Originally Posted by fitump56
You need to reread my post. Read Orwell, protested the Vietnam War, you're preaching to the wrong guy. BUT, that does not mean that BB is always evil, e.g. seat belts, environmentals, pollution......


Orwell was fun reading in 1975. You won't find many who wish the decentralization of gov't than I do. I protested the Vietnam War because it was a slaughterground which had no real purpose. As we can plainly see today.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins
I heard briefly on the radio yesterday that the autopsy showed the cause of death as being a crushed artery in the neck. Does this mean that a helmet wouldn't have protected him?

Tough to say, Mark. Would he have been better protected w/ a helmet? Absolutely.

I tell ya, we are simply going to have to put a stop to this baseball nonsense. The game must be banned for our own protection. Why, someone could get hurt, or even killed. I say we do away with baseball once and for all.;)

It's not tough to say at all. A neck injury is not prevented by a batting helmet. So no, he would not have been better protected against this injury by a helmet.

He means overall. He would've been better protected overall with a helmet than sans helmet.

So, for everyone's protection, everyone on the field will now be required to dress like this:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ArmorsMetM.JPG

I believe you invent a device to protect body part that was injured. In some areas this device is called a "Yeager".

No he wouldn't have been better protected. He would have been more protected but more and better are different things.

That is correct. But let's examine what is now being reported.

"a burst or crushed blood vessel stopped blood flow to his brain"....a burst vessel does not have to be a direct strike to the neck (artery = to brain, vein = away from brain; "vessel" = either) either of those could well have been in areas where the helmet would have protected.

None of this discussion makes any hill of beans in the end result of things. The insurance companies dictate the desired protection rules.

Wow!!! That's all I can say. I make a post that is just a tiny bit inflammatory and "bzzzzztttt!!" deleted (or edited) within two minutes. I just don't know if I'll be able to get over this. I may have to go and see a therapist and get some meds. Any suggestions on brand and dosage? Tyler? fitump56?? ozzy???

Have to disagree. In this case (helmet or no helmet) more and better are the same.

should BASE coache's be required to wear HOCKEY style helmets?

This is effin scary. I saw just this weekend an ump take a 85 mph fastball right off the carotid artery. Apparently catcher called for a curve. That is not what was thrown. Ump stayed in there like we are taught to do and somehow the ball got in between his chest protector and face mask and got all meat. Dropped him like a sack of potatoes. You could see the contour of the skin go bumpy where he got hit.

In the case of this umpire, the first though I had was that an HSM much better covers that area.

The face mask vs the HSM safety (non)issue is about as arguable as putting your hands on the dashboard vs seat/shoulder harnesses in a high speed crash.