Quirk in the N.H.L. Visor Debate: Fighters Get Penalized Rangers defenseman Marc Staal's recent eye injury has again highlighted the hot-button issue of visors. The N.H.L. has expressed its desire to make them mandatory, but right now, it actually has a rule penalizing those who do wear them. Rule 46.6 in the N.H.L. rule book states: "If a player penalized as an instigator of an altercation is wearing a face shield (including a goalkeeper), he shall be assessed an additional unsportsmanlike conduct penalty." While the league says it wants to promote player safety by having all players wear visors, but players say they're reluctant to wear a visor if they're likely to fight because they don't want to further penalize their team. "That's probably my biggest reason," said Maple Leafs defenseman Mark Fraser of removing his visor, because fighting "is part of my role on this team and it just prevents me from any larger penalties and also sort of the unwritten rule that if you're going to fight with a visor you'd have to take your helmet off completely." Fraser said the league is sitting on the fence when it comes to player safety with the rule. "It does seem a little contradictory perhaps, because obviously a lot of guys that do (take the visor off), that might be part of their justification," said Fraser, who has 18 N.H.L. fights in his career, according to hockeyfights.com. I'd rather keep my helmet on with no visor than take it off completely because part of player safety as well is concussions and falling down and hitting your head or whatever else. Fraser's teammate, Frazer McLaren, also believes the rule prompts fighters to keep the visor off. From a fighter's perspective it's not really that ridiculous because if someone instigates a fight with you who's got a visor on, it's tough for the guy without the visor because the other guy's face is protected. In that sense it's a good rule for some of the fighters," said McLaren, who has 26 career fights, including the Wednesday night knockout blow he delivered to Ottawa's Dave Dziurzynski. At the same sense I understand the angle you're coming from where it kind of probably deters some players from wearing visors, who might have originally worn them.  Then there's Senators tough guy Chris Neil, who appears to be in denial about visors preventing eye injuries. Neil was struck in the eye in January 2011 by the stick of Montreal's Max Pacioretty. He wasn't wearing a visor then and still doesn't. "I think that situation is a fluke accident, but as far as sticks coming up, that's the scary thing," Neil said, referring to Staal's injury. I think if everyone's wearing no visor guys would be more respectful around the league with their sticks. Despite players such as Tye McGinn of the Flyers, who has three fights this season, and Kings forward Colin Fraser now wearing visors, Neil had this to say regarding Rule 46.6: "I don't really look at that either because, you know, usually guys aren't fighting if they're wearing visors." Chris Phillips, who is the Senators" union rep who sustained an eye injury in 1998, admits the rule does raise some red flags. "That's what makes it a good debate, you don't want to see guys get hurt," Phillips said. I've seen guys take their helmets off in sort of respect to each other ... you don't want to see a guy get a concussion cause he's fallen down in a fight and hit his head. There's always a trickle-down effect from doing certain things that makes it a good debate. At the end of the day you don't want to see guys get hurt.