Jump to content

Recommended Posts

So since last year to my knowledge the screw on "C-flaps" and other brands are not allowed and due to liability concerns. Manufacturers of helmets and flaps have not gotten them certified, With exception of the manufacturer of the helmet adds that piece themselves. 

So I just looked at Littleleague.org and found all the manufacturers letters that were there last year.  It is in fact the same info I was told to tell people this year.  With that in mind I have been checking equipment prior to games and have tossed 3 bats that were dented badly and or one had a severe enough bend you could see it.  Also add to that helmets that clearly had "add on" chin flaps.

So I questioned a helmet on Tuesday night and one of the AC's challenged me on it and "argued" that they were all legal now as of this year.  I did not have any documentation to this effect and he kept on me. " what gives me the right and who made me the expert"  He was one more statement away from me telling him have a nice view of the game from his car. But I explained to him based on what I learned last year and what was restated to me this year. The rule was the same No helmets can have flaps added onto them unless they are the manufacturers and or they have been added by the manufacturer, It's done out of safety and liability for the kids safety and the liability for the local league and myself and the coaching staff including himself.

He did not want to accept it.

The HC was cool and calm he took the helmet and went looking for a screw driver to remove the flap.

This AC was being a jerk about it.. I look back and seriously I should have run him.

 

OK so does anyone have any info did they change this?  Everything I researched today states its the same unless a manufacturer made it with it basically

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep pretty much the same thing that I recall from last year.

 

I also have all the letters from the manufacturers stating. ""Adding a flap to our helmet makes it void the certification from NOCSAE and "we" cannot condone use of them""  

I summarized that statement between all the letters from Allstar, Boombah, Champro, Easton, Mizuno, Rawlings, Under Armour, and Wilson.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Veering this off-topic a bit. From the LL letter, in a section that NOCSAE wrote: "NOCSAE, itself, does not certify any product"

This confuses me. What is NOCSAE's role in having "NOCSAE certification" if it doesn't "certify any product"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, yawetag said:

Veering this off-topic a bit. From the LL letter, in a section that NOCSAE wrote: "NOCSAE, itself, does not certify any product"

This confuses me. What is NOCSAE's role in having "NOCSAE certification" if it doesn't "certify any product"?

 

I believe it is up to the helmet manufacturer to certify their own helmets based on what NOCSAE says they need to meet.

I am pretty sure this is how DOT does M/C helmets, then they themselves test a handful a year to be sure.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, ArchAngel72 said:

Yep pretty much the same thing that I recall from last year.

 

I also have all the letters from the manufacturers stating. ""Adding a flap to our helmet makes it void the certification from NOCSAE and "we" cannot condone use of them""  

I summarized that statement between all the letters from Allstar, Boombah, Champro, Easton, Mizuno, Rawlings, Under Armour, and Wilson.

 

Doesn't Easton allow an added c-flap either of their own design or Marwort: https://www.littleleague.org/playing-rules/modifying-helmets-with-additional-attachments/

Share this post


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

Doesn't Easton allow an added c-flap either of their own design or Marwort: https://www.littleleague.org/playing-rules/modifying-helmets-with-additional-attachments/

Easton Diamond Sports, LLC
3500 Willow Lane | Thousand Oaks | California | 91361
www.easton.com | (805) 953-4800
27 July 2018
Mr. Patrick Wilson
Senior Vice-President of Operations and Program Development
Little League International
539 US Highway 15
Williamsport, PA 17701
Re: “C-Flap” and NOCSAE Certification
Dear Pat:
We are in receipt of your letter and email dated 16 May 2018 requesting clarification on NOCSAE certification of Easton helmets to which a player adds a “C-flap”. We provide the following response.
Our position is simple – the addition of any device to one of our helmets voids the SEI certification to the NOCSAE Standard if the user materially alters the helmet in order add the device. Generally, third party c-flaps cannot be properly attached to Easton helmets without modification. As such, their addition, regardless of how attached, voids both our warranty and its SEI certification.
We are aware of a couple of exceptions to the general rule provided above regarding the attachment of third party C-flaps to Easton helmets. The Markwort C-Flap can be properly attached to Easton’s Z7, Z6 and Z6 Elite helmets without modification. Our warranty and SEI certification to the NOCSAE Standard for these helmets remain intact when the Markwort C-Flap is properly attached. Please note, however, that the SEI certification to the NOCSAE Standard only extends to our helmet. NOCSAE does not publish any standard for c-flaps on a stand-alone basis, or when combined with helmets.
Please note, we now offer Easton’s own Extended Jaw Guard. Easton’s Extended Jaw Guard can be attached to our Z5 helmet, our Pro X helmet and our Elite X helmet. In all cases, the Extended Jaw Guard can utilize existing holes on these helmets for installation, requiring no modification. The Extended Jaw Guard -- when attached to the Z5, Pro X and Elite X -- will neither impact the warranty nor the SEI certification to the NOCSAE Standard of these helmets. Please note that the Pro X and Elite X helmets will be available for purchase with the Extended Jaw Guard already attached as combined products, or as standalone helmets as well.
We hope this is helpful and provides the requested clarification. Please let us know if you have any questions.
Thank you,
Easton Diamond Sports, LLC
cc: Karl Eckweiler (via email only)
Calin Thomas (via email only)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ArchAngel72 said:

Easton Diamond Sports, LLC
3500 Willow Lane | Thousand Oaks | California | 91361
www.easton.com | (805) 953-4800
27 July 2018
Mr. Patrick Wilson
Senior Vice-President of Operations and Program Development
Little League International
539 US Highway 15
Williamsport, PA 17701
Re: “C-Flap” and NOCSAE Certification
Dear Pat:
We are in receipt of your letter and email dated 16 May 2018 requesting clarification on NOCSAE certification of Easton helmets to which a player adds a “C-flap”. We provide the following response.
Our position is simple – the addition of any device to one of our helmets voids the SEI certification to the NOCSAE Standard if the user materially alters the helmet in order add the device. Generally, third party c-flaps cannot be properly attached to Easton helmets without modification. As such, their addition, regardless of how attached, voids both our warranty and its SEI certification.
We are aware of a couple of exceptions to the general rule provided above regarding the attachment of third party C-flaps to Easton helmets. The Markwort C-Flap can be properly attached to Easton’s Z7, Z6 and Z6 Elite helmets without modification. Our warranty and SEI certification to the NOCSAE Standard for these helmets remain intact when the Markwort C-Flap is properly attached. Please note, however, that the SEI certification to the NOCSAE Standard only extends to our helmet. NOCSAE does not publish any standard for c-flaps on a stand-alone basis, or when combined with helmets.
Please note, we now offer Easton’s own Extended Jaw Guard. Easton’s Extended Jaw Guard can be attached to our Z5 helmet, our Pro X helmet and our Elite X helmet. In all cases, the Extended Jaw Guard can utilize existing holes on these helmets for installation, requiring no modification. The Extended Jaw Guard -- when attached to the Z5, Pro X and Elite X -- will neither impact the warranty nor the SEI certification to the NOCSAE Standard of these helmets. Please note that the Pro X and Elite X helmets will be available for purchase with the Extended Jaw Guard already attached as combined products, or as standalone helmets as well.
We hope this is helpful and provides the requested clarification. Please let us know if you have any questions.
Thank you,
Easton Diamond Sports, LLC
cc: Karl Eckweiler (via email only)
Calin Thomas (via email only)

To me it states there that they CAN be attached and if attached properly THEIR helmet warranty and certification remains, HOWEVER those things do not extend to the c-flap itself.   They seem to say yes it can be properly attached but we hold no responsibility if it (the flap)  fails.

 

Share this post


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

LL Letter : LL C-Flap Use.pdf

/\ this

Last year they were not authorized.  NOW, there are letters from the manufacturer authorizing the "add-ons" IF they are the manufacturer of the C-Flap. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the AC was referring to NFHS.

http://www.nysbua.com/85-news/187-nfhs-the-usage-and-allowance-of-cheek-and-jaw-protectors-attached-to-batting-helmets

(Basically, if the helmet is NOCSAE, and the helmet itself hasn't been altered, cheek flaps are fine, even though they aren't NOCSAE certified)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Aging_Arbiter said:

/\ this

Last year they were not authorized.  NOW, there are letters from the manufacturer authorizing the "add-ons" IF they are the manufacturer of the C-Flap. 

That letter irritates the crap out of me.

 

WHY IS IT NOT DATED ANYWHERE?  well ok the date for NOCSAE's release is on there but not that letters date..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kylehutson said:

Maybe the AC was referring to NFHS.

http://www.nysbua.com/85-news/187-nfhs-the-usage-and-allowance-of-cheek-and-jaw-protectors-attached-to-batting-helmets

(Basically, if the helmet is NOCSAE, and the helmet itself hasn't been altered, cheek flaps are fine, even though they aren't NOCSAE certified)

Nah no way its Majors LL in NH he would not nor SHOULD not be referencing that.

 

He honestly was pissed because I let 3 helmets that were there with manufacturer's flaps on them go and his kids helmet had some cheap azz brand that he himself admitted he put on and it had 2 flat head screws and one beat up phillips that was nearly stripped out in it.  I called it out because it LOOKED after market and when I looked at the maker of it, it clearly did not come from the same manufacturer.

Anyway.. I'm still looking 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy umping LL a whole lot more since I decided that as a volunteer I was going to ignore the stupid crap LL constantly hands down. I don't give a rats a$$ about c-flaps in LL. Why do I want to toss a helmet with an enhanced safety feature, as long as it's not attached in some unsafe or half a$$ed way? If it has a c-flap that's properly attached, I'm fine with it. I don't need a letter and I'm smart enough to know if a c-flap is properly installed or not. Honestly, can't anyone make their own decisions anymore? Why does the use of a c-flap only seem to matter in LL and not any other organization that I'm aware of? What, a c-flap offers extra protection in HS or MLB, but somehow is mysteriously dangerous in LL? It's just another way for LL to deflect liability away from them. JMHO.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, JonnyCat said:

 . . . . "It's just another way for LL to deflect liability away from them." . . . 

Agree! . . . AND it put's the liability on the umpire, manager, and league,  etc. etc. by "LL Rule Negligence"

:-(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SJA said:

Agree! . . . AND it put's the liability on the umpire, manager, and league,  etc. etc. by "LL Rule Negligence"

:-(

Exactly! It's the same thing when we have to check equipment at LL games. The liability now gets put on us plain and simple. Doesn't have anything to do with player "safety." Why is LL the only organization that requires it's umpires to check gear? Are other organizations unable to secure liability insurance because they don't check gear? Is LL more safe because of equipment checks? It's funny, because when I do HS or travel-ball, all I see is bats exploding, helmets shattering, and maimed and dead bodies at every game! Oh the horror of not checking gear in order to keep little Billy safe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don’t have LL around here, but I can say that USA Softball requires us to do equipment checks.  The stringency of those checks depends on the facility you work.  However here is my issue with checking equipment: it is putting more liability on me than it is taking off of me.  I have handled that equipment and said it is good.  I have no formal training to do that.  I have no technical training to do that.  I have no engineering degree or testing equipment.  I look at it.  I shake it.  I rub it.  Yep, that’s good!

A couple of years ago I had a team that had replaced all of the foam in their batting helmets with gel cooling packs.  I advised the coach I was going to toss all of his helmets because they had been modified.  He said he bought them that way.  I said OK, good enough for me.   I didn’t work for the manufacturer so I couldn’t contradict that.  I highly doubted it, but what do I know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, JonnyCat said:

Why is LL the only organization that requires it's umpires to check gear?

Until recently, Fed required equipment checks in baseball.

8 hours ago, JonnyCat said:

I don't need a letter and I'm smart enough to know if a c-flap is properly installed or not.

Statements like this is what will cause that liability to fall on you. If you follow the LL letter, then you've got a defense - ignore it, then you're on the hook when that c-flap causes an injury.

8 hours ago, JonnyCat said:

What, a c-flap offers extra protection in HS or MLB, but somehow is mysteriously dangerous in LL?

It's because those leagues typically pay for the flap to be installed by a professional, often by the manufacturer. Little League, as you can see from the original post, often leads to after-market knock-offs to be installed by Dad; without a third-party checking them, there's the added risk of improper equipment causing injury.

Don't get me wrong. I love that I don't have to go into the dugouts any more. However, when we were required to do it, I did it right and I did it well. Because if anything looks bad when you're on the stand, it's implying that you ignored the mandate set by your league or organization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To those of you who want to ignore the LL mandates.  Best wishes when one of those breaks and Mama Bear and Papa Bear lawyer up and your house is gone because they sued you back to the stone ages.

 

I married a lawyer, that's the most tangling with one I want to do, EVER.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

To me it states there that they CAN be attached and if attached properly THEIR helmet warranty and certification remains, HOWEVER those things do not extend to the c-flap itself.   They seem to say yes it can be properly attached but we hold no responsibility if it (the flap)  fails.

 

Not generally. It says a specific c-flap can be attached to specific helmets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

Best wishes when one of those breaks and Mama Bear and Papa Bear lawyer up and your house is gone because they sued you back to the stone ages.

This is one reason I've debated paying the few hundred to start an LLC ("Yawetag Officiating, LLC") and "employ" myself through it to officiate. If someone wants to sue, they have to go through the LLC - which will have my equipment as its sole asset.

But, I don't know the legalities of that and never found it worth it to pay a lawyer several hundred to figure it out for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like my house.., my truck, my property in general.  As indicated, you can "ignore the crap" as you wish.  If you end up needing a place to stay, I have a spare room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Playing Devil’s Advocate ... sort of ... 

What training did LL, NFHS, USA Softball, etc. provide to me that qualifies me to determine the safety of equipment?  Yes, I can identify a crack in a helmet or an association stamp of approval, as anybody can.  What verifies I received their special league notes on this exception or that addition?  What qualifies me to shake a bat and say it is no good?

Also, can anybody provide some examples or a database of umpires being sued?  It was recently asked, but I can’t remember if it was here or on another forum I visit.  I even tried to provide an answer, but I didn’t find much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for training, you follow what the rules state. Unless it's a specific mention (crack in helmet, disfigured bat), I'm only picking it if it's obviously unsafe.

As for any additional documents, leagues should either offer a training class and have you sign in, give you a copy with you signing that you received it, or some other method to prove you were provided the documentation. If not, then you might have a chance to minimize your liability in any civil case.

Don't know of any database.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, ArchAngel72 said:

 

I believe it is up to the helmet manufacturer to certify their own helmets based on what NOCSAE says they need to meet.

I am pretty sure this is how DOT does M/C helmets, then they themselves test a handful a year to be sure.

 

I guess that makes sense, but as NOCSAE, I would reword "NOCSAE certified" to "NOCSAE approved" or some such phrasing to eliminate the idea they do certify.

Aren't DOT helmets branded as "DOT approved" and not "certified" or "tested"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...