Chris Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Because it's there choice. Not yours. What you do is your business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bacchus Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Because it's there choice. Not yours. What you do is your business. Ignoring 9/10th of what I say, and telling me it isn't any of my business is not a position. Furthermore, what is it any of your business. Unless you come up with an actual idea or argument I will have to ignore your posts. If you have anything to aside from repeating what you have said 3 different ways, then I will give it its deserved attention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bacchus Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Either way, it still amounts to blackmailing players to do something you want. It's like telling Eric Lindros not to play hard because they won't pay him if he gets another concussion. No, in my business model its protecting your investments. If you want to smoke cigarettes and use up all our healthcare money to fight off your avoidable cancer and emphysema, then you should pay extra taxes. If you are going to drive an SUV and destroy our environment you should have to pay out the nose for it, and if you are going to put yourself at risk or injury unecessarily, then you shouldn't be rewarded for it ... it should cost you in lost income. This is the same reason the family of suicide vistims can't claim insurance. It was preventable ... it wasn't a fluke accident. Not protecting your eyes in a game like hockey is like having sex with a prostitute in Thailand without a condom. It is playing russian roulette. Anyway, obviously there is a failure to communicate on this issue. I have stated my opinion clearly, and all the neighsayers have come out to protest. Thus I retire from this forray with my opinion intact. Lets agree to disagree .... Go :hlogo: GO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Hmm... I think the biggest issue is that many players complain about visibility with visors on. I know that Ryder tried out a visor this offseason but decided not to use it because he couldn't get used to it. It might not bother everyone but if they did make visors mandatory then I wonder how many stars would suddenly have bad seasons, not being able to see properly. But then again, face masks in football are mandatory and they hinder visibility as well. The difference is that every football player grows up using a facemask whereas hockey players go years playing in the NHL without a visor and then have to switch on the spot. The easiest way to do it is to grandfather it in. In my opinion, anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazy26 Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Not protecting your eyes in a game like hockey is like having sex with a prostitute in Thailand without a condom. It is playing russian roulette. Wow. I wonder if there was a debate like this when helmets were grandfathered in. Which is the way we're gonna see visors become mandatory. It just makes sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch_Habs_Fan Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Whats al this bullshit about? It is a thread bout Bonk right? I just wanna know if he is oke, not what you guys think about Visors (there is probably a thread already for it) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Down the road, mandatory visors won't even be an issue. They are mandatory at all levels of bantam and juniors, so younger players are used to them already. As more and more non-visor guys retire, the more they will be replaced by younger guys who are comfortable with visors and wear them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortHanded Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Down the road, mandatory visors won't even be an issue. They are mandatory at all levels of bantam and juniors, so younger players are used to them already. As more and more non-visor guys retire, the more they will be replaced by younger guys who are comfortable with visors and wear them. I STILL think they should be mandatory and grandfathered in because there's a chance players who are used to wearing them at other levels right now get to the NHL and take them off, and then can't get used to wearing them again.... And for what it's worth, I just read all of the posts since my last one, and I still agree with Bacchus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Grandfathering mandatory visors = good Blackmailing players to do so by threatening not to pay them = bad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonus Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Grandfathering mandatory visors = good Blackmailing players to do so by threatening not to pay them = bad i basically agree insofar that I dont see why the league should tiptoe around the visor issue with a practical ban when a real one would work better. If one is worried about getting consent from the PA, I really think that a grandfather clause would be more amenable to the current players than some system where they could lose their paychecks. I'm sure many players who do not wear visors don't really care about whether future players have to... all the NHL would need to do is offer a minor concession (or a non-existent one) in exchange for the clause. I doubt that most players would forsake an immediate advantage for the visor-rights of future players. One idea - condition allowance for participation in future Olympics or World Cups on acceptance of a visor grandfather clause. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bacchus Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Why hasn't grandfathering happened yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuRy Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Puck in the face, broken nose, he'll be there on saturday with full visor on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habsfan88 Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Ya I'm pretty sure I saw the blood dripping from his nose, not his eye. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athlétique.Canadien Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Puck in the face, broken nose, he'll be there on saturday with full visor on. Ouch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 Puck in the face, broken nose, he'll be there on saturday with full visor on. Couldn't have been any worse than Richardson breaking his jaw last year for the Jackets. I was at the game in the upper bowl, and I could see the blood pouring out of his mouth. He skated pretty quickly to the bench, but there was still a large trail of blood where he skated. Took the refs a few minutes to scrape up the frozen blood with their skates and move it off to the side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch_Habs_Fan Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 Puck in the face, broken nose, he'll be there on saturday with full visor on. THanks, thats just what i wanted to know. Not all the other crap!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted December 16, 2006 Author Share Posted December 16, 2006 TSN says that Bonk is not certain to play tonight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoRvInA Posted December 16, 2006 Share Posted December 16, 2006 THanks, thats just what i wanted to know. Not all the other crap!! ditto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 I do believe he is... with quite a blackened eye. GO :hlogo: GO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 THanks, thats just what i wanted to know. Not all the other crap!! Don't get mad at people for having an on-topic discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 is bonk ok? heck, he helped keep sid the kid to just 2 shots on nets tonight... not bad that sort of puts a black eye on crosby's night GO :hlogo: GO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 is bonk ok? heck, he helped keep sid the kid to just 2 shots on nets tonight... not bad that sort of puts a black eye on crosby's night GO :hlogo: GO! *sigh* lol, some people never learn, I guess. Am I the only one who thought Bonk's visor was a little awkward-looking? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 (edited) *sigh* lol, some people never learn, I guess. Am I the only one who thought Bonk's visor was a little awkward-looking? speaking of never learning, child , isn't it about time you changed your fav habs player? as much as i like jan myself, i also recognize that he's following the old american expansionist cry "Go west, young jan!" GO :hlogo: GO! Edited December 17, 2006 by shortcat1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted December 17, 2006 Author Share Posted December 17, 2006 I was very proud of Radek tonight, everytime he battled for puck with his face against the boards I cringed. If anyone has played with a facial injury wearing a full sheild protects you from direct contact but when your mask is jarred it stings BIG TIME. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch_Habs_Fan Posted December 17, 2006 Share Posted December 17, 2006 Don't get mad at people for having an on-topic discussion. It's just not on-topic. This thread goes about Bonk(topic title) and not about if visors should be or not. There are already 2 topics about visors. I'm not mad , i just hate to read through all that and still didnt know anything about bonk! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.