Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim C
Take this post with a large grain of salt.
The first "definitive study" has been completed.
The PBUC has just completed a two year study that compares the number and severity of concussions of plate umpires. The study included both those that wear a traditional mask and those that wear the HSM.
The findings are:
There was NO significant difference based on the type of equipment worn in either number or severity.
I would make a couple of suggestions when reviewing these findings:
1) It is doubtful that the number of incidents was of a high enough number that it gives true empirical representations to make any final decisions and,
2) There was no base line established before the study so the information is only anecdotal, at best, and could be misleading.
The main reason I post is to show that at least someone is looking for proof that an HSM is, in fact, more protective.
Regards,
|
|
Tee since we are on this subject matter (meaning safety) just curious if you have any info on the deciding factor when MLB abandoned the old traditional baloon in favor of the current CP.
Was it simply a matter of style? as it would seem to be much safer using the baloon than the inside CP.
The reason I ask is that if the PBUC is really interested in the safety of umpires then they would not have abandoned the old baloon in favor of the CP to begin with.
An umpire is much more exposed using the CP then the baloon.
Thanks
Pete Booth