comp, or anyone else would have any sympathy for you and pay you the balance of your salary though you may never be able to work again? Of course not.

[Lyric]

These guys are assets of an organization. They have a responsibility to protect themselves and preserve the investment. Sundin is the captain and should be setting an example for the rest of the team. How many times do you have to be hit in the face to finally admit that a visor may not be the worse thing? I guess it wasn't that long ago that we had to make them protect their brains.