About visors in the NHL, the talking heads are being a little lazy and imprecise by saying visors will be 'grandfathered'. That's not accurate or descriptive, they're using a hockey term that fans know, but by overusing it they're fuzzing up the definition.
What is accurate to say is that visors might become mandatory next season, with an out clause for current players who don't want to wear one grandfathered in. So visors aren't grandfathered, they're being made mandatory.
A grandfather clause is a provision in which an old rule continues to apply to some existing situations, while a new rule will apply to all future cases.
You're splitting hairs. While your example above is correct, it would also be correct to say that the existing rule that allows for league approved protective head gear (helmets without visors) would in fact "grandfathered".
ReplyDeleteThat would workif they were saying "...helmets without visors will be grandfathered...", it's always told as "visors will be grandfathered in...", which is wrong.
DeleteI'll stand by my statement that announcers and analysts are being lazy and imprecise.
In a related manner, I hate when football announcers are breaking down slow-mo of a quarterback coughing up the ball during a pass attempt, and the refs are ruling on whether it's an incomplete pass, or a fumble. You hear them saying empty hand this, empty hand that, but they never take the time to explain what they mean, empty hand how, empty hand when, what is triggered at what point. They're talking in jargon among themselves and not analyzing for the casual fan at home.