The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Softball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 16, 2004, 08:41am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 962
I was asked this question last night and wanted to make sure I was right. Is any organization disallowing painted helmets? I have heard several discussions about this, the paint may weaken the helmet etc. I know that they should not paint over the warning label and that they need to ensure they don't sand or paint so thick that they make the NOCSAE symbol unclear. But do any of you know of any league that has actually "banned" or discussed banning painted helmets??
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 16, 2004, 09:17am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 858
Smile Painting Helmets

Dave,

I'm not aware of any leagues or associations that have banned painted batting helmets. There are several helmet manufactures that will void the warrantee on altered equipment.

Michael



[Edited by MichaelVA2000 on Apr 16th, 2004 at 02:37 PM]
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 16, 2004, 10:28am
JEL JEL is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 910
I have heard that LL has banned all paint and stickers, I don't do LL but saw a rule posting here, or e-teamz. NFHS, and DIXIE require NOCSAE embossing, AND EXTERIOR WARNING LABEL. Warnings are embossed on some helmets, so light paint may not be a problem. Others have a sticker, which if painted or removed makes it illegal in most leagues. ASA does not specify the warning label must be intact, but does state they are to be NOCSAE approved. If NOCSAE mandates warning label, (not sure if they do) then a helmet missing label would not be legal in ASA either. I usually allow the airbrushed ones, the ones that have names and such, but toss a full paint job.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 16, 2004, 11:34am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 962
JEL,
Not trying to argue but what do you toss them for? Do you consider that an altered helmet? Are there others that would toss them and if so what for? Again I am not argueing I see both sides of it.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 16, 2004, 11:57am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 476
Send a message via ICQ to SamNVa Send a message via AIM to SamNVa Send a message via Yahoo to SamNVa
LL rule 1.16 has a note to the effect that: "Helmets may not be painted and may not contain tape or decals unless approved in writing by the helmet manufacturer."

I did hear that Andy Konyar (the LL UIC) publishedd a modification to this rule in Fairball magazine that allows a small decal on the front, or a player name on the back as long as the majority of the helmet surface is not affected.

SamC
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 16, 2004, 12:21pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sherman, TX
Posts: 4,387
Quote:
Originally posted by JEL
I usually allow the airbrushed ones, the ones that have names and such, but toss a full paint job.
Based on what rule?
__________________
Scott


It's a small world, but I wouldn't want to have to paint it.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 16, 2004, 01:04pm
In Time Out
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 69
Sam is right

LL has specifically allowed team/league decal on front & small lettering for name or number on back, reasoning that usual decal adhesive in these amounts won't compromise the plastic helmet's integrity.

Beware the difference between mfg. elaborate paint jobs (becoming more common) and aftermarket artwork. As the issue is possibly weakening safety equipment, I believe the stance all sanctions have taken is that original equipment o.k., aftermarket paint has to be approved by the mfg. for liability reasons.
__________________
Panda Bear
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 16, 2004, 01:10pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
Re: Sam is right

Quote:
Originally posted by Panda Bear
LL has specifically allowed team/league decal on front & small lettering for name or number on back, reasoning that usual decal adhesive in these amounts won't compromise the plastic helmet's integrity.

Beware the difference between mfg. elaborate paint jobs (becoming more common) and aftermarket artwork. As the issue is possibly weakening safety equipment, I believe the stance all sanctions have taken is that original equipment o.k., aftermarket paint has to be approved by the mfg. for liability reasons.
The umpire has no clue whether the paint job was approved by the manufacturer or not.

This is a liability / warranty issue, not a legal / illegal equipment issue.
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 16, 2004, 01:56pm
JEL JEL is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 910
Based on what rule?

ASA helmet rule. NFHS helmet rule. DIXIE helmet rule

If NOCSAE is visible, and warning label is visible, it IMO meets NOCSAE approval, thus is approved for play in NFHS,and ASA.

STANDARD PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATION FOR NEWLY MANUFACTURED BASEBALL/SOFTBALL BATTER'S HELMETS
NOCSAE DOC (ND)022-03m03 adresses the label issue, but does not address painting.

As for paint, I wish all would make a "no paint, no exception rule", but LL is the only one to do it so far. Broken, cracked, dented, and illegally altered are the operative words used by ASA. Paint is not really addessed. If Susie wants her name airbrushed on, and a picture of a ball with fangs, I could, but don't consider that altering.
Those jobs are usaually done with water based paints, and do not affect the helmet polymers. A full paint job, one I have seen was painted entirely w/gold enamel spray, NOCSAE not visible-warning label removed, another sprayed w/ hi-build urethane primer, and a 3 stage automotive pearl clearcoat, paint so thick it covered NOCSAE embossing. I tossed them both. Until there is a ruling as in LL, umpires are gonna have to use some judgement.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 16, 2004, 02:08pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
I agree with your actions on your examples, but the key was not the type of paint (maybe you're an expert in paints, but most of us aren't) or in the "full" paint job v. airbrush job, but rather that the NOCSAE stamp and the warning lable were no longer visible.

If the paint job has been thinned / masked around the NOCSAE stamp / warning lable so both are still legible, I am not going to try to determine the paint technology used.
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 16, 2004, 02:11pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Twin Cities MN
Posts: 8,154
Quote:
Originally posted by JEL
As for paint, I wish all would make a "no paint, no exception rule
I disagree. Has the painting of designs on hockey goalie helmets hurt anything? Let the players be creative.
__________________
Tom
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 16, 2004, 02:39pm
JEL JEL is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 910
Has the painting of designs on hockey goalie helmets hurt anything? Let the players be creative.

Tom,
To me the question is not has the painting hurt anything. I have never seen a defective helmet injure a player. We don't do a lot of hockey here in south Georgia, so I can't address the goalie masks. I do have a good bit of paint, as well as plastics knowledge, and realize that not all umpires share that. This is precisely the reason I would like to see a "no paint no exception rule". This would remove all qeustion, and liabiliteis issues from the umpires, and let us get on with the business of calling the game. If paint was specifically addressed by rules, the judgement might be easier, but a listing of what can be painted and what not can become over-regulating. If the kids want to be creative, thats fine,(and as I posted before,I allow those if labeling is there) let them be creative with ther bat-bags, jackets and such, and not with safety equipment.

I do think the painted helmet issue could stand some more scrutiny from rules commitees. Again, if safety wasn't involved, this would be a non-issue.

BTW, That gold helmet with non visible labeling? I saw on field opposite of mine last night! Another umpiring crew allowed (or missed) it.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 16, 2004, 03:03pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 508
I talked to a guy today who is a little league guy...like UIC or something (not sure official title). He said there was a kid hit in the head last year, and the helmet he was wearing was painted. A lawsuit ensued. According to him the helmet manufacturer said that the painting of the helmet weakened the structure of the helmet, thus it wasn't their fault. Now, I guess, again according to him, that LL has banned all painted or stickered helmets. Only original finish on the helmet is acceptable.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 16, 2004, 06:13pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 10
Our helmets are painted

Our team uses Riddell helmets, the same company that makes football helmets. We had our helmets painted by Riddell using the very same paint they use for football helmets. They also installed the facemasks and supplied the decals. After painting them, Riddell attached the white rectangular warning label on the back. Here is the problem we ran into once last season: We had an umpire declare the helmets to be illegal because they were painted. Discussions (perhaps arguments) ensued. Ten minutes or so later the umpire relented, but forewarned us that they would not be allowed at state, regionals, and nationals (which didn't prove to be the case). The incident did spook us and we were fearful every time the umpires checked at future games that they would disallow the helmets. Fortunately, that did not happen, although there was some severe questioning a couple of times. Nevertheless, we are quite concerned that there is a "myth", if you will, floating around about painted helmets automatically being illegal.

Any thoughts on how we can be more proactive to avoid a similar incident?
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 16, 2004, 06:20pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 10
We play ASA (sorry)

Forgot to mention that. Girls fastpitch.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:49pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1