Why Do No NHL Players Wear Cage-Type Visors?

[Harry York 37]

The NHL actually restricts the usage of a full face cage/shield. They’re only allowed temporarily when extra facial protection is required, like for a broken jaw. So besides no player really wanting to be the first to use a full cage for macho reasons, the rules say they quite literally can’t.

Why is this? Because it’s been shown players are much less cautious with their sticks when they’re wearing full facial protection. So everyone needs to wear them or nobody. That’s the logic of it anyway.

Thanks. I get the reality of the less cautious and I was aware of the rule. Back in those days, just having the stick up carelessly/dangerously resulted in a 5-minute Major period. It did not matter if there was contact nor blood drawn. I feel we should go back to that. But I also feel that just touching the gloves on a slight stick check should not be so quickly penalized as a hook...NOT to be confused with an aggressive slash to the hands -- I realize it's a judgement call, but it seems the pendulum swung a bit.
Anyway... going back to the shield/bubble. Maybe coming up with a better design that most of the players can come to realize is okay, they could then either loosen the rule against a fuller shield, call the high sticks and cross checks to the face more strictly, and/or mandate that going forward for new players, similar to the grandfathering of helmets and subsequently shields.

I don't remember much more than the refs threatening you if you held your stick too high. It seems they might have called penalties on players who ignored them.
It's a helluva lot scarier playing competitive ice hockey with a naked face and vulnerable eyes if everyone is not cognizant about the threat of horrific injury. One of my teammates was involved in a play where an opponent lost his sight in one eye. There was an actual criminal case.

when I ref'd a few years back, they def wanted us to call that, even if you were all alone at the point just waving your stick for a pass

we did NOT call that lol

edit: to your point tho, I DID work with a guy that used to yell at players for that

Heheheh. It was a chance to give players some hell, I reckon. What ref wouldn’t enjoy a bit of that, eh?

[moose-and-squirrel]

The NHL actually restricts the usage of a full face cage/shield. They’re only allowed temporarily when extra facial protection is required, like for a broken jaw. So besides no player really wanting to be the first to use a full cage for macho reasons, the rules say they quite literally can’t.

Why is this? Because it’s been shown players are much less cautious with their sticks when they’re wearing full facial protection. So everyone needs to wear them or nobody. That’s the logic of it anyway.

Thanks. I get the reality of the less cautious and I was aware of the rule. Back in those days, just having the stick up carelessly/dangerously resulted in a 5-minute Major period. It did not matter if there was contact nor blood drawn. I feel we should go back to that. But I also feel that just touching the gloves on a slight stick check should not be so quickly penalized as a hook...NOT to be confused with an aggressive slash to the hands -- I realize it's a judgement call, but it seems the pendulum swung a bit.
Anyway... going back to the shield/bubble. Maybe coming up with a better design that most of the players can come to realize is okay, they could then either loosen the rule against a fuller shield, call the high sticks and cross checks to the face more strictly, and/or mandate that going forward for new players, similar to the grandfathering of helmets and subsequently shields.

I don't remember much more than the refs threatening you if you held your stick too high. It seems they might have called penalties on players who ignored them.
It's a helluva lot scarier playing competitive ice hockey with a naked face and vulnerable eyes if everyone is not cognizant about the threat of horrific injury. One of my teammates was involved in a play where an opponent lost his sight in one eye. There was an actual criminal case.

when I ref'd a few years back, they def wanted us to call that, even if you were all alone at the point just waving your stick for a pass

we did NOT call that lol

edit: to your point tho, I DID work with a guy that used to yell at players for that

Heheheh. It was a chance to give players some hell, I reckon. What ref wouldn’t enjoy a bit of that, eh?

he was quite curmudgeonly .. hell, I was one of the guys he yelled at when he did my teams game lol

[Harry York 37]

The NHL actually restricts the usage of a full face cage/shield. They’re only allowed temporarily when extra facial protection is required, like for a broken jaw. So besides no player really wanting to be the first to use a full cage for macho reasons, the rules say they quite literally can’t.

Why is this? Because it’s been shown players are much less cautious with their sticks when they’re wearing full facial protection. So everyone needs to wear them or nobody. That’s the logic of it anyway.

Thanks. I get the reality of the less cautious and I was aware of the rule. Back in those days, just having the stick up carelessly/dangerously resulted in a 5-minute Major period. It did not matter if there was contact nor blood drawn. I feel we should go back to that. But I also feel that just touching the gloves on a slight stick check should not be so quickly penalized as a hook...NOT to be confused with an aggressive slash to the hands -- I realize it's a judgement call, but it seems the pendulum swung a bit.
Anyway... going back to the shield/bubble. Maybe coming up with a better design that most of the players can come to realize is okay, they could then either loosen the rule against a fuller shield, call the high sticks and cross checks to the face more strictly, and/or mandate that going forward for new players, similar to the grandfathering of helmets and subsequently shields.

I don't remember much more than the refs threatening you if you held your stick too high. It seems they might have called penalties on players who ignored them.
It's a helluva lot scarier playing competitive ice hockey with a naked face and vulnerable eyes if everyone is not cognizant about the threat of horrific injury. One of my teammates was involved in a play where an opponent lost his sight in one eye. There was an actual criminal case.

when I ref'd a few years back, they def wanted us to call that, even if you were all alone at the point just waving your stick for a pass

we did NOT call that lol

edit: to your point tho, I DID work with a guy that used to yell at players for that

Heheheh. It was a chance to give players some hell, I reckon. What ref wouldn’t enjoy a bit of that, eh?

he was quite curmudgeonly .. hell, I was one of the guys he yelled at when he did my teams game lol

He was that unbiased…. A legend of a ref.

There was an Ump at Bob Russell on St. Cyr Rd who treated games like they were sacred trusts. He was about five foot nuthin’ with a golf-ball sized goiter on the back of his neck. When a pitch missed the strike zone, he would shake his head dismissively while declaring,”No no, no no!”. He also reversed the count and would holler,” Two Strikes and a BALL”.
When a call was disputed on a technicality, he would overule the objection and exclaim in a loud and goddanged reverant tone,” It’s AGAINST the Rules of Baseball!”

[moose-and-squirrel]

speaking of face coverings (ya know... what we're SUPPOSED to be talking about..lol) Benn is lucky right there to not be more seriously hurt.. JUST above the eye

a visor would have protected him

[Harry York 37]

speaking of face coverings (ya know... what we're SUPPOSED to be talking about..lol) Benn is lucky right there to not be more seriously hurt.. JUST above the eye

a visor would have protected him

When Chopper put one on, you knew it was NOT about guts, but about sanity.