Re: Yeah right . . .
 

There are many quotes that you can dig up that were wrong. It was said that computers would never be useful but for may be four people in America.
We sold the rights to the VCR to the Japanese because we thought there would never be a market for it.

Hey it's only an opinion, but I think that umpires who don't already use a hockey style mask will, for the most part, stay with the traditional mask. But in 20 years, those guys will be in minority and a lot of the newer guys will have grown up with the hockey style mask. It will reach a tipping point and then the change willl happen. Masks will be in the minority.

But hey, it's only a guess/opinion. I could be wrong.

The number of helmet wearers is steadily increasing in my area. My partner was slow to switch by phasing it in. Now he wears only the helmet. I was sold right away. The vision is great, it is cooler than a mask, and I have taken some pretty solid shots in the mask and do not feel a thing.

Ed H

Re: Yeah right . . .
 

Tee,

The construction analogy is a little different. In that line of work many of the changes in safety equipment/practices are mandated by OSHA or some other regulatory body. We don't have any of those specifically dealing with umpires or their equipment. Instead, the trends in equipment and uniforms over the last 20 years have been driven by the MLB umpires we see on TV. Now if MLB starts mandating that MLB umpires wear the helmet exclusively (or their is an en masse switch), I could easily see all of us amateur umpires switching to the helmet. As long as their is a mix of masks and helmets at the big league level, that's what we'll see in amateur baseball. There was a post I read on another board from a Short season A umpire that suggested MiLB might mandate helmets at some point and time. He also reported that at least one MLB umpire had been forced to wear a helmet after receiving a concussion a few years ago.


Lawrence

Obviously,
 

Gear junkys follow others, that's a given.

When I interviewed the leading equipment suppliers they all agreed to a letter: "By far baseball umpires are the cheapest of all officiating groups!"

While we do follow with shirt color, belt color (remember the maroon belts of AL umpires in the 70's) and patent leather shoes it will be a far stretch to go to hockey masks.

We have about 150 varsity level umpires in our local group. We have maybe another 35 to 50 beginners.

We have one umpire (BTW, a pro school grad who is universially considered our worst varsity umpire) that wears a helmet.

Don't get be wrong . . . seeing Ed Hickox wearing his 7 stitch under his helmet made me, for the first time, have an interest in trying the hard head myself.

Do I think it is a "fad" . . . sure I do . . . but some "fads" make it into common usage.

It is simply put this way
 

The umpires of tomorrow, sadly,scarily, are the ball players of today, the ball players of today are not ever using the traditional mask, and are used to the helmet, therefore, it is reasonable to believe that the helmet will replace the mask as the predominant headgear of the future of umpiring, this maybe 15-20yrs in the future, but it certainly seems most likely.

Re: It is simply put this way
 

There is an excellent example in the marketing world of how that logic failed miserably.

In the 1980's Apple Computer reasoned that if students, the business leaders of the future, were conditioned to use Macs, they would bring them into the business world with them. Apple then locked up the elementary and high school markets, at times giving away the computers. They even held a huge market share in the college arena. At one point educational use of computers was 80% Macs.

Who owns the business market, even today? PC's. In fact, Mac's share of the business market has fallen despite their brilliant strategy of locking up the youth.

The PC industry simply responded: "You're not a student anymore, here's what professionals use." And despite the fact that Macs outperformed PC's in many ways, the PC's won the battle.

Re: Re: It is simply put this way
 

GarthB,
Interesting.
Thanks for that.
mick

Re: It is simply put this way
 

Actually Jason Phillips of the Dodgers wears a mask with the earless batting helmet facing forward. I wonder if he ever dabbled at being an umpire back when he was a kid.

It seems that those opposed to helmets want to turn their use into a fashion issue (a fad). I don't see anything "cool" about their use, given the backlash (only Smittys use them).

For me it is purely a functional issue. I simply have a better/wider field of view using one. Things that were obstructed from my view with my old mask (for instance some batted balls hitting the batter) I can see with my h/s mask.

I wonder how the New View masks compare to the h/s mask wrt field of view. Really the only reason the h/s mask has a better view is that your face is closer to the bars. This concept is probably what is being used for the New View mask. Perhaps if conventional mask provide the same (perhaps better) view as a h/s mask, then the h/s mask may resemble a tired fad and disappear.

But you can only go so far before this concept becomes a danger. Check out this picture from a high-speed camera of a baseball being shot a mask at about 100mph.

http://home.comcast.net/~rnsbmalex/p...s/ballmask.jpg
Scary, eh. I remember Eric (can't remember his last name, from Florida) saying how he got a broken nose from a baseball in the mask.

Personally, I use the helmet because it is easier to use, IMO. I have used the mask and I've found that it doesn't hold up as well to foul tips and doesn't provide as well overall for me. On the other hand, the mask does provide much better ventilation and is easier to carry around. If I had to I could use the mask, but I just prefer to use the helmet for my own reasons.

TB Blue
 

UMMMM.. I think I might have been talking about kids, not professional ballplayers, but then again, that would have taken away from your stupid comment.

Also Regarding Apple, As a child of the computer generation, although Apple was very popular at school, most kids still had a PC at home during this same timeframe, (heck thier games were way better). As the Apple was too expensive to own for many people, where the vic 20, and the Commadore 64 was widly used, also IBM went after the apple market strong with thier products, and created an easier software compatibility.

However, Talk to most computer experts, and you will find out that the FAR superior product and computer innovation comes from Apple. Thier prduct is better because they don't comprimise the products abilities by making it simple. Eg. the original Apple O/S is more or less Windows. But a good Windows took 10-15 yrs (some say still haven't) to comeout on the IBM Compatibles.

So the apple example really shows how the general public would prefer to do what is easy rather than what is better. It sounds like the umpire community is just the same.

You guys are comparing apples to masks ( heh heh heh ).
When you say that the majority of this generation's catchers are wearing hockey masks - that is true. But if you are saying that because of that, the new generation umpire is going to wear helmets, I fail to see the rationale. First of all, they grew up watching " real " umpires wear masks. This is their indoctrination into umpiring - not what catchers wear. Secondly, on a baseball team, how many catchers are there? 2 , 3, 4 ? So why would all the other ball players decide a hockey mask is better - because their catcher wears one and their " real " umpires don't? Again, I fail to see the rationale. Or are we presuming that only catchers ( who by the way wear hockey style helmets ( smile )) will become umpires? I certainly hope not - nor do I agree. I still stand by the mask and believe that masks are here for a long while.
Just my humble opinion.

what we (I ) am assuming is ...
 

That the popularity of the hockey mask for the kids of today, will translate in to the umpires of the future. I grew up watching so called "Real" umpires and playing hockey. I saw playing hockey a lot of goalies with masks and a lot with regular helmets, I saw the number of helmet dwindle, I was a forward, so I wore a regular helmet, but when the helmet for umpiring came out I looked into them, they have better vision. PERIOD. That was a good enough reason for me. I think the protection difference is there and better for the helmet, but only slightly. I think the straight on shots are deflected better, and the throat protection is better. The weight/bulk of the helmet vs. mask was never really a big deal for me then or now, yes it is bigger to carry, and a little awkward for eg. line-up changes- where do you put the helmet?? but the overall effect is that it is better in ways that are important to me.

The stick or head in the sand, nothing could be better than something originally designed 80-120 yrs ago is simply silly. Is the hockey mask better for everyone, - NO, is it better for me - YES. Should that cause other traditional umps to be so scared and defensive as to describe anyone who dares use the equipment as a Smitty, or NOT A REAL UMPIRE - HECK NO. MAny people who try the helmet love it and never will go back, while others dislike it. When in this day and age of the tell everyone something sucks, but tell no one something is good, the number of people who try the helmet and stick with it vs. go back to the traditional mask must be hugely lopsided in favor of the hockey mask. I think the compassion to the pillow is a great one, I'm completely sure that the first USP wearing umpires were also shunned because the Fear of change is a great one.

Look at Hockey today (well last year anyway) there are 2 ref's in the show that still don't wear helmets, they sadly look out of place old and in my opinion stubborn. The world has agreed that helmets are better, and safer, but they are not required to so they don't. Is this because helmets are not better? or are they too stubborn to change?

Re: what we (I ) am assuming is ...
 

Originally posted by 3appleshigh [/i]
[B] " I grew up watching so called "Real" umpires and playing hockey. I saw playing hockey a lot of goalies with masks and a lot with regular helmets, I saw the number of helmet dwindle, I was a forward, so I wore a regular helmet, . . . . . "


Is this a baseball forum?




". . . . . . . the number of people who try the helmet and stick with it vs. go back to the traditional mask must be hugely lopsided in favor of the hockey mask. "



really? what do you have that supports that?



" Look at Hockey today (well last year anyway) there are 2 ref's in the show that still don't wear helmets, they sadly look out of place old and in my opinion stubborn. The world has agreed that helmets are better, and safer, but they are not required to so they don't. Is this because helmets are not better? or are they too stubborn to change? "



Is this a baseball forum?

I have trouble making the distinction between being better for hockey and being better for baseball. I understand what can be better for baseball. I'll go to the hockey forum if I want to learn more about their helmets.

Helmet Rules
 

I use an All Star Helmet for both Baseball and Softball, although it has an 8" Opening, I find that my vision is almost perfect in all situations of play for both. Although when it comes to tight plays or squeeze plays I generally remove it out of habit and also so some twip, e.g a coach, does not bellow about poor vision.