Is that a glare on your head protection or are you just happy to see me?

[johnnyg08]

Defensive players may wear face/head protection:

A. Provided it meets NOCSAE standards

B. Even if it has a mirror-like surface

C. Even if it has a non-glare face mask

D. A, B, C

My cite is 1-5-5

[bam]

A B C

[johnnyg08]

Here's the rule from the rule book:

[johnnyg08]

From the NFHS Preseason Guide:

[johnnyg08]

Case book:

[bam]

So what's the answer?  Definitely A.  What about C?

 

Or maybe not A. 

[johnnyg08]

I like "C" but my colleagues are feeling "D"

I think there's more rule book support for C than D

The logic I'm also using is that they wear regular baseball caps on defense so why would the helmet need to be NOCSAE as long as it's non-glare?

[Cav]

C.

[noumpere]

I like "C" but my colleagues are feeling "D"

I think there's more rule book support for C than D

The logic I'm also using is that they wear regular baseball caps on defense so why would the helmet need to be NOCSAE as long as it's non-glare?

Your own post above with the case plays shows that NOCSAE is not a requirement (a "skull cap" can't be NOCSAE certified.)

 

C is correct.

[johnnyg08]

I like "C" but my colleagues are feeling "D"

I think there's more rule book support for C than D

The logic I'm also using is that they wear regular baseball caps on defense so why would the helmet need to be NOCSAE as long as it's non-glare?

Your own post above with the case plays shows that NOCSAE is not a requirement (a "skull cap" can't be NOCSAE certified.)

 

C is correct.

I know that, but read the Preseason Guide. If not read carefully it would be easy to read that NOCSAE is required on defense. I'm confident in my answer, I just hate the question.

[Thunderheads]

NFHS .................  ah the joy ...................

[LMSANS]

 

 

I like "C" but my colleagues are feeling "D"

I think there's more rule book support for C than D

The logic I'm also using is that they wear regular baseball caps on defense so why would the helmet need to be NOCSAE as long as it's non-glare?

Your own post above with the case plays shows that NOCSAE is not a requirement (a "skull cap" can't be NOCSAE certified.)

 

C is correct.

 

I know that, but read the Preseason Guide. If not read carefully it would be easy to read that NOCSAE is required on defense. I'm confident in my answer, I just hate the question.

 

The preseason guide appears to only mention batting helmets.  I see no reference to the defense.

[johnnyg08]

The preseason guide appears to only mention batting helmets.  I see no reference to the defense.

I agree, but it depends on how it is read.

[MadMax]

Earless batting helmets have been worn by defensive players, ala John Olerud. There's a district in Pennsylvania (as an example) that enforces all pitchers must wear one. If my technical memory serves me, the helmet itself is NOCSAE approved, as in it is protective and the quality controls in its manufacture are "free" of defects and flaws. However, in NFHS, it cannot be used by catchers while catching or batters (at all), because it lacks ear protection.

 

What this addresses is not that defensive players have to wear helmets, but that if they do, the helmet has to be NOCSAE-approved (as in, it is integrally safe and protective, not some promotional give-a-way helmet from a MLB game), and that it cannot have a mirror-like finish either. You know how we're guilty of being a OOO if we outlaw a pitcher's sunglasses? Well, in this case, it would be wrong to allow a pitcher to wear an earless batting helmet with a chrome finish, because it is a shiny, reflective (mirror-like) finish that may distract the batter.

 

In related news, what was UnderArmour thinking with introducing an all-chrome finish on their batting helmets? They had to know it would run afoul of the governing bodies (Fed, NCAA, etc.)

[noumpere]

What this addresses is not that defensive players have to wear helmets, but that if they do, the helmet has to be NOCSAE-approved (as in, it is integrally safe and protective, not some promotional give-a-way helmet from a MLB game),

 

Not true.

 

Note that FED 1-5-1 (batting helmets). 1-5-2 (face masks attached to batting helmets), 1-5-4 (catcher's helmets) all contain the "NOCSAE standard" language.  Rule 1-5-4 (defensive head protection) contains no such language.

[johnnyg08]

What this addresses is not that defensive players have to wear helmets, but that if they do, the helmet has to be NOCSAE-approved (as in, it is integrally safe and protective, not some promotional give-a-way helmet from a MLB game),

Not true.

Note that FED 1-5-1 (batting helmets). 1-5-2 (face masks attached to batting helmets), 1-5-4 (catcher's helmets) all contain the "NOCSAE standard" language. Rule 1-5-4 (defensive head protection) contains no such language.

Exactly. Except in the preseason guide if read a certain way