Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

-Injuries & Ice Chips thread- 2015 Season


The Hornet

Recommended Posts

@sportsnetmurph: Kevin Bieksa will take morning skate in Denver. He'll try a visor as well. Says vision in right eye has improved from yesterday. #Canucks

I hope he sticks to the visor permanently

If he's even a bit blurry I'd prefer he just sat this game personally.

Ditto on the visor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@sportsnetmurph: Kevin Bieksa will take morning skate in Denver. He'll try a visor as well. Says vision in right eye has improved from yesterday. #Canucks

I hope he sticks to the visor permanently

They haven't recalled anyone, so I'm assuming that either:

A. They feel pretty confident that Bieksa will be ready for game time today.

B. Stanton is ready to go and will dress for tonight.

I can't imagine them running with 5 defense for the whole game, and there hasn't been any announcements about them recalling Corrado or anyone since Horvat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"It hit me around my eye, so there was concern. I'm pretty sure it touched my eyeball" - @kbieksa3 on injury.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B1nsS3sCYAEbEIb.jpg

Vancouver Canucks @VanCanucks

Bieksa would not confirm he will wear a visor tonight vs. Avalanche.

Glad he looks and seems to be okay, but it sounds pretty scary. And he's still not sure he'll wear a visor?! Come on Bieksa, be smarter than that! Please put on a visor and keep it on!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, what will we do....? :rolleyes::lol:

Tank for McDavid.

Honestly, I don't see any other option.

Jokes aside, I wanted to see what he could do under WD. He had a great first game with the limited time he was given.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad he looks and seems to be okay, but it sounds pretty scary. And he's still not sure he'll wear a visor?! Come on Bieksa, be smarter than that! Please put on a visor and keep it on!

He's more comfortable without the visor. Its not mandatory so idk why people think its dumb. Look at how Hamhuis played with the mask on, he was bobblig pucks and missed picking up the puck behind the net because he couldn't see.

Also Bieksa likes to fight and fighting with a visor is frowned upon

Link to post
Share on other sites

He's more comfortable without the visor. Its not mandatory so idk why people think its dumb. Look at how Hamhuis played with the mask on, he was bobblig pucks and missed picking up the puck behind the net because he couldn't see.

Also Bieksa likes to fight and fighting with a visor is frowned upon

A visor and a full face mask are not the same thing. But, you're right. Bieksa, like all players with more than 25 games of NHL experience at the beginning of last season, is grandfathered and therefore not required to wear a visor. Of course, now all incoming players ARE required to wear a visor because it's a proven safety feature.

As for fighting with a visor on, interestingly it doesn't seem to be frowned upon anymore. As far as I know, there has never been a rule against fighting while wearing a visor, but there was a rule saying a person who instigated a fight while wearing a visor would get an additional 2-minute penalty. Specifically, the old rule said:

46.6 Face Protection - If a player penalized as an instigator of an altercation is wearing a face shield (including a goalkeeper), he shall be assessed an additional unsportsmanlike conduct penalty.

Should the player (including a goalkeeper) who instigates the fight be wearing a face shield, but removes it before instigating the altercation, the additional unsportsmanlike conduct penalty shall not apply.

However, here's what it says in this season's rulebook:

helmetfightingrule14-15.jpg

So, it appears that that rule has been rewritten to remove any mention of shields, very likely because someone pointed out the obvious: If all incoming players are required to wear visors and you penalize players for starting fights while wearing them, only older players can start fights without their teams being penalized unless they take their helmets off first, which is known to increase the risk of head injuries.

Had the rule remained in place, it would have likely led to fighting being phased out of the NHL since one team would always be given a PP as a result of the "instigator" getting an additional 2-minutes and more often than not players would be reluctant to put their teams at a disadvantage. (It is interesting, though, that I hadn't heard anything about this change. You'd think it'd be something that someone would have mentioned...)

Anyway, you're right. It is his choice according to the rules. I, however, will continue to cringe every time I see him or any other player almost lose an eye by getting hit by the puck or a stick because I know it could have so easily been avoided. And when it happens, I will continue to call out for that guy to put on a shield because that's my choice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A visor and a full face mask are not the same thing. But, you're right. Bieksa, like all players with more than 25 games of NHL experience at the beginning of last season, is grandfathered and therefore not required to wear a visor. Of course, now all incoming players ARE required to wear a visor because it's a proven safety feature.

As for fighting with a visor on, interestingly it doesn't seem to be frowned upon anymore. As far as I know, there has never been a rule against fighting while wearing a visor, but there was a rule saying a person who instigated a fight while wearing a visor would get an additional 2-minute penalty. Specifically, the old rule said:

However, here's what it says in this season's rulebook:

helmetfightingrule14-15.jpg

So, it appears that that rule has been rewritten to remove any mention of shields, very likely because someone pointed out the obvious: If all incoming players are required to wear visors and you penalize players for starting fights while wearing them, only older players can start fights without their teams being penalized unless they take their helmets off first, which is known to increase the risk of head injuries.

Had the rule remained in place, it would have likely led to fighting being phased out of the NHL since one team would always be given a PP as a result of the "instigator" getting an additional 2-minutes and more often than not players would be reluctant to put their teams at a disadvantage. (It is interesting, though, that I hadn't heard anything about this change. You'd think it'd be something that someone would have mentioned...)

Anyway, you're right. It is his choice according to the rules. I, however, will continue to cringe every time I see him or any other player almost lose an eye by getting hit by the puck or a stick because I know it could have so easily been avoided. And when it happens, I will continue to call out for that guy to put on a shield because that's my choice.

Although I agree with what you are saying about wearing a visor, I personally now wear one after playing in the minors without one. However, some of your comments illustrate a distinct lack of understanding of hockey code....but your grasp of the rule book seems pretty good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I agree with what you are saying about wearing a visor, I personally now wear one after playing in the minors without one. However, some of your comments illustrate a distinct lack of understanding of hockey code....but your grasp of the rule book seems pretty good.

Not sure what "hockey code" has to do with whether or not players choose not to wear a visor because they think it impedes their vision (which is what you argued), but I'm glad to hear you wear one. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...