Recontra

Anyone know if there is any word on new or upgraded umpire gear coming out for the 2023 season? I've got great gear now, but confess I like to buy & try new stuff when it's available.

Mad Max is joking, but not really 😃 It's been a couple of years since I've done a LL fall ball game, but here's what I learned: LL Fall Ball, all levels, "a developmental autumn season where everyone AND THEIR LITTLE BROTHER gets to play catcher!" Dress accordingly, so you have fun, too! A buddy who is a much senior and much wiser volunteer than me says he always wears an old style Balloon Chest Protector for LL fall ball. When I first did LL fall ball, I mistakenly clung to the naive delusion that "Balloon Chest Protectors are for sucks!" After my second game of being the backstop, I started leaving my chest protector in my pickup, stopped by the League Equipment Shed on my way to the field, and grabbed a balloon protector. That one equipment modification made fall ball as recreationally fun for me as it was for the players who were playing "up" a league--and I never cared when the little brothers came out of the dugout with catcher's gear on, because Balloon Chest Protectors really aren't for sucks!

Such a tough play for BU on the line to call, even harder when it's a line drive curling toward your head. Everyone will tell you post-game that you should just move inside on this ball, because it's going to curve towards foul territory, but that's so tough to do--move into the oncoming ball. A couple times every season, I can't make my body do that and end up abandoning the line. Here, the PU was farther off the line than U3 when the ball got to 3rd, and U3 still may have had the best look. But I also agree that this is a situation that needs to be both pre-gamed and executed unequivocally. If U3 has to abandon the line and let PU make the fair/foul call, then he and PU have got to make eye contact, PU has got to come in big thumping his chest "Partner, I got it!" and then emphatically make the call. PU is taking U3's primary call (fair/foul call on batted ball that goes beyond 3rd base). That didn't happen. Neither one of them were on the line, and PU was further off of it than U3. I'd still like an explanation as to how the video reviewers determined that they were going to declare the ball was fair after one of them signalled it foul, and award R-1 three bases. R-1 wouldn't necessarily have scored, he may even have held up at 2nd. Other than that play, it was a remarkably well-called game by the crew, including U3 and PU. And that deserves repeating. It was a remarkably well-called game by the crew, including U3 and PU. PU was solid. I feel so bad for all of them, Bend North as well as the crew, especially U3.

Oregon has two statutes that other states might want to adopt. The 1st permits a sports official to eject any player, coach, parent, or fan from any sports field or sports complex (even public parks) who engages in inappropriate behavior. Violators commit criminal trespass. The 2nd provides liquidated damages and attorneys fees to any sports official who is subjected to offensive contact, during or after the game, on the field or in the immediate vicinity of the complex (i.e. parking lot). Actual injury need not be shown. ORS 164.274 As used in ORS 164.276 and 164.278 : (1) “Coach” means a person who instructs or trains members of a team or directs the strategy of a team participating in a sports event. (2) “Inappropriate behavior” means: (a) Engaging in fighting or in violent, tumultuous or threatening behavior; (b) Violating the rules of conduct governing coaches, team players and spectators at a sports event; (c) Publicly insulting another person by abusive words or gestures in a manner intended to provoke a violent response; or (d) Intentionally subjecting another person to offensive physical contact. (3) “Premises” has the meaning given that term in ORS 164.205 . (4) “Spectator” means any person, other than a team player or coach, who attends a sports event. (5) “Sports official” has the meaning given that term in ORS 30.882. ORS 164.276 A sports official may order a coach, team player or spectator to leave the premises at which a sports event is taking place and at which the sports official is officiating if the coach, team player or spectator is engaging in inappropriate behavior. ORS 164.278 (1) A person commits the crime of criminal trespass at a sports event if the person: (a) Is a coach, team player or spectator at a sports event; (b) Engages in inappropriate behavior; (c) Has been ordered by a sports official to leave the premises at which the sports event is taking place; and (d) Fails to leave the premises or returns to the premises during the period of time when reentry has been prohibited. (2) Criminal trespass at a sports event is a Class C misdemeanor. ORS 30.882 Award of liquidated damages to sports official subjected to offensive physical contact (1) In addition to, and not in lieu of any other damages that may be claimed, a plaintiff who is a sports official shall receive liquidated damages in an amount not less than $500 but not more than $1,000 in any action in which the plaintiff establishes that: (a)The defendant intentionally subjected the plaintiff to offensive physical contact; (b) The defendant knew that the plaintiff was a sports official at the time the offensive physical contact was made; (c) The offensive physical contact is made while the plaintiff is within, or in the immediate vicinity of, a facility at which the plaintiff serves as a sports official for a sports event; and (d) The offensive physical contact is made while the plaintiff is serving as a sports official or within a brief period of time thereafter. (2) The court shall award reasonable attorney fees to a prevailing plaintiff in an action in which liquidated damages are awarded under this section. (3) An award of liquidated damages under this section is not subject to ORS 31.725 (Pleading punitive damages), 31.730 (Standards for award of punitive damages) or 31.735 (Distribution of punitive damages). (4) As used in this section, “sports official” means a person who: (a) Serves as a referee, umpire, linesman or judge or performs similar functions under a different title; and (b) Is a member of, or registered by, a local, state, regional or national organization that engages in providing education and training in sports officiating. [1999 c.786 §1]

Amen JonnyCat!! Ok, so this thread I started about catcher’s not sticking and framing pitches might have about run it’s course, as it looks like some might about be at the “Well, we’re just going to have to agree to disagree” point (and trust me, I’ve been there in the vociferous minority more than once on this forum—sometimes even angry about it—but invariably a while later—sometimes weeks later—I realize I was wrong and the true experienced veterans on this forum, who were just trying their Scout’s best to teach my stubborn ass, were actually right 😂😂) So, I’m not qualified to be judgmental (of anyone). But, let me just try to give one possible independent reason why every umpire would always want to track every pitch all the way to the glove: Breaking balls! Sliders and curve balls. Here in western Oregon with the Marine Layer, the wind changes a lot every afternoon into the evening, every Spring and Summer. And it varies day to day. It often varies from the 1st inning to the 5th. The same slider that was breaking late and missed high in the 1st is breaking sooner and hitting in the 4th. It’s frequently a challenge to call the top of the zone throughout the game, because the breaking point of pitches changes as the game goes on. But here’s what I do know: Regardless of the wind, if a catcher is properly set up and gloves a breaking ball below the batter’s belt, there’s no way that pitch did not pass through the strike zone. No fricking way! Boom! That’s a strike! Confession time of my own: I worked my 1st volunteer LL Majors game last night—my HS playoff season is over, Legion hasn’t started, so I leaped at the opportunity to give my local LL league a game—we were so short of HS umpires this season, it truly was my 1st opportunity as we were all working every available day. I had a blast working last night solo for HC’s, players, and parents who were overjoyed to have an actual umpire, any umpire 😄—every other available volunteer LL umpire was elsewhere. Nobody was throwing above the 50’s. There were a lot of bloopers. I actually made the following audible on a blooper I balled. “Ok, I know he caught it below the belt, but that pitch was high!” It’s sometimes easy to think out loud when you’re working solo 😂😂 But for pitches in the 70+ mph zone . . . and fast enough to be true breaking balls . . . I posit my theorem is solid. Just a thought for why even someone who was only concerned with the area over the plate, would nevertheless still want to track that and every pitch all the way to the mitt. Just saying. Again, Amen to JonnyCat!!

Boom! If I'm struggling to immediately find a batted ball, my 1st thought is always that I must have given up on the pitch somewhere in front of the plate--and I think most of the time that is the cause. Not knowing where the hell the batted ball is, that's just the symptom of my improper use of eyes. Recognizing the symptom of the problem often helps me to correct the cause mid-game.

A pitch remains a pitch until it stops moving (think Randy Johnson tagging that dove and the umpire turning with the pitch to follow it to the fence where it stopped being a pitch). I found this gem on Instagram (and will use it as a teaching tool in the future). It was posted to see how the umpire catches the pitch, but watch him follow the pitch (he never would have caught it on the rebound had he not been tracking it all the way). Also, I've had higher level coaches scream at me if a catcher slides out to grab a pitch that passes through the strike zone (butchers it 🙂). So, I'm one who most definitely believes how a pitcher receives a pitch is not only relevant, it's additional information on the pitch. https://www.instagram.com/p/CcY_kGEMuPl/

I see you’re from Gaston. I had Gaston twice this year, once at St. Paul and once at Amity. You working the Premier Portland or the Bend Elks Tourney? Those tourneys are always a blast, and well run. We got a big group over in Bend this weekend. Have fun! With youth ball or even small town varsity high school ball (especially JV), I’m never a rules Nazi with that white/gray on the pitcher’s mitt rule. That might be the only mitt that player or his family could afford. The Rule is designed to keep a pitcher from being distracting. Is his mitt truly distracting? I’m not saying to ignore the rule (or any rule). But here’s how I usually handle it: I go to the opposing coach and quietly say, “Hey, John, that boy’s pitcher’s mitt is technically illegal, because it has white on it. . . . Do have a problem with it?” 98% of the time the opposing coach won’t care. But if he does, I enforce the rule, not throwing the opposing coach under the bus—I’m the bad guy. If he says, “No,” then end of potential problem which no longer exists. Just my two cents on how to handle that.

Watching at least PAC 12 baseball, I see a lot of catchers who have abandoned the pursuit of the art of framing pitches. And that has run down hill to high school ball (at least around here). Maybe it started in MLB with the electronic strike zone. Don’t know. Catchers immediately lift lower pitches, or pull in outside pitches, instead of sticking the pitch and letting us take a slightly extended look on how they received the pitch, letting us look at the “stick.” I had the pleasure of working some volunteer fall and winter ball college games a few years ago for a catcher who ended up going #1 in the draft, and who just got called up from AAA a few days ago. He made balls look like strikes. He’d catch a slightly outside pitch in the web of his mitt (with 2/3’s of his mitt over the strike zone), or glove a lowish pitch fingers up in the palm of his glove, with 2/3’s of his mitt above the knees. It was artistry. Balls that were intentionally a bit high, low, outside, or inside, he’d just immediately throw them back to the pitcher, almost before I called the pitch, making my job easy. Then he’d stick one he wanted, holding it rock solid a bit—and I’d want to bang them, and usually did. He put on summer clinics for high school catchers, and for a couple of years all high school catchers were striving to stick and frame pitches. Now they’re all just lifting and pulling in pitches immediately after they are caught—before I’ve called the pitch in my mind. I say anything, and I’ll likely get an earful from the defensive HC. Leave his catcher be, “he’s doing what I’ve told him to do.” Anyone else notice this trend?

I wholeheartedly agree there is no need for a big dramatic "You're done!" mechanic (in most situations). However, I also believe in "most" situations a clearly visible "You're done!" mechanic is in order, and prevents any confusion--alerts your partner that he better get his ass in, and let's every player, coach and fan know what's going on. I don't believe it is ideal to want fans and other players and coaches to be wondering in the next inning why so-and-so is no longer around. But I also know that the MLB umpires also have gotten away from dramatic ejection mechanics (in most situations). Here's a good example from a few years ago! The plate umpire dumps the pitcher almost casually for mouthing off to David Ortiz. I looked this hilarious video up again this season, because that pitcher is the Varsity high school coach of a team in our area (his son is a freshman pitcher). Nicest guy on the planet (bigger than many professional wrestlers :-), and I ain't ever going to risk dumping him no matter what he says to me 😂 Ejection at about 1:24. (1) Kevin Gregg, David Ortiz exchange words as benches clear - YouTube

All great responses by other contributors with more experience than me. I'll only add that while I agree the initial catch/no catch in this scenario is PU's primary call, it's also something which could and should be pre-gamed. So, I wouldn't put all this on you! I might get flamed for saying this. If PU knew his view was blocked, or even if there was a questionable "bounce", if you pre-gamed it, he could have made eye contact with you, and you with him. It's kinda like a screamer up the 1st baseline when you're in A, F-3 touches the ball past the bag, but because he's directly in front of you, you can't tell if he touched it in fair territory or not, or F-2 runs up the line to field a fly bunt but PU can't tell if F-2 first touched it in fair or foul territory. A shoestring catch by F-6 is another similar scenario. The book gives that to PU. But sometimes you in A have the best view. There's more time than you think to make this call and communicate non-verbally with your partner. It's not in the book, but it works if it's pre-gamed. PU looks quickly toward you with a wide-eyed glance. You're 100% certain the ball touched the ground (or say F-2 first touched the ball fair or foul in front of PU up the 1st baseline). You can tap your chest, wait a fraction of a second for PU to acknowledge you, "I got it!" "No catch! No catch!" Or, fix it after the dust clears. Most of the time, nobody other than you and your partner know who's primary on a call like that. But pre-gaming those situations will prevent two calls from being made on the play. Same thing with something like a missed swipe tag during a run-down that we're 100% certain we saw. Partner with responsibility for the tag turns and continues running with the run-down (he obviously didn't see the tag). Tap chest, "I got it!" "That's a tag, he's out!"

Thanks! That's what I needed to hear. After 10 plus years, it appears I still need to "Slow the hell down!" I made the "That's nothing!" call way, way too quickly without processing ALL that happened and didn't happen--and there was a lot of information that needed to be processed on that play. Hopefully, I be around long enough to see that play or one like it again . . . and not kick it!

Thanks for the responses! While the call may have been correct/defensible (protect pitcher not catcher), my reasoning wasn’t sound and was mistaken. Sounds like it’s strict liability. Catcher runs in front of R-3’s path to get to a batted ball, R-3 can’t avoid, if catcher is hindered, R-3 has interfered. I think if I saw the same play again I’d call interference on R-3 and not say I was protecting the pitcher. Dang!

Not sure I got this right. High school varsity, top of the 8th, game still tied. 2 outs, R-3 only. R-3 steals on the pitch. R-3 was about 2/3’s way Home and running hard when Batter swung and hit a dribbler about a foot fair up the 3rd base line that went several feet into the grass beyond the circle. Both F-1 and F-2 went to field it, and both were equally close to it when R-3’s right shoulder bumped F-2’s right shoulder while continuing to run full speed home. F-2 stopped as a result of the impact. F-1 fielded the ball and his throw to 1st was not in time. I signaled “That’s nothing!” pointed to the site of the collision emphatically and gave the safe mechanic again as F-1 threw to 1st. I decided both that I was protecting the pitcher, and that there was no time or way for R-3 to deviate in order to avoid the catcher who got up and ran into R-3’s path while he was running full speed and was just outside the box when the collision occurred—acknowledging that a fielder has the absolute right to field a batted ball, but in my judgment R-3 couldn’t have stopped, slid, or otherwise avoided F-2. HT head coach wanted interference on R-3, because a runner has to get out of the fielder’s way. I told him both that I was protecting the pitcher (which was maybe horseSH*# of me, because both F-1 and F-2 were equidistant from the ball when the collision occurred), but that I also judged that there was no way for R-3 to avoid the collision because of his momentum. I agreed to consult, did, and after talking with my partner decided to uphold the call. I went towards the 3rd base dugout and explained it was a tough and close call, but that R-3 was stealing on the pitch and because of his momentum, in our judgment there was no way he could have avoided the catcher who crossed his path, I pointed, the runner is safe at home, and then I signaled and verbalized that the run scored. That’s the 1st time I’ve seen a situation where I did not think the runner could have avoided the fielder’s attempt to field a batted ball. Not sure what R-3 could have done. If he let up, he probably would have collided with the entirety of F-2. Still not sure I got it right, though.

I’d probably need more than all the fingers on one hand to count the times my first 3 years where I thought, “Screw this, I’ve had enough, this is bullSH*#, I’m most certainly not having any fun, and I’m listing my gear on ebay as soon as I get home!” I think this is now the start of my 12th year. One thing that always helped me (and still helps me) is having a mentor or brother in arms accessible by cell phone to go over tough games and talk about controversial situations. There’s a reason there’s a bar in our town where umpires drop in on Wednesdays after games to talk, share, and bond. To this day, I still walk off the field and confess, “Dang, I guess I’ll have to wait until at least tomorrow to have my 1st perfect game.” And I’m still having fun! Mostly. LoL 😂😂

“Hey, Mike, he’s got sunglasses on, he can’t have those! . . . . . . . can he?” ”Hey, Mike, he’s got eye make-up on, he can’t have that . . . . . . . can he?” Me. Glare. “Play!”

I don't think "B" is inconsistent with permitting the defense to take the results of the play or the penalty: Batter out, runners return. No defense would take the results of that play. However, if R-1 had been thrown out at 2nd, my ruling would be that the defense can take the results of the play: R-1 out on the tag, B-3 out on the illegal bat. I also would agree with Matt that each successive play/pitch is a discreet play. R-1 steals 2nd on 1st pitch. He steals 3rd on 2nd pitch. He steals home on 3rd pitch, after which illegal bat is discovered. Batter is out and R-1 goes back to 3rd, not back to 1st (unless defense elects to take the results of the play). That's just my theory.

Just for comparison, most of the "good" travel ball tourneys in Washington, Oregon, Nevada, and Arizona are run by Premier Sports. Many teams play across state lines for various tournaments. Ejections are memorialized, and the ejection policy is enforced (even across state lines). It works. Here it is: "Ejection Policy Players / Coach Ejections Any player or coach ejection will result in a one-game suspension, to be served in the next tournament game For all player ejections, the player should remain in the dugout For all coach ejections, the coach must leave the complex immediately and be out of site from game officials. Failure to comply with this directive will result in forfeiture of the game If the same player or coach is ejected for a 2nd time (either in the current tournament or any future Premier Sports Tournaments event), he or she will be suspended for the remainder of the tournament If the same player or coach is ejected for a 3rd time, that player or coach will be suspended for the remainder of the current tournament season Fan / Parent Ejections Any fan or parent ejections will result in removal from the complex. The fan or parent in question will not be permitted back into the complex for the remainder of the tournament A second fan or parent ejection for the same team will result in the removal of ALL FANS for that given team. This fan restriction will remain in place for that team for the remainder of the current event"

I respect your opinion, and I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I got a balk on a "live" ball, not a "dead" ball. I put the ball in play when I thought all the conditions existed. It's got nothing to do with ethics, punishment. I got a live ball, and you've got a dead ball. That's essentially the difference in the way we umpired the play. But, since I see where this thread is going (sounds like the same place the 2-3 previous threads went), I'm willing to just drop it and go on my misguided way 🙂🙂 No offense is intended, so I hope none is taken.

By my reasoning, I'd have a balk then, and send R-2 to 3rd (pitcher was engaged with the pitcher's plate without the ball when the ball was declared live). And you may all be right, and I may be totally 100% wrong. But seriously, if pitcher hadn't engaged the plate yet when you mistakenly put the ball in play, but then you see him move his pivot foot onto the plate, and you don't signal the ball is dead or put the ball back into play a second time, and then he feints a throw to 1st, are you going to declare there was no balk, because you mistakenly put the ball in play before the pitcher actually engaged the plate? Homerun? Negated for same reason? The Rule says we shouldn't or maybe even can't put the ball back into play until ALL of those conditions are met. But nowhere as far as I can see does the Rule or any official interpretation of the Rule state what happens if we put the ball in play, before the pitcher has engaged the plate, or is that Rule overlooked? Sorry, I'm not convinced. But I'll drop it.

I think for Little League, it's fine to do your son's games, especially if you're the only trained volunteer umpire available. The alternative would be to just have another parent pulled from the stands who might not have the faintist clue. Yes parents will talk, but they'd also talk about any other volunteer parent pulled from the stands at the last minute. They'll say, "It's not fair that team has its own trained umpire!" and stuff like that. Who cares? Always grab a parent from the other team to work the bases for you, or if they have no experience at all, just plant them between 1st and 2nd and have them make all calls on those bases, you take everything else. If you're fair, word will get around. If they've got a parent who wants to call balls and strikes, welcome it, and jump on the bases. When I did my own son's LL games (that's how I started), I always insisted on having a parent from the other team work the game with me to avoid the appearance of bias. By the end of the season, most teams were telling me they'd actually prefer me to work the game by myself if there weren't another trained umpire--but not all 😀. And if a team suggests you let their designated umpire parent work the plate, say, "That would be awesome!" That will probably not happen very often as long as you show you're totally fine with that. And if you work in a Little League with lots of trained umpires, that's even better. And if they don't want you working your son's games because they have enough other volunteer umpires (used to be like that a lot of places not too long ago), more power to that league. But don't let them send you across the complex to work another game instead of watching your son's game at the same time--because that can happen as well if you let it. Most of all, have fun!!

In a State LL Juniors Allstar Game last summer, I was U-2 with bases loaded. Infield fly dropped between pitcher and F-6 on a muffed catch, I physically and verbally called the infield fly. A CF was fixing to unfold as players, coaches, and fans for both teams started screaming all sorts of nonsense. So, I repeated the "Infield fly, batter's out, batter's out!" call loudly two more times, emphatically hammering the out each time. Everyone finally dialed a clue before a CF developed. In the OP situation, the cluster happened so quickly after the ball dropped, that I don't blame U-3 for not emphatically repeating the call. In my sitch (and I assume most of our games), if a cluster had ensued and I had not emphatically and vociferously repeated the call, I think that would have been on me.

And that's precisely why I almost ALWAYS just go ahead and ask my partner for strike zone feedback after the game, I sometimes even write down certain pitches between innings I want to remember afterwards and ask about. "For this game I was trying to keep the top of my zone at the belly button . . . just above the belly button . . . wherever I was trying to set it . . . where did you see the top of my zone?" Not unusual that my partner will let me know he saw it a bit above or below the level where I thought it was. Still great feedback. "Remember that slider I punched out for strike-three in the bottom of the 3rd, and everyone gasped, and ___ said, 'Come on, Mike! ?" "Did that look low to you?" I know I got the best view in the house, and my partner can't see up and down even as well as the coaches, but until I eventually have my perfect game where I know for a fact I didn't miss a single pitch, I'm going to ask my partner for strike zone feedback--it's always helpful. I do the same thing on the bases if my partner isn't volunteering. "You remember that double-play banger in the top of the 5th when ____ came out and went ape-SH*# on me?" "Did it look like I got that right?" Confidence boosters, Baby! We all need them! Or, verification I missed or might have missed a call and need to slow down, fight for better position, . . . whatever. We all need that as well!

True Story: 1st 30+ Men's League game I worked a few years ago, I was on the bases. My partner had a pucker tight zone, and it turned into a 3+ hour game and a walk fest. The pitchers universally hated it, as did I. Didn't really hear anyone else bitching on either side, except the head coaches who were running thru pitchers. All the batters who still dreamed of playing MiLB loved it. Their batting averages were huge. They either got walked, or they got a soft toss over the plate they could yard or turn into an extra base hit. A couple of days later, I had my 1st plate assignment for this league (a big/huge client of my local umpire association--they paid well--and not all of our umpires got to work the games). I endeavored that I was going to call a normal high school varsity type zone, and not a MiLB zone like my partner had earlier. So, I did. OMG, I was harangued by batters, the bench, the fans every time I called a strike that didn't fly over the white of the plate. I had thrown bats and helmets after punch-outs in the dugout, F-bombs. It wasn't fun. I warned batters, I called Time! and warned both benches. Should or could I have started yarding player managers, player coaches, and batters on both teams? I sure could have. But I didn't. I was, however, criticized after the game by a player-manager who was also the league president for talking down to his players like they were in high school: "You can't talk to these men like that." Regardless of how I handled the situation (I certainly could have handled it better), afterwards there was no doubt in my mind exactly why my previous partner (and other umpires who worked that league) had a pucker-tight zone. He needed the money, and it was far, far less un-enjoyable and less stressful to call the Rulebook zone. After my game, I called our Commissioner because I was concerned I had offended the league president and would get black-balled. He let me know I had learned exactly why umpires don't call strikes out there. It's not worth it. Fortunately over the next couple of years things got better with our Association leadership working with the league. I'm not saying the OP plate umpire wasn't just missing obvious strikes that any of us would have called. Just relaying my own personal 1st experiences working Men's League. It wasn't fun.

Very nice WSJ journal article. Awesome to see our gear getting national mainstream media attention. And also glad the F-3 mask is finally catching on with many MLB catchers. I saw lots of Div I umpires (and catchers) wearing it last season. A shame Wilson has allegedly been permitted to suppress its more widespread use through exclusive equipment MLB deals re: labels and emblems on the field. And I'm certainly not knocking other great masks other umpires passionately like, like the All-Star Magnesium. If F-3 and All-Star combined to make an F-3 with Magnesium geometry, that would be the ultimate in protection. While I have both the V-1 (4-spring) and V-2 (3-spring), I actually prefer the V-1 and believe through perceived impact to my own brain that it provides better protection, but it's a bit heavier (not so noticeable if the elastic headstrap is worn snug)--impacts to the chin are just much harsher with the V-2. But the V-2 also provides awesome protection, and I can certainly see why catchers prefer the V-2, and that's the one I've been wearing the past two seasons. A trade off: just like the Wilson West Pro Black shin guards clearly provide better protection than my F-3 shin guards, I ain't wearing those Wilsons--tried that--gave them away. But they were definitely bullet proof. Good to see Jason Klein and Force3 getting some press! Much deserved.