Was all the emphasis on scoring designed for gambling on the sport?

[seagoal]

Just now, bunnyman666 said:

It really doesn’t when you get right down to it. If star players’ brains became porridge, I am certain there would be more emphasis to eliminate fighting. As it is, it’s not the stars (except Landeskog) throwing down. McDavid doesn’t want to ruin his manicure.

2 Kraken games ago Yanni Gourde threw down in a fight.  I was pretty surprised to see that.

[bunnyman666]

5 minutes ago, seagoal said:

2 Kraken games ago Yanni Gourde threw down in a fight.  I was pretty surprised to see that.

That is surprising!

[MTH]

Fighting in the NHL is pretty much at an all time low. The league knows its a dying trend. Rather than deal with all the people complaining that fighting was banned, they know it will go away on its own.

[bunnyman666]

1 hour ago, MTH said:

Fighting in the NHL is pretty much at an all time low. The league knows its a dying trend. Rather than deal with all the people complaining that fighting was banned, they know it will go away on its own.

It’s like the option to go visorless: slow and eventual. Will full face protection end up being the norm in 15 years?

[MTH]

1 hour ago, bunnyman666 said:

It’s like the option to go visorless: slow and eventual. Will full face protection end up being the norm in 15 years?

Many people don't know that full face is actually illegal in the NHL now. 

I could see it being legal option soon. Hopefully.

[bunnyman666]

Just now, MTH said:

Many people don't know that full face is actually illegal in the NHL now. 

I could see it being legal option soon. Hopefully.

Weird, and yet I will see the occasional full face on someone injured.

[MTH]

19 hours ago, bunnyman666 said:

Weird, and yet I will see the occasional full face on someone injured.

You have to get approval for it when injured. 

Still dig the creative options that equipment managers have made through the years.

The classic Itech shield lower part - face window removed:

Hybrid Itech lower and a regular half visor:

The Pat LaFontane:

Older hockey was even more creative:

This is Bobby Hull.

[coopaloop1234]

20 hours ago, MTH said:

Many people don't know that full face is actually illegal in the NHL now. 

I could see it being legal option soon. Hopefully.

I'm only for this if they mandate that players have to wear their cages tilted up like NCAA hockey players. 

It'll be the new tilted up Itech/Bauer mask in the CHL. 

[ilyazhito]

On 4/5/2022 at 3:00 PM, MTH said:

Many people don't know that full face is actually illegal in the NHL now. 

I could see it being legal option soon. Hopefully.

Why is the full visor/full face cage illegal in the NHL? 

[MTH]

23 hours ago, ilyazhito said:

Why is the full visor/full face cage illegal in the NHL? 

Why are hockey pucks 3"x1"?

Who knows? I assume it had to be some type of rule preventing players from playing like a goalie. Just a guess.

[ilyazhito]

It doesn't make sense, because player and goalie cages look very different. 

[bunnyman666]

13 hours ago, ilyazhito said:

It doesn't make sense, because player and goalie cages look very different. 

At one time, not so much. The HM 50 was for both goalie and forward. HM 40 was a forward cat eye and the HM 30 was for goalies. 
 
I am certain that the rule @mth mentioned is one of those archaic rules that the NHLPA and owners haven’t gotten together on changing. It’s just like at one time, a gong was perfectly acceptable to signal a goal; chain link fence was also acceptable to go above the boards for the rink per the rules in the 1950s.

[bunnyman666]

16 hours ago, MTH said:

Why are hockey pucks 3"x1"?

Who knows? I assume it had to be some type of rule preventing players from playing like a goalie. Just a guess.

No full definition, though it could have to do with fighting, and concerns of elbows flying regularly. I also suspect it has to do with facial recognition for fans. Remember that our current commissioner for a short time in the dawn of his reign gave players the option to take off the helmet, hoping that stars would do it; alas, one enforcer did it and the experiment was ended. It is different playing with a visor versus full facial protection, as a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, I was a left winger on the checking line and at 16, I could ditch the bubble and graduate to an Itech RBE 2 when playing Juniors. Upon my re-entry into hockey 12 years ago, I eventually rigged up (with the help of an EQM friend) a similar visor and lower bubble protection that afforded the wide-open vision of a visor with sufficient jaw protection. Losing teeth in juniors and up would’ve been a badge of honour; as an adult playing beer leagues, not so much

So to answer the question, it is likely traditionalists and money driving the rules.

[MTH]

18 hours ago, ilyazhito said:

It doesn't make sense, because player and goalie cages look very different. 

Even a player cage will prevent a shot from hitting your face. So standing in front of shot isn't as much of a concern with a full face cage as a visor. Although I think the rule is from when full face protection was for just goalies. So full face protection in the NHL rule book is the same as a blocker, glove and goalie pads on your legs.

I do miss cool and unique helmets. The Jofa egg shells, the Chelios CCM with no padding... gave players some personality.

Edited April 8, 2022 by MTH

[bunnyman666]

11 minutes ago, MTH said:

Even a player cage will prevent a shot from hitting your face. So standing in front of shot isn't as much of a concern with a full face cage as a visor.

I do miss cool and unique helmets. The Jofa egg shells, the Chelios CCM with no padding... gave players some personality.

You still have guys, even in NCAA play, using “pro” padded helmets, wearing a small when it should be a large. I have had a few modern ones come through my collection.

[MTH]

5 minutes ago, bunnyman666 said:

You still have guys, even in NCAA play, using “pro” padded helmets, wearing a small when it should be a large. I have had a few modern ones come through my collection.

I think the NHL phased that out. All the helmets are now certified by the league. There were guys grandfathered in with old lids, but I do believe that every player must wear a new helmet that is certified every year.

The 'pro padding' is a thing of the past.

[bunnyman666]

1 minute ago, MTH said:

I think the NHL phased that out. All the helmets are now certified by the league. There were guys grandfathered in with old lids, but I do believe that every player must wear a new helmet that is certified every year.

The 'pro padding' is a thing of the past.

I had a CCM HT50 that is a size small with pro padding. That was from 2018. It’s not quite as crazy as those HT2’s, but the rotational padding was omitted by the factory in favour of thinner, dual density padding. I may still have a pic on my phone of the liner.

[coopaloop1234]

9 minutes ago, MTH said:

I think the NHL phased that out. All the helmets are now certified by the league. There were guys grandfathered in with old lids, but I do believe that every player must wear a new helmet that is certified every year.

The 'pro padding' is a thing of the past.

God I loved my old CCM player helmet when I was growing up. 

Sure doesn't help that every photo of them in the show just has a very iconic look/feel to them. 

Case in point with Yzerman and Hull here. 

[ilyazhito]

6 hours ago, bunnyman666 said:

At one time, not so much. The HM 50 was for both goalie and forward. HM 40 was a forward cat eye and the HM 30 was for goalies. 
 
I am certain that the rule @mth mentioned is one of those archaic rules that the NHLPA and owners haven’t gotten together on changing. It’s just like at one time, a gong was perfectly acceptable to signal a goal; chain link fence was also acceptable to go above the boards for the rink per the rules in the 1950s.

Wow. I knew about chain link fences around the boards. However, the gong is new to me. Maybe the gong was a precursor to the goal horn.

It is stupid that players can't wear facial protection unless they get injured. As long as there is a clearly defined difference between player and goalie cages, and specific head protectors are goalie-only, then there is no potential for confusion between players and goalies, which is what the no face cage rule might have addressed. 

[coopaloop1234]

3 minutes ago, ilyazhito said:

Wow. I knew about chain link fences around the boards. However, the gong is new to me. Maybe the gong was a precursor to the goal horn.

It is stupid that players can't wear facial protection unless they get injured. As long as there is a clearly defined difference between player and goalie cages, and specific head protectors are goalie-only, then there is no potential for confusion between players and goalies, which is what the no face cage rule might have addressed. 

Pretty sure most guys don't want to wear full face gear anyways. If it was a big enough talking point, the NHLPA would be pushing for it. 

Most guys are happy to only be forced to wear a visor. 

[MTH]

Towes still rocks the Bauer 4500 helmet. But Bauer still makes these (my one son wear it). Towes still has the factory installed dual foam.

Players used to just go single layer rubbatex 1/4" thick and call it a day like a pro.

 

[bunnyman666]

23 minutes ago, ilyazhito said:

Wow. I knew about chain link fences around the boards. However, the gong is new to me. Maybe the gong was a precursor to the goal horn.

It is stupid that players can't wear facial protection unless they get injured. As long as there is a clearly defined difference between player and goalie cages, and specific head protectors are goalie-only, then there is no potential for confusion between players and goalies, which is what the no face cage rule might have addressed. 

Gong was acceptable as well as a horn or a buzzer. 
 
As far as facial protection goes, some confusion could be out there. After all, Bobby Plager was wearing an identical Lefty Wilson to the goalie was was defending in front of when he had a face-changing incident. Of course this was pre-cage era.

In the end, the forwards wearing full face protection is a very complicated issue, weird as it seems.  Unlike in goal where you are encouraged to have more tunnel vision by turning your head, you need as much peripheral vision as a skater. Even the certified visors have more blind spots due to their construction. And having your vision blocked by a chin cup can cause you to skate head-down, which is SUPER dangerous.

[bunnyman666]

7 minutes ago, MTH said:

Towes still rocks the Bauer 4500 helmet. But Bauer still makes these (my one son wear it). Towes still has the factory installed dual foam.

Players used to just go single layer rubbatex 1/4" thick and call it a day like a pro.

 

I have a few of those CCM HT-2 “pro padded” helmets. I think the rub is that you can get it from the factory with thinner padding; you just can’t rip it out and pad it yourself any longer. 
 
That 4500 is still pretty low profile compared to some. The upcoming 3D printed liners could change everything, allowing for max protection with minimal profile.

[MTH]

1 hour ago, bunnyman666 said:

I had a CCM HT50 that is a size small with pro padding. That was from 2018. It’s not quite as crazy as those HT2’s, but the rotational padding was omitted by the factory in favour of thinner, dual density padding. I may still have a pic on my phone of the liner.

There were a bunch of new Bauer and CCM helmets that were sold with the bike helmet foam that pro guys wore with the old style rubbatex foam instead. AKA pro padding.

They were on Pro Stock a lot. Not much left now.

[bunnyman666]

4 minutes ago, MTH said:

There were a bunch of new Bauer and CCM helmets that were sold with the bike helmet foam that pro guys wore with the old style rubbatex foam instead. AKA pro padding.

They were on Pro Stock a lot. Not much left now.

I got mine from Monkey. It was a Notre Dame pro return. Yes- they weren’t anything like a kiddie XS helmet with 1/4” padding, but they were pretty thin comparatively.