Helmet wearers
 

A question for those who wear a hardshell helmet for games, like FED mandates now for F2's. I might be the only guy I know in my area with one, I have never had a game with anyone who uses it. I just got mine and I was wondering:

When do you take it off? Do you take it off all the time like a regular mask, or do you keep it on most of the time? If you have a call at the plate, do you take it off or keep it on?

Thanks for the help! I am trying this as an experiemnt to see if my younger umpires would like to use it.

I took mine off after the fifth or sixth game I wore it and have never put it back on.

I take it off when I have to make a call, more because I want to avoid a problem not because I wouldn't be able to see. The vision is good and I will leave it on during routine plays. It does come off as easy as my old facemask, but it is more annoying to put back on. I took off my old mask whenever the ball was hit. I have seen others keep their helmets on much more often that the facemask.

Ed H

i dont wear a hockey helmet, but i would hope that people are taking them off at the same times they would with a traditional mask. if its a hassle to take off, dont use it.

The vision is so much better with the helmet, there is no need to flip it on and off all the time. There is also no need to take it off because that it the way it works with a facemask.

"so much better" is debatable, but ive made more posts on that vision aspect than i care to have made, so im out on that part

as for the second sentence, this doesnt seem "correct" to me to leave your helmet on "because thats the way it works."

Of course you should take your helmet off at the same times you would take off your traditional mask. The only time I can think of where you wouldn't is on a hot liner down the line and you have the fair/foul call, and to remove the mask may cost you your look. I wore the helmet for a few seasons, and always removed it when normally called for. I think it looks horrible to be standing there at the end of a play with your mask still on.

There is absolutely no reason to ever take your helmet off to make a call, due to the visibility of a helmet.

But...I take mine off in every situation I would take off a mask. Again, not because I need to, but as part of the "show" to keep the coaches, and Big "old" Dogs, happy.

Here is a link to my experience wearing a helmet for about 6 years now.

http://www.reegind.com/helmet.htm

It's actually easier to take off and put on than a mask. One hand for both on & off, and no hat to worry about.

My observation has been that at the D1 College level, the first 2 years helmets were being used, they weren't taking them off for calls. Then, in year 3, they started taking them off just like a mask. I can only speculate as to why.

I wear a HSM and I take it off everytime the same as if I would have taken off a traditional mask. There is no excuse to keep it on because it is harder to get on and off. IMHO I have always thought an umpire running down the first base line with a mask, traditional or HSM, on looks terrible. The other thing I hate seeing are umpires who wear the HSM and set it on the ground to have home plate conferences or make changes in their lineup. I believe if you are going to wear the HSM, you should always hold it and never put it down on the ground.

T. Farwig

I always leave it on when trailing a runner to first or when looking at a fly ball. Guess what, there isn't a single person watching the umpire during these situations, except maybe another umpire.

I have an HSM, and I would much rather wear it than the traditional hat/mask combo. It is a cooler solution in warm weather. When I wear it, I take it off just like I do my mask, only because I'm trained to do so.

I don't wear it all the time due to the thinness of my hair. Last summer I wore my HSM during a LLB Majors tourney, three plates in a row. By the time I was done, I had a nasty sunburn on the top of my head. Yeah, I know that some of you are thinking sunscreen. That would be a viable solution if I were willing to shave my head, which I'm not. I go with a #2 guard, and if I could find a suitable sunscreen which would not turn my hair white, I'd use it.

Another reason I like the HSM . . . if we are requiring our youth players to wear it for "safety reasons," then doesn't it seem consistant that the HSMs should be worn by blues as well?

This last paragraph is ridiculous, bordering on stupid.

Where in the hell is it required for players to wear a helmet (in the same vane) as the umpires wear? What rules set are you reading?

I will have to agree with Rich. Statements like this are the very reason many of the umpires that advocate them have very little credibility.

Peace

So you're saying we shouldn't sit on it during pitching changes, like Football players do their helmets on the sidelines ?

Thanks for the laugh, that took the edge off my day.

Jumping back up to the first post...

Jk, what did you mean when you said that the NFHS mandates this piece of equipment for their catchers?

I must have missed that memo...

FED 1-4-7,8

Mr. Fronheiser,

Why? Or do you like to just to ignite the flame thrower, then walk away?

First of all, understand that the question was rhetorical in nature, and not a position per se.

Second, do you always have to disagree with such a negative tone? I have noticed that you have a way of stating your position in simple, one line declarations which are either inflammatory, or border on being such.

I always thought that boards like this were meant to be a means of discussion and debate, where people can exchange information, views, and where people can learn from the experience of others. If you really have to resort to such words, then one must assume that your ego is only trying to cover for your lack of self-esteem. One who has confidence in his/her position on a topic should be willing to elaborate on it. I certainly am willing to concede a point, given that the contrary position has been adequately supported. When you state your positions in such a manner, no one learns.

Ever wonder why newbies are afraid to post questions here? It is because they are afraid of getting flamed by posts like the one I quoted above. These people are apprehensive enough because they are learning a new skill. They are just looking for good information that is reasoned, and which may be backed by experience. Stating positions like you did above, and on another post regarding shirts, in this manner, do not reflect reasoning or experience. They only reflect your stubborn adherence to tradition which may or may not have sound support. We'll never know, because you don't provide anything but a knee-jerk reaction. Enlighten us, Rich. You seem to have a great deal of experience. I'm willing to read your posts, and even claim that you are correct in your position. Just explain them, is all I ask.

This also applies to others of you who post here. You know who you are.

Stop and think for a moment as to why many youth baseball organizations, including FED, have mandated that the HSMs be worn by catchers. (Are they mandated by the NCAA as well? I don't know...I am asking.) It is because the insurance companies who provide liability insurance have dictated so. Why would they do this if they had not found these types of helmets to be safer than what has traditionally been warn? Otherwise, we'd still be seeing kids wearing skull caps and masks like most of us did when we were growing up. And typically, these companies do not mandate such things unless there is research to support their positions (there's a familiar theme).

If it's such a ridiculous point, then why are we seeing MLB umpires wearing them? You don't get much more traditional than the umpire schools, and the ranks of veteran MLB umpires. If we are starting to see MLB umps wear them, then there must be a reason. No, I am not saying that the ump schools are encouraging the use of HSMs. Most older umpires, simply out of tradition, balk at the thought of wearing an HSM. That is fine. They are entitled to their opinion. My point is simply that within a group of people who work in such an environment which is deep in tradition, where change occurs VERY slowly, we are seeing change in regards to hockey-style helmets. I think it is because some people have decided that they provide a safer alternative to what has been worn traditionally.

Respectfully,

Bob

Lman,

Huh???? :confused:

How about 1-5-3 & 4, which state no such requirement?

JM

P.S. Congratulations on your prestigious award from last year. Did you know that you look a lot like me - in a kind of blurry, distorted way? ;)

That rule is refering to a helmet (with ear flaps) and a standard mask combination. That is totally different than mandating a hockey-style mask.

By your citation of this rule, is it your contention that HSM's are mandated (ie: required) by FED rules?

Or, do you mean to say that they are allowed (ie: optional)?

Bretman,

Not sure if you're asking me, or someone else, but, by my read, HSMs are cetainly allowed, but certainly not required for the F2.

JM

Had I known this was rhetorical, I wouldn't have responded. Sorry.

But it's ridiculous to say that we should wear something to be an example to the kiddies. Kids wear protective gear because they are playing the game and because we, as adults, make decisions for them regarding their safety.

BTW, I wear a helmet. Safety plays no part in that decision.

sorry, I just realized I only have the 2005 (ahem) FED book here. So the citations have certainly changed. Thusly, I dont know offhand what the above cites say. My error for quoting from a 2-yr old rulebook. :o

1-5-3&4 in the 2005 book are totally unrelated.

Appreciate the kudos on my historic award. Never won anything in my life, then one day....... ;)

No, not my intent. I was quoting in the context of contrasting a seperate mask-and-cap combo (traditional umpire) with a helmet of any type, HSM or not. In my (admittedly outdated) cite, Art 7 requires a 'head protector'....and then Art 8 states that "the catcher's helmet and mask combination shall meet NOCSAE..."

It doesnt say, "IF the catcher wears a helmet and mask combination, it shall meet NOCSAE"..it strongly implies that he WILL wear such a combination.

Art 8 further describes: ".....the commercialy manufactured catcher's head, face and throat protection..:"

All of that doesn't sound like a turned-around baseball cap to me, and that's the point I was trying to make, muddled though my attempt was.

So, what other "helmet and mask combination" is commonly used other than a HSM? Or am I so HSM-ignorant that I'm assuming that F2s' "h and m combos" are all HSMs?

Little League and FED require catchers to wear helmets that meet NOCSAE standards. I do not know about Babe Ruth, or some of the other rule codes. Those rule sets do not require an umpire to wear such a helmet or mask, nor does OBR.

The point I was making in my original post, runs along the same logic as is taught in umpire clinics and schools. We are told not to wear watches, jewelry, or anything that we tell players not to wear, so that we can point to ourselves as examples. So, if we as adults (not just as umpires, but as a collective set who write and/or enforce game rules) are dictating that players wear such equipment, I am just saying that it provides a good example to wear the same equipment.

No, we are not required to. No, I don't wear an HSM all the time either. But I do think that we will see a day (not in the near future) where it will be mandated by the insurance companies for organizations to change their rules to require umpires to wear hockey-style helmets. What do I base this on? Look at history. They have mandated it for youth players in order to provide favorable rates for liability insurance (and most of the other "safety" rules we have seen implemented in youth baseball rules). It seems only a matter of time before they begin to implement it for adults as well.

Another example of liability? Look at the background checks that have to be done now.

The question of liability plays a bigger and bigger role in our lives, much to my dismay. It is, however, a question which requires the attention of those people paying the insurance premiums. And, the insurance companies know this.

What do mean when you say "helmet?" FED does not require a Hockey style helmet.

Helmet
 

Gentlemen,

I am sorry for my inexact language. Fed requires a mask/head protector of some type, not necessarily a HSM. I am an old tradionalist, therefore any catcher's equipment not the old style mask and helmet combo I end up referring to as an HSM, even though there are different styles out there.

Personally, I believe these masks should not be mandated for FED baseball, it is overkill by the laywers. But, I lost that arguement years ago, so you live with what you have.

I am having a little trouble getting used to the helmet, if I have a game tonight I will let you know how it works. I am not sure I have it adjusted correctly.

Thank you for your assistance, and please keep the discussion going!

Okay. Now that we have the right rule book.

And the right rules.

And the right terminology.

Just in case there's still any question: FED baseball does not require catchers in their games to wear a hockey-style mask!

This is exactly my situation, but you expressed it better than I did. Any catcher's helmet is a HSM to me, esp since Ive never been to a hockey game and dont anticipate changing that situation im my lifetime. Sorry for the confusion.

I still would like to see a common FED H&M combo that does NOT resemble a HSM, however. What, specifically, makes it 'hockey style?' :confused:

Distinction without a difference, as far as I can see. But, jk and I have abjectly apologized more than Don Imus, ok? ;)

Gentlemen,

Perhaps this is just a question of semantics, but I would consider this a legal FED mask/helmet combo (manufacturer states it meets NOCSAE standards) which I would not call an HSM.

http://www.onlinesports.com/images/mw-rai1.jpg

JM

Thanks JM, I was going to add my pennys worth by stating that the Fed rule states that any helmet mask combo must have ear protection for the catcher, not an HSM only. Therefore it CAN be a traditional mask with a skull cap type helmet with ear protection that meets NOSCOE. As you pictured here. Nope, not HSM IMHO also. The picture makes it a heck of a lot easier to explain it.. so thanks and yes, I have seen catchers using this style of protection vs. the HSM.

You would be wrong. For one I will not speak for what LL or Babe Ruth does. I do not work those levels and do not give a rat's behind what they do. FED has no such rule requiring a player to wear a helmet in the style that an umpire would have to wear. A FED catcher can wear the traditional mask if they like.

Let me say it was not a very good point you were trying to make.

Wearing a watch is a lot different than telling us what specific type of uniform to go out and buy. All that is required is a mask, it does not matter what kind of mask you wear. Would you like it if we told you what type of shirt you had to buy (not talking about color here)? Maybe you like a specific shirt because that you feel is comfortable for you that might not be required if we use your logic.

Considering I have yet to see any evidence of such a bigger liability. I have been hit in the mask with a ball several times and I have never been hurt or slightly hurt. I have known more people that have attributed some other problems to their helmet, so I would really like to see how liability will play a role.

Peace

Umpire Bob,

I don't wear a watch or jewelry because I don't want to ruin my watch and because some jewelry is a safety hazard. If I wanted to wear jewelry or a watch I damn well would. What about the coach's we see that wear 10 lbs of bling and such? Don't the players look to their adult "ROLE MODELS" before looking at us to determine right from wrong? The clinics you talk about that instruct such nonsense must be Little League, right?

As to the liability issue, most associations I know don't carry insurance on the umpires in the first place. We have to buy our own.

We don't wear watches or jewlery other than a wedding ring and the associaton purchases liability insurance that covers all members.

The only struggle we have over this is with one JV umpire who is upset that he can't wear eyebrow rings when he works.

Garth, I think your association is a rarity. I work for 3 different groups and in each on our contracts state.. "no insurance is included".

In my association insurance is covered.

I'm not sure what you classify as a "traditional mask"

Just so there is no confusion - here is the exact FED rule.

ART. 3... The catcher shall wear, in addition to a head protector, a mask with a throat protector, body protector, protective cup (male only), and baseball protective shin guards.

ART. 4... The catcher's helmet and mask combination shall meet the NOCSAE standard. Any helmet or helmet and mask combination shall have full ear protection (dual ear flaps). A throat protector, which is either a part of or attached to the catcher's mask, is mandatory. A throat protector shall adequately cover the throat. The commercially manufactured catcher's head, face and throat protection may be a one-piece or multi-piece design. While in a crouch position, any non-adult warming up a pitcher at any location shall wear a head protector, a mask with a throat protector and a protective cup (male only).

Where on Earth did you hear this? Catcher's haven't been allowed traditional masks w/skull caps for years now.

Semantics
 

Remember our discussion about calling the NO EAR flap helmet prohibited by FED rules a batting helmet?
Do you remember the old LL batting helmets that only protected 3 sides of your head?

Although correct, I do not use the term helmet/mask combo on the ballfield.
I would call that a picture of a new baseball catcher's helmet or, to be politically correct, a fastpitch softball catcher's helmet.
I wore a similar one when I was a 12 year old many many moons ago.
If a catcher's helmet becomes mandatory, I will comply.
If a HSM ever becomes mandatory, I will quit.

It depends on your definition of "traditional." I'm sure Jeff just meant "non-HSM style", not necessarily "skull cap". The tyep as pictured in CoachJM's post are allowed.

Well, the helmet/mask combo CoachJM posted is far from "traditional," IMO.

I would think that if umpires commonly wore this combo that it would still be viewed as a "helmet" by the umpiring community, whereas a mask worn with a hat would be viewed as "traditional."

Alright, traditional for kiddie ball, then. . .
 

but not for "shaving age" players. They have "traditionally" worn the mask/skull cap, or mask/hat backwards combos through the years.

You vigorously and tearfully ask for some people to stop repeating them and then you repeat every one of them! The word MORON comes to mind.

Let me put it this way. When the mask can be completely detached from the helmet, I consider that very traditional. And the picture showed above is not the same contraption that you see that players where when they are not using the HSM. I know you want to just have a debate over a very semantic issue. So if you do not know what traditional means in the context of this conversation, then so be it.

Peace

Powerful
 

Actually, I repeat every one of them! Then I vigorously and tearfully ask for some people to stop repeating them. Obviously, the phrase "some people" doesn't necessarily apply to me. A HSM will not protect my head. The HSM cannot provide me with a better "vision" that I guess I may need for one situation or may not need for another. I would feel like a moron if I became an umpire after I had my vision problems improved by a HSM. Does anyone suggest vision improvement for the BU? I may be a moron for wasting my time trying to explain these things to some people. I already have enough vision to know some of those people will ignore my attempt.

Report
 

Men,

I never, ever thought I would say this, but I loved the HSM.

It was a cool suny day when I used it, so as to using it on hot days I'm not sure, but yesterday it was great.

It was comfortable, it was easy to deal with, usually I kept it on between innings. I did have trouble getting it on around my glasses, but that might just take time to fix.

I never noticed a real big change in the viewing area over a regular mask.

I did have some questions about the fit, and I may have some adjustments to make on it:

1. The mask was hard to put n the correct place at first, if I put it on so my forehead hit the padded front of the HSM, the cage did not match up with my eyes, and it didn't fit well around the chin. Is there supposed to be space between the front of your head and the front of the HSM?

2. I am not really sure where my chin goes on the mask. If I put my eyes where they should be in the cage, the chin does not fit into the center of the chin pad, it seems to sit on the top of the pad. If I put it where i though the chin should sit, it was also tight around my chin.

3. I may need to tighten the back piece a little, because it did slip a little.

But overall, I was very, very surprised at the helmet, and how well it fit, esp with having a large head.

I was suing the Allstar 2000ump, which might explain a lot of why it was good. If you want a HSM, that is the one to get.

then there is absolutely no reason to ever wear anything on your head or face when making a call, due to the visibility of nothing being there.

I admire your courage
 

Everytime I read this, I must stop to admire your courage for posting it. I am not saying that I disagree with your opinion of using a helmet, especially one you like. I am saying that I am not sure that this post supports the exclusive use of any helmet. I also admire the honesty in this report. I hope it works out well for you after the proper adjustments have been made. If it doesn't work out for you, I will gladly have uxley11 send you instructions on how to get rid of it on eBay. Have a great year.

SAUmp
 

Thank you for your kind words!

If you would ask some of the other posters on this forum, some of them would admit to knowing me for a while, via internet boards and the like which are gone but not forgotten.

They wil also tell you I am as traditionalist an umpire as you will find, so trying a helmet is a pretty radical thing for me. I was one of those guys who never thought a HSM was good, and I swore I would never wear anything but a mask and hat. I'm not toally sold on it yet, but I am impressed with it.

I do hope to get some guidence about fitting these things a little better, and I'll wear it somemore, and see where we go with it. But I will be able to tell my new umpire students in the future that if they want to go with an HSM, go for it.

Okay then, let's put it in simpler terms, hoping that you can understand: A mask that can be worn without a helmet is a traditional mask, and those masks are not allowed to be worn without a helmet under FED rules. You said that a catcher can wear a traditional mask (one without a helmet, remember), and that is false. Catchers are not allowed to wear traditional masks, because traditional masks are ones which are not worn with helmets, which are required.

The mask that JM pictured cannot be worn independently from the helmet, as there is no top pad. Other such masks that use helmets are also non-traditional in nature. The only masks which are traditional do not require a helmet in order to wear them.

I'm not debating semantics with you. I'm pointing out the inaccuracy of your statement. I know what is a traditional mask, and what is not, thank you very much for your unsolicited input on the subject.

JRUT, if you respond .............. ;)

edited to ask: Sir, may I call you JRUT? :o

Once again you wallow in semantics. That is not what I said. I said nothing about the helmet or what can be worn with or without the mask. I simply said that a traditional mask can be worn under the rules. Now they sell them in stores all the time. If you have not idea what that is, not sure I can help you. Remember I was responding to a person that said they could only wear a HSM under the rules. Now where in the rules is that stated? Actually the helmet they wear does not have to be attached in any way with the mask. That to me is a "traditional" mask. The same kind of mask I wore when I played and the one that they sell more often to umpires (at least in style).

I do not recall that I only reference the picture that JM showed.

What I said was not inaccurate at all. Because you are only debating what you think a "traditional" mask is. We are talking about masks, not the form of helmet. The person that I responded to said we should be required to wear a helmet like is required by the rules for the players. The players do not have to wear a HSM at all. There is no such rule. If you find the rule, then please reference it. Show me and everyone where this is stated then when you do not find it; I would like you to admit that you were wrong. We know that will never happen from you.

Peace

Look, I didn't say that JM's was the only reference, only an example of "non-traditional."

Okay Rutledge, you tell me. Exactly what do you consider a traditional mask?

Answer that question and we can go from there.

I say a traditional mask is one which is worn independently from a helmet. One which is not worn with a helmet (other than an illegal skull cap, that is.)

The rules state that catchers cannot wear a mask without a helmet with ear flaps, and that skull caps are prohibited. The helmet-mask combination must have adequate throat protection, and may be one-piece or multi-piece designs. Nowhere in the rules are "traditional masks" allowed, because "traditional masks" are not used with the type of helmets required by the rules.

Rule 1-4-8
Casebook 1.4.8 SITUATION A

I have never seen a catcher wear a mask without some kind of hard shell under it (cap or skull). Fed requires two ear coverings for the hard shell, so if there was such a thing you could wear it with a traditional mask. I have not seen any combination of mask and shell that was not attached to each other.

I feel like I am talking to a child.
 

http://dsp.imageg.net/graphics/produ.../p801410dt.jpg
Traditional Mask sold at Dick's Sports--Rawlings PWMX Catcher's Face Mask

The mask that JM showed is considered a "Youth" mask. It is for kids likely of LL and before HS age. It is designed for kids that do not know how to pull off their masks and gives them extra protection.

http://dsp.imageg.net/graphics/produ...p3192102dt.jpg
Rawlings Ai1OS Youth Catcher's Mask / Helmet Combo

The first picture is not outlawed by the rules. The NF Rules only state that the players have to wear a helmet if they are a catcher. The second picture is a combo mask helmet which in no way is required by the rules to be used as stated by UmpireBob.

Is there anything else you are having a hard time figuring out?

Peace

Yes, I am having a hard time figuring out why you talk down to people the way you do.

The traditional mask you are showing is a regular mask, which is not allowed for high school baseball, because it does not attach to an approved, dual earflap helmet (skull caps and/or batting helmets are not legal).

I quoted you the rule you wanted, but you still insist that regular catcher's masks are still legal in high school, and they have not been for several years now. The casebook reference I gave says it all. They are speaking of traditional mask/old style batting helmets (a.k.a. skull caps) which are no longer allowed.

I've got it, why don't you show me one of these traditional masks on a player, along with the NFHS approved helmet that is required? Good luck finding that.

I guess reading comprehension is very difficult for you Steve.
 

I have a proposition for you. Just show me the exact wording in the rulebook that outlaws a traditional style mask. Or show me where it says only a HSM can be used or else the equipment is illegal? Because if what I have described is illegal, there should be something that says it is somewhere. Then there should be without a doubt.

Since I realize you will never do this. Rule 1-5-4 says, "The catcher's helmet and mask combination shall meet the NOCSAE standard. Any helmet or helmet and mask combination shall have full ear protection (dual ear flaps). A throat protector, which is either a part of or attached to the catcher's mask is mandatory. While in a crouch position, any non-adult warming up a pitcher at any location shall wear a head protector, a mask with a throat protector and a protective cup (male only)."

Now with all due respect I have yet to see a HSM without throat protection apart of the mask. But I do see many traditional masks without any throat protection. Things that make you go hmmmmmm.

Peace

Simplified and Illustrated Rulebook says.......
 

Rule 1-5-4: (While showing a picture of a helmet style mask above the wording)

"To be legal, a catcher's helmet and mask combination shall mee the NOCSAE standard, have full ear protection and have a throat protector that adequately covers the throat. The commercially manufactured catcher's head, face and throat protection may be a one-piece or multi-piece design."

I guess you will say this is not valid information. ;)

Peace