To Jump in here
 

A couple of responses,

One of our good friends said a major problem wwas "players getting hit by balls in the face." The key is when. I know of one who got killed in a game since 1982 with a thrown ball.

As to catchers and umpires: Folks the difference between a batter and F2 and the PU is somewhat akin to the difference between night and day. A batter has to move out of the way (remember that rule), umpires and catchers have to stay still behind home plate catching or looking at pitches. We don't move (at least I hope so).

I am somewhat symapthetic to the "if it saves one life argument it's worth it" line of thought, but if that's case, where else in our society do we apply such a cost/benefit analysis? Let's mandate the driving age be 21 for bicycles and 35 for motor cars then.

Unless I am senile in the years 1982-2005 on the HS level the chances of dying in a baseball game by getting hit by a pitch is at most 1 in 1 million participants. And that is if every death reported was in a game (not practice), and done only by being hit with a pitch. Let us compare say, the top 10 causes of death in males under age 18, anyone care to guess if the odds are this small?

Further, let's ban football, unless you limit it to non-contact, no helmet flag football and allow no practice or games when the temprature is above 65 and below 50. Now you have eliminated almost all risk in a much riskier sport than baseball. Let's also eliminate swimming, cheerleading and wrestling, and now
it's safe for athletes to play sports. Hooray!

If you want to assure fewer deaths, then outlaw the head first slide, and use soft baseballs, or hollow plastic bats. Now the chances of death in baseball are close to nil, but is it baseball?

I'm sorry, I wish we had details on every death in HS Baseball since 1982 somewhere, so we could do a real risk analysis. I doubt we ever will see such a thing, because the FED laywers who make the rules would never allow it to that open a process.

And if you use face masks, I woudl submit you have the possibility for more minor injuries because of the limited vision, and the freedom to allow people to use their head as a weapon (i.e. R2 says, "Hey I got my face covered, let me go in an take F2 out at home by getting him in the knees").

I'll get off my soapbox now, and thanks for reading.

Betcha people were called sissies for wearing batting helmets. Should we ban batting helmets, or make them optional?

Bobby Layne called football players sissies for wearing face guards.

Jacques Plante got called a sissy for wearing a goalie mask.

Hockey players used to think it was sissy to wear a helmet. Should we let them take them off?

Heck, players got called sissies for using fielding gloves. The rules makers had to add the " may wear a glove" rules to declare it legal.

Come on, Rich - you know what I am getting at!
This isn't LL baseball anymore. Hell, if someone wants to wear a face shield, fine but don't mandate it!

Baby boomers meddling again. If the incidence is less than one half of one percent or less as stated earlier, let the player decide. Statistically insignificant number IMHO. Is this becoming baby ball or baseball. If the FED wants to take a significant course of action, then increase the penalty for throwing at a batter when the head is involved. Say...five game suspension for the pitcher and three games for the coach. And let me warn both benches when warnings need to be given. If you can't tell the difference between a high hard fastball with intent or a poorly thrown curveball, you shouldn't be doing that level.

So FED adds a rule (or ruling) that ALLOWS the use of face guards and somehow it becomes a rumor that it's going to be mandated - and everyone goes nuts.

Not everyone.

Let's all ignore the practical
 

They play baseball in Japan with a rubber version of our baseball. It is the closest thing we have to a real (simulated) synthetic baseball. It is cheaper by the dozen and it doesn't deteriorate as quickly as a rawhide covered baseball. Saving a school some money is a factor.

The main reason it is used to play high school baseball in Japan is safety. Ever heard of a Japanese baseball breaking a car windshield? Young pitchers develop effectively because they are not encourage to throw curveballs. Talk about saving some money on real baseball medical bills. The focus is were it is suppose to be, on their young arms and fundamentals of the game. After high school, the kids make the switch over to the real thing. There is no emotional debate over the safety of metal or wood bats over there.

Is FED consider more expensive helmet/facemask requirements without first considering the adoption of a rubber baseball? They never blink an eye wasting money on the wrong equipment. Has anyone ever been killed by a rubber baseball? That fact alone makes owning the new $50 allstar 2200 pitcher's titanium helmet/mask combo a rather silly idea. They seem to be ignoring the real scientific evidence. I guess borrowing a good Japanese idea isn't very popular either. Lah me, toy-ota.

I agree. As umpires, we need to model the behavior we advocate. No more sissy face masks. Dump the chest protectors. Shinguards? Hah, I laugh at your shinguards. Oh, and sandals should do just fine.

To really drive the point home, I disabled my airbags and ripped out my seatbelts. The next time I go skydiving, no helmet or reserve chute for me. I ain't no sissy!

Paul,

I have no side to take in the debate over mandating safety equipment. I really don't care at this point.

I simply think it's stupid the way people are drawn to attack someone's manhood or courage because they may believe that protection against injury may be worth some inconvenience.

If you want to attack the idea, then do it with facts and figures, not bravado and testosterone.

I'm not sure my generation is responsible for this. I would more likely suspect Gen Xers, or whatever the generation that invented this "Time Out" crap as a deterrent to child misbehavior. It's the modern free-to-be-you-and-me-hug-a-tree-Cumbaya-singing-Volvo-driving-soccer-mom, and as Denny Crane would say, "mamby-pamby" bunch that is responsible for this movement.

I think it will change the game dramatically. You are going to see less hits, and more Strike-Outs.

The local batting cage I USED to go to, requires full caged helmets to be worn. Let me tell you, you can't hit the broad side of a barn, let alone a 60+ MPH baseball, with one of those things on.

I am a really good hitter, as far as making solid contact, with a variety of pitches. But with one of those caged helmets on, I could barely get a foul tip. After a while, I started connecting, but it was really tough, because you had to track the ball through one of the gaps in the cage. That means, the head is not strictly tracking with the ball, but also moving to keep the ball in that little window.

I would not be surprised if more batters get hit in general, just because they can't see the ball, or lose track of the ball.

I think this is another case of someone making policy, that has never had to use the policy. Kind of like the morons who design forms that have boxes too small to fit the information they demand, and then reject the form.

I meant no offense. I was referring to a universal "you" rather than a personal "you." I should have used the term "one."

I think Uxley could do that today and never notice the difference.

LOL... Steve, I too am a baby boomer, I would have to agree, it's those that just don't get it. You have to be responsible for your actions, not sit along the side lines with a lawyer waiting for the chance to pounce. As for the time outer's, that would be baby boomer Dr. Spock. From what I've seen, I would have to say, it doesn't work. Now my dad's belt... that worked very well!

[[/QUOTE]

We are umpires who are asked to administer the rules according to the leagues we service.

Who cares if a state mandates the use of face protectors or not. Will it change how we umpire? Will the games last longer because of this new change?

Therefore, how is this just bad, bad, bad

IMO, it's no different than any other change the FED put in place. Ie; the FPSR, bat restrictions, etc.

IMO, the only ones who should care are the players that will have to wear them as it might effect them hitting but that awaits to be seen.

As far as I am concerned, it might add an extra couple of minutes when checking equipment because we will probably have to make certain that the face protector has the proper LOGO etc. on it. If it's part of a "combo" then it will probably not add any extra time checking equipment. Other than that it's play ball.

If the FED put in some kind of rule/regulation that added an extra 1/2 hour to the game then I would care.

Pete Booth