Headgear and Back Slapping
By Mike Haggett
Published October 24, 2005

Visors Should Remain Optional

Following the incident on opening night with Toronto Maple Leafs center Mats Sundin taking a puck off the eye socket; it has renewed the debate on whether or not making visors on helmets mandatory. The league office has more or less gone on record saying that they want it, and with no surprise, the players association has stated the fact that they want to keep it optional.

It never ceases to amaze me that one freak incident by a player (in this case magnified by a star player) will open a huge can of worms in media circles on player safety.  Taking a trip back into time, helmets were optional in the 1970’s and then grandfathered in during the 1980’s. There is no argument from me on that... helmets needed to happen. Any player without a helmet on, given the physical nature that the game evolved into, is crazy.

The last nutcase to retire without wearing a lid full time is current Edmonton coach Craig MacTavish, and Kerry Frasier is the last NHL referee to still go without head gear. One might speculate that MacTavish’s off ice behavior during his playing days may have been affected by his taking of one too many dingers off the boards. As far as Frasier goes…I mean, who would want a bucket to mess up that wind tunnel tested hairdo?

In all seriousness, this has turned into a hot issue. However, why should it be? I understand the league offices’ argument to a certain degree, citing safety from those face-high 90 mile–an-hour plus heaters off the blue line. My argument is how often does that happen? In all fairness to Sundin, who has one bizarre injury after another during his career, he was just at the wrong place at the wrong time. A puck off the face is almost as rare as a referee calling for a penalty shot with a minute to go in a tie game.

What the media and the league office are not talking about is an incident that happened in the AHL back a few seasons ago. Forward Jeff Libby while playing for the Portland Pirates wore a visor on his helmet. One night while playing against the Lowell Lock Monsters, the sticks got up and one caught between Libby’s face and his visor. As a result, the blade of the stick all but filleted his eye out of the socket and abruptly ended his career. [NOTE: After publication of this article, it has been brought to our attention that there was some factual errors about the  "Jeff Libby incident". The article has not been modified but writer Mike Haggett is providing explanations at the end of the article]

This type of an example may be extreme, but so is the incident with Sundin. It is not an everyday occurrence, and hitting the panic button over an odd case such as this should not bring sweeping changes to the league and its players. If players were dropping like flies much as they were before mandatory helmets, then I would come out in the other direction here, but they certainly are not. Players take risks of serious injury every time they lace up the skates.

I cannot imagine players like Tie Domi, Brad May and Ryan Vandenbussche squaring off at center ice wearing visors. Fighters carry more of the burden of injury risk to hands and face by adding the half shield, and as long as fighting is a part of the league, they shouldn’t be forced to wear one. If a fighter chose to wear a visor, then it should be an unwritten rule for engagement that the helmet be removed before the battle commences. Sometimes that happens, but more times than not, punches start throwing before the helmets come off. Where the league totally misses the boat is that the number of bizarre visor related injuries will increase with everyone wearing them. I, for one, would not like to have a butt end of a stick driven into my eye socket in a corner scrum. The only way to make it safe for all, full face shields would cure the situation, but as long as fighting is allowed, that will never happen. That is why visors should remain an option. Chances are visors will be grandfathered in much as helmets were, despite the fact that a majority of players who wear visors or not would like to keep it optional.

If the NHL wanted to make a strong impact in the health of their players, studies should be made on improving upper body pads to protect players from shoulder injuries. Another common occurrence is groin and other upper leg muscle injuries, as there has been no real gain of prevention in that department, either. Those types of maladies eat up more lost time than any other type of injury, but you don’t see NHL officials running to the microphone and cranking up the PR machine over those. It’s time that the league did, as those are the real problem here… not visors.

Early League Numbers Impressive

The league office held a high-five and backslapping party for the first hundred games last week and deservedly so. The early season success of the league is most encouraging, but should be viewed with cautious optimism as the long term future of the league is far from a certainty, and much of it depends on whether or not the new rule enforcement sticks over the long term.

Offensively, all categories are up, and many are up significantly. Goals are up to 6.2 per game average versus 4.7, a 32% increase from 2003-04. Shots are up 11% to 58.8 average per game from 52.9. Late game heroics doubled as 15 games were decided in the last five minutes of regulation, compared to 7. Along those lines, 9 of 19 games that went to overtime were decided in the five minute frame, compared to just 5 of 18 during the same time frame the season previous.

Special teams have much more emphasis on game outcome as figured. Power play advantages shot through the roof from 1,004 in 2003-04 to 1,282 in the first 97 games this season. Factoring total time played through 97 games (5,897 minutes, 31 seconds) the score has been tied or within a goal 72.3% (4,263:08) which proves how important special teams are. Of the 216 power play goals scored during the period, 121 (56%) had either broken a tie (77 goals), or tied the game up (44). Without even looking at numbers, just viewing the game so far makes it real difficult to turn off. Two and three goal leads even going into the third period don’t have the comfort ability as they once had. A five on three situations can change things very quickly in that regard and momentum can shift in pretty short order, much more than in years past.

Television viewing in Canada has done extremely well out of the gate. Hockey Night in Canada on CBC has enjoyed a healthy increase as viewer ship for both games of their Saturday night doubleheader. Game one averages early on show that 1.807 million have tuned in, compared to 1.147 for the same time period in 2003-04 (a 58% increase). Game two numbers have jumped substantially as 1.288 million average have tuned in, compared to 719,000 (a 79% increase). TSN is the big winner percentage wise as they have posted a 330% jump in ratings, with 899,000 average viewers, compared to just 207,000 in the same period in 2003-04. It should also be noted that TSN established an all time record for viewer ship on opening night, which I discussed in a previous column.

The early attendance figures are also significant. The league enjoyed 93% capacity overall as more than 1.67 million fans went through the turnstiles during the first 97 games, which translates into a 17,226 per night average, 6.1% more than in 2003-04. What is more amazing is 23 clubs are even or ahead of average during the same time frame, and five of the top six percentage gainers are from the southern markets, typically where hockey has struggled in the past. Tampa Bay is up 30%, enjoying the belated Stanley Cup honeymoon. Florida is up 26%, Calgary 23%, Atlanta 21%, Nashville 17% and Phoenix 13%.

So what does all of this mean and what direction will the league go from here? This is why I said earlier that this should be viewed with cautious optimism. The league office has announced crackdowns on obstruction to begin the previous two seasons, just to see them relax that stand further along in the season. Now league officials say they plan on maintaining the enforcement, which by the numbers presented here that they must continue to do so. The way I see it is the first 97 games is nothing more of a renaissance of fans getting back to the arena to see first hand the much publicized changes. To see it embraced as quickly is cause for optimism, but will it hold up? Three of the six teams enjoying the largest percent increase in attendance (Calgary, Atlanta and Phoenix) are struggling right now on the ice and for them to at least maintain or continue to grow; they will have to turn their performance around quickly in order to keep the passive fans coming. Granted, teams are doing all they can to market their clubs to the passive fans with all kinds of deals to get them through the door, but once they get them in, they have to present them a product that will keep them coming. I am not convinced that hockey can survive in the south over the long term, regardless of what these early numbers may indicate, and it is going to take more than a few games or even the next two seasons to try to convince me otherwise. The bottom line is the league office needs to stay on course with enforcement of the “new NHL” rules on obstruction, because the offense appears to be what is motivating the crowds to come.

Off the Post

A tale of two extremes in one organization, the Pittsburgh Penguins have yet to win a game (0-4-4), yet their AHL affiliate in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania has yet to lose (7-0-0) thru October 24^th … Will Peter Forsberg ever score? 12 assists in 6 games along with a +7 is impressive, but Peter, it’s time for some twine… Along those same lines, Calgary’s Jerome Ignila has only 2 goals and 22 shots in 192 plus minutes on the ice, which certainly explains why the defending Western Conference champs have struggled out of the gate…. Ken Hitchcock, Flyers head coach voiced some concern over the “new NHL” after the 5-2 win over the Maple Leafs Saturday night. He thinks players are taking advantage of the new rules and have become Oscar winning actors in front of the officials. "I like what's happened to the game, but I'm concerned," Hitchcock said. He says some players "take advantage of the good things that have been given to them" by "falling down easily, making simple plays tripping penalties . . . those things concern me." That may be a story to watch here in the future, as we are seeing all kinds of calls here, but diving calls are extremely rare under the new enforcement… With Chris Osgood on an injury rehab assignment in Grand Rapids and ready to return to Detroit, the Red Wings may have a hard time working him into the lineup the way Manny Legace has played. In net for all of Detroit’s 9 games, Legace has posted an 8-1 record, a 1.77 GAA and a 92.5 save percentage, leading the league… Don Cherry and Ron MacLean on HNIC Coach’s Corner Saturday were discussing hazing and the OHL’s Windsor Spitfires GM/Coach Moe Mantha being suspended for the season as a result of an incident on the team bus. Cherry turns to MacLean and asks “Ron, have you ever been hazed?” McLean responds by saying “Yes, sure I have been hazed, it happens to most everyone” Cherry then quips “Did you ever get shaved down there? (meaning his groin) You probably did and you enjoyed it, too.”

Information in this article used from the Canadian Press, Associated Press  and NHL.com.

Publisher's Note:
After publication of the article above, it has been brought to our attention that the article had some factual errors about the  "Jeff Libby incident". The article has not been modified but writer Mike Haggett is providing the following explanation:

Well, Chaulk This One Up On Bad Memory
By Mike Haggett
Published October 26, 2005

My previous column on “Headgear and Backslapping” sent me numerous emails on the Jeff Libby incident which I described in my argument against visors. I recalled the freak injury totally wrong, as was pointed out by the readers. After doing some research, I was able to get a link to the story of the injury.

My first error was the fact that Libby played for the Lowell Lock Monsters, not the Portland Pirates. My second error was the fact he was NOT wearing a visor at the time of the unfortunate occurrence. My third error was the fact that it was a skate, not a stick that caused the eye injury to Libby.

I will say that with all honesty that it was not my intent to deliberately mislead any readers of the column in order to prove my point. I wrote solely on memory and did not refresh my memory on the incident. For that, I humbly apologize, and will research any future thoughts thoroughly in order to get the facts straight before commenting.

As a result of this inadvertent error, I did some investigation to find out how many injuries and the types of injuries that have occurred as a result of wearing the half shield. One study done by Injury Research British Columbia back in 2000 recorded 8 eye blinding injuries as a result of wearing the visor, compared to none using the full shield. The Canadian Academy on Sports Medicine backed up IRBC’s claim, and I quote:

“Use of visors significantly reduced the incidents of injuries in hockey. However, eye injuries may still occur with the visor, particularly if used improperly (for example, worn tipped back over forehead or with the chinstrap loosely fastened). COS statistics indicate that 8 blinded eyes have occurred with visors. Full face shields have been effective in virtually eliminating ocular, dental and facial injuries and thus are significantly better than the visor. “

>> Click here for the full report <<

That said, I will not change my stance on visors, and that the decision to wear them should ultimately be decided by the player, not the league. The only way to fully eliminate eye injuries is to use full face shields, and until the league outlaws fighting all together, I do not see where it should be mandated.

Again, I apologize for my errors; I want to thank those that called me on it, and I will make sure not to make the same mistake again. I do this column strictly for fun and enjoyment, which is why I hope you read it and will continue to do so.