Jump to content

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
txump81

NFHS Rules: Catcher's Helmet

Recommended Posts

Still waiting to see definitive proof of hockey mask being safer. Until that debate is settled the NFHS cathers mask rule remains dumb in my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remove these ads by becoming a Premium Member
1 hour ago, Minnz said:

Still waiting to see definitive proof of hockey mask being safer. Until that debate is settled the NFHS cathers mask rule remains dumb in my mind.

Why is the burden of proof on the device that protects the entire head? Shouldn't we look for proof that the alternative is just as safe before altering the rule?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Minnz said:

Still waiting to see definitive proof of hockey mask being safer. Until that debate is settled the NFHS cathers mask rule remains dumb in my mind.

There's a debate? Huh. I musta missed it. I have no issue believing a helmet that covers the head offers better protection than one that doesn't. BUT don't blindly agree with me. Take a look at the scientific test methods NOCSAE uses to determine that headgear and related equipment is safe:

http://nocsae.org/wp-content/files_mf/1458844362ND08114m15PneumaticRamTestMethod.pdf

http://nocsae.org/wp-content/files_mf/1463597031ND01113m16MfrdProceduralGuideforQualityControlandSampleSelection.pdf

http://nocsae.org/wp-content/files_mf/1490213565ND00115m17DropTestMethod.pdf

http://nocsae.org/wp-content/files_mf/1490287310ND02112m17ProjectileImpactTestMethod.pdf

http://nocsae.org/wp-content/files_mf/1514996961ND00117m17bDropTestMethod.pdf

But I'm no physicist, so I don't understand all the math. I am, however, willing to take NOCSAE's word for it that if equipment passes these tests, they provide at least a decent degree of safety. And a better degree than other equipment -- like a traditional mask/helmet combo that doesn't pass these tests. If this isn't "definitive proof," it should be good enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ElkOil said:

There's a debate? Huh. I musta missed it. I have no issue believing a helmet that covers the head offers better protection than one that doesn't. BUT don't blindly agree with me. Take a look at the scientific test methods NOCSAE uses to determine that headgear and related equipment is safe:

http://nocsae.org/wp-content/files_mf/1458844362ND08114m15PneumaticRamTestMethod.pdf

http://nocsae.org/wp-content/files_mf/1463597031ND01113m16MfrdProceduralGuideforQualityControlandSampleSelection.pdf

http://nocsae.org/wp-content/files_mf/1490213565ND00115m17DropTestMethod.pdf

http://nocsae.org/wp-content/files_mf/1490287310ND02112m17ProjectileImpactTestMethod.pdf

http://nocsae.org/wp-content/files_mf/1514996961ND00117m17bDropTestMethod.pdf

But I'm no physicist, so I don't understand all the math. I am, however, willing to take NOCSAE's word for it that if equipment passes these tests, they provide at least a decent degree of safety. And a better degree than other equipment -- like a traditional mask/helmet combo that doesn't pass these tests. If this isn't "definitive proof," it should be good enough.

There has been some debate in the umpire community regarding  hockey style helmets and conventional masks. the debate being about which transmits more concussive force. I think, with the catcher being more at risk to follow-thru impact on the side or back of his head, that HSM would be better. Thus FED should mandate the Force 3 NOCSAE HSM. Full head protection with concussion attenuation;)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Jimurray said:

There has been some debate in the umpire community regarding  hockey style helmets and conventional masks. the debate being about which transmits more concussive force. I think, with the catcher being more at risk to follow-thru impact on the side or back of his head, that HSM would be better. Thus FED should mandate the Force 3 NOCSAE HSM. Full head protection with concussion attenuation;)

I would contend that a debate in the scientific community would hold more sway than a debate about the same subject in the umpiring community. Although we have lots of personal experiences, we're not a scientific body (understanding that individuals among us may certainly be scientists who have experience in this field). And I know guys like MadMax have studied this with great enthusiasm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ElkOil said:

I would contend that a debate in the scientific community would hold more sway than a debate about the same subject in the umpiring community. Although we have lots of personal experiences, we're not a scientific body (understanding that individuals among us may certainly be scientists who have experience in this field). And I know guys like MadMax have studied this with great enthusiasm.

As an umpire, I have ZERO interest in which helmet/mask combination works best for a catcher... for me, yes :-)

I look to the rule book and or governing bodies to supply the guidance and from there I will enforce it. I do not have the time, interest or education in concussive force distribution and or sports equipment testing to be competent to provide any opinion on what participants should or should not wear.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mudisfun said:

As an umpire, I have ZERO interest in which helmet/mask combination works best for a catcher... for me, yes :-)

I look to the rule book and or governing bodies to supply the guidance and from there I will enforce it. I do not have the time, interest or education in concussive force distribution and or sports equipment testing to be competent to provide any opinion on what participants should or should not wear.  

Interestingly, the NCAA rule requires a throat guard, which I assume we take as the bottom of the mask when a skull cap and mask are worn together. They CYA’d their ask. 

“b. Catcher’s Throat Guard. It is required that all catchers have a built-in or attachable throat guard on their masks. 
c. Catcher’s Helmet and Face Mask.  It is required that all catchers shall wear a protective helmet and face mask when fielding their position, warming up a pitcher (ie. between innings) or catching in the bullpen.  It is recommended that all catcher’s helmets bear the manufacturer’s certification indicating satisfaction of NOCSAE test standards. 
PENALTY for b. and c.—The player shall not be allowed to catch but shall not be ejected from the contest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×