$40-$70 Titanium Cage LSH
 

Survey says?
1) Why shell out the dough on a black HSM w/ titanium cage when a cheaper alternative may consider product A)
Warrior Pro Z Black Lacrosse Helmet & Titanium Mask L - eBay (item 400014619205 end time Dec-07-08 20:10:29 PST)
or product B)
Warrior Viking HVKB Black Lacrosse Helmet & Mask XL - eBay (item 400014042524 end time Dec-07-08 19:34:28 PST)

2) Would you buy a LSH? Consider these benefits: A) cost less, B) improved air flow, C) cage protection on par w/ HSM, D) improved vision, E) less vulnerable collar, F) eliminate pads, and G) less risk of concussion.

3) Do you consider this LSH a visual/fashion improvement over the HSM?
For comparison: http://www.onlinesports.com/images/wls-wta5590bla.jpg

SAump:

I would not buy either because of the vertical bar that is in the middel of the mask.

MTD, Sr.

And the fact that there is a chin strap, severly limiting the ability to take off the "mask".

Oh wait, HSM wearers don't take off their "masks" so this may add to their arguement. And how are you going to fit a hat under there.

What Hat?
 

Thanks for the replies.

1) How long will it take to remove that annoying bar with a hacksaw?

2) One should remove a mask. One should not remove a helmet. Say goodbye to that HSM throat guard attachment and replacing all those worn out plate hats. Would you wear a helmet without a chin strap? HSM users who now worry about getting hit on the back of the head have a better argument for wearing a chin strap. It reduces the risk of concussion from a 95mph foul ball. Think of it as safety and well-being or continue to wear a mask at your own risk.

3) There was discussion about players having to wear a helmet w/face shield for his or her safety. Rules were amended to allow their voluntary use by participants. The idea of implementing a mandatory requirement was rejected. Base coaches couldn't escape the requirement of wearing a fielder's helmet. It won't be long before the issue returns to the discussion table.

Most helmet wearers do not feel the need to don a hat. Those who do remind me of Rick Moranis in Spaceballs.

"Smoke if ya got em!"

[quote=SAump;555908]Thanks for the replies.

1) How long will it take to remove that annoying bar with a hacksaw?/quote]
One should never assume they know more than the engineers that designed the protective device in the first place. This usually leads to meeting new acquaintances in the local Emergency Room.

Maybe you should check with the Pros who wear the "bucket". Most of them remove the "bucket" as often as we remove our masks. No comment on throat guards as I am not a believer in them.

Chin straps are not needed for umpires. Where did you come up with the idea that chin straps help when getting hit in the back of the head? As far as the "bucket" vs a mask, I've been wearing a mask for almost 30 years and I am still here!

Okay, what's your point?

SA, you are heading for another fall with this discussion! :rolleyes:

Stubborn, old umpires.

I own one of these Wilson HSMs, and I have yet to use it. I prefer a mask. But if I was in the market for one, it certainly would be any one of the dozen or so that are designed for baseball and not this hoaky-looking thing--especially just because it's cheaper.

The chin strap
 

I'd wear a football helmet if I thought I was in danger of falling. Every umpire thinks about reducing the risk of injury. One is taking a risk, however small the risk may be. Someone stated that the risk from a concussion while wearing a mask or HSM is about even. There is no evidence one offers any better protection than the other. The main idea is to significantly reduce the risk of concussion by removing the danger.

I believe those who say it easy to take off a HSM once they pass the "muscle memory" stage. Why would they be opposed to wearing a chin strap? It applies the same muscle memory requirement w/out the danger imposed by that dangling throat guard. If I were hit that hard, I rather worry about the integrity of the frame than my state of well-being? BIWSTFAD!

I was an early convert to the HSM. I take it off anytime one would take off a conventional mask--always have, and always will. There never was a learning curve or "muscle memory."

Even you cannot be this obtuse. That strap secures in four points, of which two need to be unsnapped for removal. This helmet cannot be removed with one motion.

Also, to what danger are you referring? That sentence doesn't even make sense.

Its a snap!
 

Some of us began at the back of the line. Remember removing the mask with your left hand. Remember the drills. Remember holding the indicator in your left hand or standing in front of the mirror. How many times did your plate hat fall off? Muscle-memory is that point when you can leave all the drills behind and do it right every time, like throwing a baseball or riding a bicycle.
BTW, Im not trying to be obtuse here. The ease of taking off a HSM is what is obtuse to me. The strange idea that only the attributes of a HSM are suitable for catchers and umpires floors me. I can't get a HSM up and over my head without difficulty. Here is another helmet, unsnap the thing and remove. How much easier is that? Much easier.

Finally something we can all agree on.


Tim

So, you've moved from learning to take an HSM off to learning how to take a conventional mask off. Can you stay on subject for one post?

Because one has to reach to the back, undo at least one (and probably two) snap(s), then reach to the front.

Lacrosse helmets fit more tightly if worn properly.

The same way you grasp a conventional mask. You grab it on the left side of the jaw, pull forward and up, and it's off.

Form follows function. A helmet that is not designed for baseball is not likely to be as functional as one that is.

I made my point, snap.
 

The subject was muscle-memory. It applies to a comment you made about removing a helmet.
Tight helmets give me a headache. Funny, reach back where to release the snap and where to remove the helmet. I thought it was decided long ago that if timing was a factor, one should leave the helmet on because of the peripheral vision advantage found in the helmet.
I hear an expensive all-black plate shoe modeled after the NHL pro skate will soon be released. Very comfortable and awesome protection and durability. The designers of the hockey equipment wanted me to say, thank you, for the kind words about them.
http://sports-and-outdoors.become.co...ambigcatid=782
http://cgi.ebay.com/PLH-2000-Black-L...3A1%7C294%3A50
Enough about the strap, or snap, I thank you for your comments. I will reflect on them. Lets hear from others for a couple of pages and/or let the thread expire. Can the LaCrosse helmet take the shot and provide better protection for the user?

Aside from the fact that those lacrosse helmets look incredibly stupid, I wouldn't trust one while taking a foul tip on the face. (Especially if there was a hacksaw involved to saw some of the bars off)

I have a HSM and it is really easy to take off with one hand. It's pretty easy to put it back on with one hand too.

SA, this post (and this whole subject) make no sense! I leave you to your fantasies - enjoy!

At last, the voice of reason has spoken!

Can-he-leave-her
 

I understand your position about the chin strap. The original idea was safety. Worse things were said about the seatbelt. Wearing a seatbelt was once considered hoaky. The SUL, New View, and FX Shock have not matched promised expectations for providing great protection. All three are designed by product engineers. One was actually an innovative idea (SUL). But the other two were real hoakey.

Take a look at the future mask {similar baseball mask already used in Japan}.
http://www.hockeymonkey.com/itech-ho...ll-shield.html
Better pictures available through search engine.

The cantilever {upside down L} design alone offers more protection than a HSM. If the helmet is worn properly, it will absorb most of the blow and padding could still be inserted to protect the chin. All the advantages I mention above apply. Open face bars already exist. But wearing the helmet w/out the chin strap poses the same hazard we face today.

With all due respect, this helmet is now considered hoaky.

Mandatory Helmet Requirement
 

I regret my sarcasm about taking a hacksaw to a brand new product. I should have stated what any experienced official would have stated.

If you wear bifocals, the seperation between lenses is as wide as that bar. If the bar blocks your vision of the ball, then you are standing to close to the play. One has to understand the concept of angle versus distance to fully appreciate the fact. You are not looking into the helmet, your looking out of it. The converse is if the bar blocks you vision of the ball, pray for the bar to protect you and thank God it is still there.

The other hangup appears to be the chin strap. What other sport allows a participating member to remove a helmet during live action? Comments were made about the ability to take off the helmet in one motion. You need to remove a mask to run faster or see better. Those chinstraps promise additional safety and eliminate the need to carry the helmet around on the ballfield. Why would one need to remove an umpire helmet?

Any future improvement in safety will have to look hoakey. Check out the protection around the neck, forehead and facial cage. Compare it to forehead, face grill and throat guard on any HSM up to latest Shock FX designed for baseball. Make the call.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/ima...8960367&sr=8-6

This is getting to the point where it's not even funny even if it's a joke.

Following advice
 

I understand why we remove the mask. The question is why do you remove the bucket so often? Wait a minute, you remove your helmet because we removed our mask. I am looking for any other reason you remove the bucket. Plain English, ball hit to LF, why take your eyes off the ball?

Okay I'll bite first. I take off the mask because I am really quick. When I go out on a fly ball, I don't want my mask to fling off in front of me and take my attention away from the play. If falling off when I take off isn't a problem, then I worry that it will fall off when I stop. That is the exact moment when I need to make my call. I can't be fidgeting around trying to catch my mask at the same time. Now how or why would a HSM lose its perch?

Well, do you need the protection of a mask or helmet after the ball has been put into play? If God thought we'd have better vision with bars in front of our face, he'd have built us that way.

Tim.

You remove the helmet for the same reason you remove your mask, not because you removed your mask. Do you think helmet wearers want their helmets bobbing up and down when they run? Why of course not. But you already knew that, because, as you often do, you are just messing with everyone's head here! :)

I have never been hit by a foul tip. I have, however, been hit by a foul ball.

I can't believe no one else jumped on this.:D

On topic, I'll stick with my mask.

We don't bother correcting umpires who emulate the stupidity of baseball announcers because they are proving that they are completely ignorant of the rules (as the statement from one zm1283 shows) and will never learn.

I await the onslaught of unintelligent announcer emulators :rolleyes:

Dumb idea
 

The thought of a plate umpire wearing a lacrosse helmet is just plain dumb. But let's agree on one thing - protection is not the issue. Lacrosse helmets, like football helmets, are designed to protect the head from all angles. Umpire's masks and helmets are primarily designed for protection from only one direction, the front.

The suggestion that a lacrosse helmet wouldn't provide adequate protection from a ball hitting you in the face is wrong. Lacrosse balls are hard and travel at high rates of speed - just like a baseball.

I'm not very familiar with Lacrosse, so just out of curiosity what type of ball do they use? Is it even comparable to a baseball going 90+ MPH and hitting you in the head? If not, why would you even consider wearing such?

From WikiAnswers:

"A fast shot in lacrosse, usually a sidearm crank, can travel between 100 and 110mph. Average speeds are in the 80-100mph range."


Fast enough for you?

He gone..........

Okay, I'm bored.

A lacrosse ball is the solid rubber ball that is used to play lacrosse. It is usually between 7.75 and 8 inches in circumference (about 2.5 inches in diameter) and weighs between 5 and 5.25 ounces.

A baseball is generally between 9 and 9¼ inches in circumference (about 2.9 to 2.9 inches in diameter) and 5 ounces in weight.

For you physics buffs

5oz lacrosse ball @ 110mph = 126.40 foot-pound Kinetic Energy
5oz baseball @ 95mph = 94.28 foot-pound Kinetic Energy

Hardy har-har.

Get a life.

Like what, that a foul tip is always live and it's always a strike?

I know what a foul tip is. If you want to argue about how ridiculous a lacrosse helmet would look while umpiring, I'm up for it.

Let me prove a point! If you know what a foul tip is then how (as an umpire) can you make the statement:

Quote:

Originally Posted by zm1283 Aside from the fact that those lacrosse helmets look incredibly stupid, I wouldn't trust one while taking a foul tip on the face.

:eek:
This statement is almost as dumb as someone suggesting the use of football or lacrosse helmets for use by baseball umpires.

Point made and I will not detract any more from this extremely, intriguing subject of helmets for umpires! :rolleyes:

Sorry! Foul BALL to the face. Are you happy now?

Maybe that's the problem with this board (Any sport): Everyone trying to one-up each other by "making a point" all the time.

That's why I never played lacrosse - I couldn't hit the damn googly! Wait a minute....that's cricket - or Seinfeld. :p

JJ

Wise a** vs. thin skin ...always a bad mix.

That was a wicked googly!