Butch Gorings Helmet
Guest
|
Post by Butch Gorings Helmet on Sept 11, 2005 17:10:39 GMT -5
What's everyone think about this issue? I personally feel that everyone should wear the same thing. With it being a players choice it just creates more tension on the ice. For example a player with a visor might make fun of one that wears a cage.
I was at the Elmira/Cambridge game today and Elmira had 3 players with visors and Cambridge had 2 players with cages. The cages won this meeting 5-3.
|
|
|
|
Post by Edward Fraser on Sept 11, 2005 19:18:50 GMT -5
I don't think you should ever stop a player who wants to wear a full cage or sheild, if the league feels its players are safe with the half visor then OK, but they NEED to make sure that players secure their helmets and make sure the visor is over their eyes, not on top of their head.
At the recent Cambridge/Stratford game, the Winterhawks had only two players with cages while the Cullitions ALL had them, not a single visor. You wouldn't believe the amount of times Cambridge players lost their helmets. I can't recall a single Culliton losing his lid.
I wonder if the Mid has a rule similar to international hockey where the player must leave the ice immediatly if his helmet falls off?
It certainly is an interesting issue, any idea why the OHA made the switch?
|
|
|
|
Post by stoogie on Sept 12, 2005 14:43:04 GMT -5
Edward
Cambridge and Stratford have not met at all this year???
Maybe you dreamed it? Your post did sound legit but it never happened. Can't fool us...
|
|
|
|
Post by jeffstratford on Sept 12, 2005 17:58:10 GMT -5
it was Stratford vs Brantford and Ed was right every player that had a half visor lost there helment....
|
|
|
|
Post by jeffstratford on Sept 12, 2005 17:59:01 GMT -5
There will be a lot more blood on the ice this winter with half visor no question......
|
|
|
|
Post by hockeydiehard on Sept 13, 2005 13:51:49 GMT -5
you know...im getting sick a tired of the cage/visor issue already. if some kids want to waear the visor then go ahead and for the kids who wear cages good for them...its not that big of a deal, there will be some more injuries but the kids wearing trhe visors take that chance and know the potential impacts wearing a visor has...so who cares anymore, maybe everyone should worry about winning hockey games and getting off to a good start than this stupid issue
|
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Gretzky on Sept 13, 2005 17:22:00 GMT -5
I don't know but "butch gorings helmet" is a great screen name.
|
|
Wayne Gretzkys shoe lace
Guest
|
Post by Wayne Gretzkys shoe lace on Sept 13, 2005 17:22:17 GMT -5
I don't know but "butch gorings helmet" is a great screen name.
|
|
|
|
Post by guest on Sept 14, 2005 11:48:10 GMT -5
stratford had all cages, and listowel had almost all visors, listy came out on top 7-2 ... but apparently got out-shot 49-38? whoever was counting the shots, was counting by 3's for them and must have also been counting the number of dives #13 took and tallied them up as shots.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shallow Hal on Sept 14, 2005 12:37:32 GMT -5
Half visors look great. Again, Stratford doesn't have a single player wearing them, while most of Listowel did in last night's game. Didn't see any blood, and really like the 'new' look.
Hopefully Cullitons follow suit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Edward Fraser on Sept 14, 2005 19:46:47 GMT -5
It was Brantford and Stratford I was talking about, sorry.
There is no doubt that half visors look cooler, but isn't it a question of safety? And a 16- or 17-year-old kid is normally going to choose cool over safe.
Like I said, if they let them wear the half visor, they better make damn sure they make the kids strap em on tight and keep em over their eyes!
And yes, Butch Gorings Helmet is the best screen name so far.
|
|
|
|
Post by superrook on Sept 15, 2005 12:04:25 GMT -5
Is straty just too cheap to pay the extra insurance. Its alright, I understand. Their organization doesn't have that kind of money to throw around.
|
|
|
|
Post by guest on Sept 16, 2005 12:59:18 GMT -5
Stratford ordered their new cages and everything before the visor rule so they're not sure if they wanna let the kids use visors, if they do they have to buy their own...and also, everyone has to pay the insurance fee anyways
|
|
|
|
Post by Edward Fraser on Sept 16, 2005 18:21:59 GMT -5
Supposedly there's a little debate going on as to whether or not it's the TEAM or PLAYERS call on if they can wear the half-visor...what I mean is: can the player override a team "no visor" policy?
At the Mid press conference the league said that it is the PLAYERS decision, but who knows.
Even if that is the case, is a player really going to stand up and say "You know what coach, you can stick your no-visor policy, I'm wearing one."
|
|
|
|
Post by guest on Sept 18, 2005 9:14:57 GMT -5
The only problem I have with some kids wearing visors and some wearing masks is that there becomes a disadvantage when a fight breaks out. In the States in the USHL, a player cannot wear a visor until he hits a certain age, I think it is 18 or older. Anyone under that age must wear a cage.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fred on Sept 26, 2005 14:54:53 GMT -5
Cullitons executive is responsible for the caged tribe. Over half the players voted to wear visors but the executive was against this in a meeting that they had before the season even started. This may change now that they have see that every other team in the league has at least a few players wearing them. The players have obeyed the no visor policy until the executive reveiws the topic. I beleive that if the executive again denys the teams choice to wear a visor that there will be some top players that will take it into their own hands.
|
|
|
|
Post by o on Sept 26, 2005 14:59:53 GMT -5
If the tribe doesnt wear visors ths year what about in the future. If all of the other teams are wearing them now do you think that the league will switch back to full cages. I doubt it so let the boys wear them if they want to wear them.
|
|
|
|
Post by homer on Sept 28, 2005 10:11:35 GMT -5
This is amateur hockey. Safety should be first. However if the league tracks injuries (if reported) and there is a dramatic increase mandatory use of full face protection should be reinstated.
|
|
|
|
Post by rudy on Sept 28, 2005 12:15:32 GMT -5
whoever posted that obviously doesnt play the game. Cages make homer sleep good at night knowing evryone is safe
|
|
|
|
Post by homer on Sept 28, 2005 14:09:17 GMT -5
I have played for 45 years. When I played Junior there was no facial protection. You are a big hero not thinking about safety and when they go looking for your teeth to put back in your mouth or heaven forbid one of your eyes think about what you just wrote.
|
|
|
|
Post by rudy on Sept 28, 2005 14:54:42 GMT -5
45 years, you should have hung up your mouth with your skates
|
|
|
|
Post by homer on Sept 28, 2005 14:58:10 GMT -5
By the way I still play. I expected more intelligence from you. You must be one of those whiney little guys who the bigger guys always have to look after because you are always yapping, like that little dog from the Taco Bell commercials.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrhockeynut on Sept 28, 2005 18:34:51 GMT -5
If a 16 -17 year old player is legally old enough to drive a car and make decisions affecting the lives and safety of those around them in doing so, they should be allowed to decide whether or not they wear visors or cages when they play hockey. Its not like their unaware of the risks.
|
|
|
|
Post by rudy on Sept 28, 2005 20:23:37 GMT -5
you wish you were me homer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fred on Sept 28, 2005 20:55:15 GMT -5
Homer sure makes a lot more sense than the rudy guy but from what I've witnessed thus far in the season is that the cagers are much more agressive physically because they don't have a care in the world out there & play a fearless game with no respect for their oponent. Eg. head shots & high sticking. They also seem to be really keen to push and shove much larger, tougher visored players. Perfect example of this was a mid size caged #7 of the Dutchmen pushing a much tougher visored Al Lamont of Listowel. Would he have done this without his cage? I think not. Perhaps #7 was rudy though. Hopefully this cage/visor thing will get straightened out though because right now it is ridiculous. All or none. No serious facial injuries yet but lots of cuts & scrapes.
|
|
|
|
Post by guest on Oct 3, 2005 23:49:10 GMT -5
Noticed that no dutchmen players are wearing visors now??? why is this??
|
|
|
|
Post by da on Oct 4, 2005 6:22:41 GMT -5
There were only 2 wearing visors last Tuesday vs. Listowel. Gingrich & Cote & Cote is currently under suspension.
|
|
|
|
Post by guest on Oct 4, 2005 15:10:31 GMT -5
cambridge is doing fine and all but one player has a visor
|
|
