Hockey Style Mask vs Mask/Skull Cap

You may want to check with the umpires on this site but I think you may have been told wrong about it being umpire choice or preference. If a state plays under NFHS rules then it's a requirement to wear a mask that provides ear protection - basically a hockey style mask.

As for the concussion aspect I've always wondered why they forced this change since a concussion is much more likely than a foul tip to the ear or any ball hitting the ear. With the traditional skull cap much of the force of the hit is dispersed once the mask starts to come off whereas the hockey style mask has very little give with it. So the give has to be the head / neck instead of a mask coming off.

Overall though the chances of actually getting hit with a foul ball are pretty slim. If I'm right that TN should be wearing the hockey mask because they follow NFHS rules then I say get him a hockey mask and let him use it until he oomes to a rules set that allows him the choice.

I have to chime in here even tho there are probably better qualified people to offer an opinion.

I have done some research on this with all the health issues surrounding concussions recently and even some articles in the health press linking ALS to concussions.

There is little doubt that the traditional mask does not offer the degree of protection the hockey style mask does. The traditional mask will transfer all the force of a blow directly to the face and skull. The hockey style will transfer some of that same force but not all around the head simply because it is one piece construction which extends to and past the ears.

I am not sure why any article would claim that the traditional mask offers more concussion protection.

quote:

Originally posted by bothsportsdad:
I have to chime in here even tho there are probably better qualified people to offer an opinion.

I have done some research on this with all the health issues surrounding concussions recently and even some articles in the health press linking ALS to concussions.

There is little doubt that the traditional mask does not offer the degree of protection the hockey style mask does. The traditional mask will transfer all the force of a blow directly to the face and skull. The hockey style will transfer some of that same force but not all around the head simply because it is one piece construction which extends to and past the ears.

I am not sure why any article would claim that the traditional mask offers more concussion protection.

Really? I'm not going to lie but I've always been taught that because the old school mask comes off that is what helps concussions from happening. I'm by no means any type of expert but whenever I took a foul to the head back in the day and the mask came off it seemed like it didn't hurt as much. But when the mask stayed on it seemed to hurt a lot more. Sadly I can't make a comparision because the hockey maskes came out after I had retired from playing.

Of course it does make sense that any type of improvement would be for the good - old school to hockey. But I don't think I've ever seen anybody get hit in the ear area wearing either type of mask. That is the reason I've heard the switch to the hockey style mask was for more protection to the ear area.

Then again I did NOT stay at a Holiday Inn Express either.

i had not considered the fact that the old style mask would come off but wouldnt that be the case only with a glancing blow?

I still think in a straight on blow there is nowhere for the energy of the old style mask to transfer to other than directly to the skull. The interior padding seems also be softer in the hockey style mask than in traditional style.

It would seem to me that a straight on blow would up the chances for a concussion with any mask due to what you said about displacing the energy - the head / skull takes the whole thing. I went and looked on the internet at hockey masks and some of them the front seems to sort of come to a point in the middle (rounded but still a point - hope that makes sense). By doing that it seems that a direct blow would happen less because there is less area to get hit. Check out this pic



But this one looks a lot more flat which would seem to not displace as much of the energy.



Now if you look at the old school you can really tell how flat the front is.



I hope the pictures come through.

You should check with you state's governing body again about the use of the facemask vs. hockey-style helmet. There is no way that it can be left to umpire's discretion. Here in NJ, the hockey-style is required.

Hi everyone, my name is Brad and I work at All-Star Sporting Goods. I work mostly in product development which revolves around a lot of testing, so I hope I can shed some light on the situation or at least give you my opinion from my firsthand experience of testing traditional and hockey style masks.

Like I mentioned above, we do a lot of testing… and without getting too technical, we test for ball impacts using air cannons which can shoot either baseballs or softballs. We also have speed sensors, and head forms (crash test dummies) which can measure impacts.

If you’re curious, here is some video footage of testing one of our MVP helmets: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goijPy1lo7Q

… and here is a video showing the testing of a new umpire facemask: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NyG9LSjnto

I apologize in advance because I cannot publish testing results… so sorry if I sound very general.

With our testing we have found that our hockey style helmets test the same as a standard facemask if not better. So, there is no place that you can shoot a traditional facemask where it will test better than a hockey style mask. However, there are places our hockey style masks which test far better than on a traditional mask.

The argument that when a traditional mask spins off during impact it helps lessen the impact is still uncertain. NOCSAE has done tests and has concluded that when you get hit with a traditional mask on, all the energy is transferred to the head almost immediately, even before your head would move back from the impact. With this in mind, by the time your mask would spin off, most of the impact would have already been passed to the players head.

There is no doubt that a HSM provides more protection and coverage. Here is a video of Humberto Quintero getting struck by a bat swing wearing our MVP4000. http://astros.mlb.com/video/pl...p?content_id=9210577

In comparison, here is a video link to Carlos Ruiz getting struck by a broken bat direct to his skull cap. http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=9139743

-Brad Jurga
All-Star Sporting Goods
MOVE FORWARD | RISE ABOVE

Thanks. Great information.

I was watching a clinic recently, and there were a couple of players using the tradtional head gear/mask. When these players threw down to second, their masks fell off. It seemed they just had to mess with theirs more than the players with the hockey helmet.

My son wears a hockey helmet. He takes foul balls in the mask several times during the season, doesn't seem to phase him much. We did replace his helmet this year - my view was that his helmet had taken enough impact that he should get one with padding which hadn't absorbed any impact. Most of the wear/tear was from being thrown on the ground, toted around in the bag, etc, but I didn't want to take a chance.

ps Brad, my son switched from Easton to All Star this fall.

quote:

Originally posted by All-Star Sporting Goods:
Hi everyone, my name is Brad and I work at All-Star Sporting Goods. I work mostly in product development which revolves around a lot of testing, so I hope I can shed some light on the situation or at least give you my opinion from my firsthand experience of testing traditional and hockey style masks.

Like I mentioned above, we do a lot of testing… and without getting too technical, we test for ball impacts using air cannons which can shoot either baseballs or softballs. We also have speed sensors, and head forms (crash test dummies) which can measure impacts.

If you’re curious, here is some video footage of testing one of our MVP helmets: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goijPy1lo7Q

… and here is a video showing the testing of a new umpire facemask: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NyG9LSjnto

I apologize in advance because I cannot publish testing results… so sorry if I sound very general.

With our testing we have found that our hockey style helmets test the same as a standard facemask if not better. So, there is no place that you can shoot a traditional facemask where it will test better than a hockey style mask. However, there are places our hockey style masks which test far better than on a traditional mask.

The argument that when a traditional mask spins off during impact it helps lessen the impact is still uncertain. NOCSAE has done tests and has concluded that when you get hit with a traditional mask on, all the energy is transferred to the head almost immediately, even before your head would move back from the impact. With this in mind, by the time your mask would spin off, most of the impact would have already been passed to the players head.

There is no doubt that a HSM provides more protection and coverage. Here is a video of Humberto Quintero getting struck by a bat swing wearing our MVP4000. http://astros.mlb.com/video/pl...p?content_id=9210577

In comparison, here is a video link to Carlos Ruiz getting struck by a broken bat direct to his skull cap. http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=9139743

-Brad Jurga
All-Star Sporting Goods
MOVE FORWARD | RISE ABOVE

Great post Brad! I was actually going to email you and see if you wanted to chime in on this subject, but you beat me to the punch!

Great stuff guys - appreciate the input from those who know.

Thanks guys, If you ever hand any questions feel free to post up. I check this forum from time to time to see if there is anything I can chime in about!

-Brad

Well, I've made my decision...he is moving to the outfield!

Seriously, thanks for all the response. As I said earlier, two very divided camps.

I'm going to make him wear a hockey style mask in games, but he would still like to try the mask/skull cap combo catching bullpens.

Thanks again!

I caught from the age of 7 to 25 and I got hit in the ear one time.

I was in college and catching a bullpen. There were two bullpens going on at the same time and I was catching on the left hand side. The pitcher on the right bounced a curve ball at about 55'. The other catcher went to block it and it hit off of his facemask at a perfect angle to ricochet EXACTLY to his left. Where did the ball go? Directly at my right ear! It absolutely hurt like hell, but that was the only freak accident where I have ever heard of a catcher getting hit in the ear.

My personal opinion is that a catcher should wear whatever feels comfortable to him. I know a lot of states require the 1 piece helmet, so be sure to check that out before you buy something!

Also, I don't ever remember a catcher suffering a concussion due to a foul ball. I'm sure it's happened from a batters back swing, but from a foul ball? Again, it may have happened, but I don't remember it. The helmets are so good these days that I wouldn't worry too much about which helmet has more protection from the impact of a foul tip...they are all going to do a good job protecting him!

Foul tips are given as the reason for Matheny's retirement.

Article below

Matheny Article

quote:

Also, I don't ever remember a catcher suffering a concussion due to a foul ball. I'm sure it's happened from a batters back swing, but from a foul ball? Again, it may have happened, but I don't remember it. The helmets are so good these days that I wouldn't worry too much about which helmet has more protection from the impact of a foul tip...they are all going to do a good job protecting him!

I'm sorry but I have to COMPLETELY disagree with you here. In hurry so I can't explain, but I'll explain later..

Catching Coach: I completely forgot about that!

Bulldog: I'll be interested to see how you completely disagree with that, and what information you have that shows one style mask to be much more protective than another when taking foul tips head on. Also, which age kids do you coach? I do think that you are more prone to injury at higher levels when pitchers are throwing harder.

Again, I'm sure there are some cases where catchers have concussions because of foul balls, but they are few and far between!

I don't coach baseball. I am in sports medicine. I am a former catcher who has suffered multiple concussions in my relatively short career in both football and baseball.


Concussions are not a new thing. If people really believe that concussions are "new" and that in the past players didn't suffer them then they are clueless. What people do not understand is that concussions are extremely serious and only recently has it become apparent how important they really are. We must work to not necessarily prevent them but to minimize the lasting damages done.

Concussions are not like other chronic injuries athletes suffer from. You have a "bum knee" and maybe you have a hard time walking. You have a "bum arm" and you can't play catch with your kid. You have post-concussion symptoms and you CANNOT function.

Another myth about concussions is that they only happen in football. WRONG. Concussions happen in every sport and they happen in our day-to-day lives. Baseball is not exception.

Catchers are at an increased risk for concussions on the diamond just due to the position. Foul balls, the backswing of the bat, pro catchers potentially getting plowed at the plate, etc. Catchers masks can help minimize the damage done, but they cannot prevent concussions.

Mike Matheny is a perfect example of a catcher whose career was ended by concussions. I do not know of others at the moment, but it is interesting to note that only 33 concussions were reported by Major League Baseball from 2001-2010 with 1/3 of those being reported in 2010. Again, this is not because concussions are "new" to the sport. They are only now being reported and from my reading, they are underreported. How many umpires do you think left games or missed games in that period due to concussions? I don't have the number, but I'll bet I could go back and look at video footage on MLB.com and find out 2010 and 2009.



There has been debate for a few years about which type of mask is safer. NFHS believes the 1-piece mask (most often the hockey style) is safest because it provides protection on the front, but also it provides protection of the ears and the side of the head. The two-piece mask does not provide the side protection. I have seen reports before stating that the two-piece mask does a better job of absorbing the force of the foul-tip while the aerodynamics of the hockey style mask allows it to "shed" the force better. I can't tell you for sure.

I personally preferred the hockey-style but it is also the one I used the most. By the time I reached high school, the NFHS had already mandated the 1-piece mask. The 2-piece was too much work for me when I used it AND it didn't stay on. I was always taught to keep my mask on for plays at the plate. Very seldom did I take my mask off for anything on the field..

I have never and will never underestimate a concussion. They are very serious and I wouldn't ever risk a players health. We actually had to have a concussion education session mandated by the NCAA this year.

Since you're in sports medicine, you also know that once you suffer a concussion, you are much more likely to suffer another brain trauma...which is why it is so important that concussed athletes sit out of practice/games. So if an athlete has suffered a concussion from football, they are more likely to suffer one from baseball as well.

33 concussions is not a lot at all! Over the time period that you mentioned, 2001-2010 (10 seasons), there were 24,300 MLB games. That is one concussion every 736 games, or on average a player could play for 4.5 years before suffering a concussion! Again, I'm not going to say that umpires never leave a game due to a concussion, but to say that it is common isn't accurate.

What was the highest level of baseball that you played? It wasn't very long ago that states started to require HS players to wear the one piece mask.

My whole point is that there isn't a MAJOR difference between balls that hit either mask straight on. Does a hockey mask have more protection around the ears? Sure! Do you need protection around the ears...I don't think so. I always wore a traditional mask (mask and skull cap) and never had a problem with it. I don't see how it could be too much work either? If it fits correctly, there shouldn't be an issue about the mask staying on. Just like any piece of equipment, if it fits like it is supposed to there shouldn't be much of an issue.

Just to reiterate my point, I think that concussions are a serious injury that should receive a lot of attention, but they are not common and either style helmet will consistently prevent them from occurring due to foul tips.

Edit: P.S. I would, and did, trust my safety to All-Star products. Whether you choose the hockey style or traditional style, they make safe products!

quote:

Since you're in sports medicine, you also know that once you suffer a concussion, you are much more likely to suffer another brain trauma...which is why it is so important that concussed athletes sit out of practice/games. So if an athlete has suffered a concussion from football, they are more likely to suffer one from baseball as well.

Yes this is true. And I suffered my first concussion playing baseball. They are also my most significant ones.

quote:

Again, I'm not going to say that umpires never leave a game due to a concussion, but to say that it is common isn't accurate.

My point is that though they do not appear to be common, what we don't always recognize is that concussions are often hidden. And even when athletes suffer a concussion, they are often not reported by teams either. This makes no sense to me.

quote:

What was the highest level of baseball that you played? It wasn't very long ago that states started to require HS players to wear the one piece mask.

I played through high school. I have worked with high school players and professional baseball in addition to college athletics including football. NFHS mandated it I believe back around 2002 or so. Or there was talk of doing so at least.. our coach made us move to them in junior high around 2000 or 2001 because it was published that they would be required in high school when we got there.


My take on your statement was that concussions from foul tips were not something to be concerned about. And I remain in complete disagreement with that.

quote:

Originally posted by Bulldog 19:
[QUOTE]My take on your statement was that concussions from foul tips were not something to be concerned about. And I remain in complete disagreement with that.

Not at all what I was talking about. Concussions are definitely something to be concerned about. My point is that people are splitting hairs if they're trying to choose a helmet based on which one will do a better job protecting a player from foul tips...because they're all about the same. I'm not talking about ear protection, just protection from foul tips that go directly into the front of the helmet...and I am sticking by my statement that you shouldn't be concerned about which helmet will protect you more from foul tips because they both perform the same.

If you want to talk about which helmet will do a better job protecting a player from a hitters back swing, well, that is a different conversation and I would most definitely say that the hockey style mask is better than the traditional mask. For foul tips though, I don't think either one is better than another.

quote:

Originally posted by Bulldog 19:
My point is that though they do not appear to be common, what we don't always recognize is that concussions are often hidden. And even when athletes suffer a concussion, they are often not reported by teams either. This makes no sense to me.

I think that statement is both true and false. In HS I think more concussions go undocumented because they don't have full time trainer, team doctor, and support staff that higher level colleges and professional teams have.

At the Major League level though, EVERYTHING is documented! They get a lot more MRIs and X-Rays than you can believe. Those athletes are getting paid millions of dollars and everything that happens to them medically gets written down for liability reasons.

How much money would it cost a team if player shortened his career due to injuries that the team didn't report? He could say that if the team had treated his injuries (concussions) he might be able to play another few years and sue the team for his salary.

So do concussions go unreported in HS and little league...sure they do! Does it happen in the Big Leagues? I sure wouldn't bet on it! Especially after I saw how detailed of an Injury Report was kept on me when I was in the minor leagues, and I only had a few pulled muscles.

NFHS rules forbid the use of the traditional mask and skull combo....I will not allow the readtional mask and skull for NFHS play......its not a descretionary ruling with NFHS umpires....see rule below...

NFHS rule 1-5 art 4

The catchers 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 catchers mask is mandatory. A throat protector shall adequately cover the throat. the commercially manufactured catchers head, face and throat protection may be a one-pieice or multi piece design.

Two piece


One Piece

www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/08/17/....gehrigs.concussions

I wanted to post a link to what I mentioned earlier.

quote:

Originally posted by bothsportsdad:
www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/08/17/....gehrigs.concussions

I wanted to post a link to what I mentioned earlier.

The first thing that I noticed when I clicked on that link is that he wasn't wearing a batting helmet. The safety standards are much better now than they used to be!

quote:

Originally posted by Catching101:

quote:

Originally posted by bothsportsdad:
www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/08/17/....gehrigs.concussions

I wanted to post a link to what I mentioned earlier.

The first thing that I noticed when I clicked on that link is that he wasn't wearing a batting helmet. The safety standards are much better now than they used to be!

yes standards are better but unfortunately we still have ALS... and as the parent of a catcher and knowing a former HS catcher who in his 40s was just diagnosed with ALS I take the issue of any possible connection very seriously.

My point is that I don't see any threads comparing which batting helmet is more protective, and that is because all batting helmets work about the same. The same is true for catching helmets!

I don't want people to read into my posts too deeply. I just think that both style helmets offer the same protection from foul tips.

quote:

Originally posted by Catching101:
My point is that I don't see any threads comparing which batting helmet is more protective, and that is because all batting helmets work about the same. The same is true for catching helmets!

I don't want people to read into my posts too deeply. I just think that both style helmets offer the same protection from foul tips.

all batting helmets work about the same b/c the design is basically the same...

They may LOOK the same, but they aren't! Next time you're in the sporting goods store take a look at the padding on the inside of all the different helmets there.

I'm telling you from personal experience, both helmets work very similar. I would love to hear from anybody else who has experience wearing both helmets at a high level.

The back of the helmet has nothing to do with the impact from foul balls...the only thing that matters there is the front/cage of the helmet. Traditional masks do have less curvature than the hockey masks, so I can see that argument, but I don't have all the proof to back it up.

Also, the hockey masks today are MUCH different than they were 10 years ago when they were invented. They're a lot lighter now than they used to be. That makes it more comfortable for the player, but it also transfers more force to the players head.

I've decided that I'm going to stop posting on this thread.

At the end of the day it is a player/family's decision about which mask they should wear. I ask all of our catchers if they want to order a traditional mask, or a hockey mask and I let them wear whichever one they want.

Until I see some numbers and evidence that shows that hockey masks do a better job protecting a player from foul tips I'm going to continue to let them wear the helmet that they choose.

Personally, I have played at almost all levels of baseball (HS, JUCO, D1, Rookie Ball, Short Season, Low A, High A) and now I coach at a top 20 school. Because of my extensive experience, I believe that my opinion should have some validity. I believe that with the technology we have today both helmets do an excellent job protecting players. I'm not a father yet, but I would let my son wear either style.

padding will vary from manufacturer to manufacturer... this a given. The only DESIGN difference I have ever seen on batting helmets was the helmet wrong by David Wright after he was struck in the head by a pitched ball. He then proceeded to stop wearing it b/c of the "goofy" factor. I personally have witnessed, what I believe, is use of the traditional mask and helmet combo on the showcase circuit b/c somehow it shows you are "tougher", more "professional" etc. I hope this thread has enlightened some on the dangers that exist from accepting traditional thinking without question.

Concussions are a serious threat to long term health and the medical industry is just on the cusp of understanding it all.

Sorry, one last post.

Earlier in this thread there was discussion about how Mike Matheny had to retire due to concussions.

I would like every one reading this thread to click on the link below. It will take you to a Google Image search of "Mike Matheny". Please note which helmet he is wearing in almost every picture...just because you're wearing a hockey style mask doesn't mean you're immune to injury. Again, I haven't seen proof (statistics and references) that show one helmet is significantly safer than the other.

http://www.google.com/images?q..._AU&biw=1278&bih=603

As I said in my original post, two very distinct groups...I didn't mean for this to go in this direction and I apologize for starting this firestorm.

I will say that All Star seems to be the preferred hockey style helmet in the pros...even from Rawlings endorsees like Yadier Molina.

pwm: there is nothing to apologize for. This is an excellent thread. People do not have to agree.. just remain civil which has occurred here.

This is something I am passionate about and began researching when my friend (who was a prominent citizen and JV baseball coach at our HS) was diagnosed with ALS and I ran across the article (among others)that I linked above. 101 is a college coach and has his opinion.

He and I simply do not agree.

I'm no expert nor was I a catcher but both of my boys were/are catchers. #1 son caught from 10u through HS. He only wore a hockey style mask. 2 concussions both from collisions at the plate. #2 son wore a hockey style in HS but now wears a traditional mask and skull cap in minor league ball. 1 concussion with the hockey style when he was 12 from a collision at the plate.

Personally, I don't see a heck of a lot of difference between the 2 styles. I don't think either style is going to provide 100% protection. But both styles do a good job at helping to prevent injury under normal circumstances. It comes down to what is legal at your level of play and which one you feel most comfortabe wearing.

By the way, #2 has a contract with All-Star for his equipment. Tried a lot of different brands over the years but likes the All-Star equipment the best.

Son wore the hockey style one piece all through high school. All through high school never had a problem with concussions. In high school he also wore a mouth guard at all times as all team sports in our county were mandated to wear them. That may have helped with not having any concussions, we will never know.

So in his first year at college he chose to continue with the one piece hockey style, but did not wear a mouth guard. He got a mild concussion last year on two successive foul tips to the mask and had to sit out for 2-3 weeks.

After that he switched to the traditional mask and skull cap AND started wearing a mouth guard again.

This year he will continue to wear the traditional and skull. There is no scientific proof of a difference we found in researching, but it seems that the padding on the traditional mask is thicker, and the skull cap takes a little of the impact from a hit. Also, the mask does come off if hit on the sides, where the hockey mask has no chance of moving wherever it is hit. I am not a scientist and I am not citing any tests to prove this makes any difference.

I just know he got his concussion while wearing a hockey style mask.

I highly recommend the mouth guard, no matter which way you go.

Backstop-17

Here is an article on one lab test on the subject


Kettering University Tests

quote:

Originally posted by Catching Coach:
Here is an article on one lab test on the subject


Kettering University Tests

thank you for this link... below are some interesting footnotes to the tests:

# The "hockey style" catcher's helmet tested was not the Major League? quality, but rather All-Star's basic Little League/High School "hockey style" catcher's helmet. The Little League/High School "hockey style" catcher's helmet produced by All-Star is a different construction than the helmets All-Star provides to professional catchers.
# All-Star's top-of-the-line "traditional" catcher's mask was tested by the Kettering students.

# The helmets tested by the Kettering students were tested in two locations (the side of the head and the "nose" of the metal cage). The data presented in the students' final report for these locations were from a single impact only.
# All-Star maintains that the safety performance of a helmet cannot be characterized by hitting it once in the "nose" and once on the side.
# All-Star maintains the data collected by the Kettering students is not substantiated by multiple, repeated trials.
# The numerical figure of 9.814 g was misreported, and is actually 9.184 g.

on the surface the tests look like serious scientific work but on closer inspection there were some flaws.

This has been a very interesting thread, one that I think is useful to many. As the father of a former catcher, and an umpire (when I'm not performing my normal baseball role of a coach) I've certainly got an opinion on this subject.

My son always wore only a hockey style mask, and had great results with it. He tried several over the years, and found All Star to be his favorite. Shortly before he gave up the game due to elbow and shoulder injuries, he was given a Wilson hockey mask that has the shock absorbers on the cage. He never got to use that mask, so when I started umpiring, I naturally just picked it up and that's all I have ever used. Here are my thoughts, for what little they may be worth.

I think that the hockey style masks generally provide great protection, and it is important to have ear protection. While it very rarely happens, there are impacts to the side of the head from time to time. Last spring, I was working the plate for a JV game, and a batter actually hit me on the side of the head with his backswing! Now, I'd never had a bat come near me before, except when a batter carelessly tosses it, and this kid almost knocked me off my feet! He rocked me hard enought that I was staggering a bit and couldn't get out into the field to make the call at first base. I chewed him out pretty good when he came out to start the next inning (Yes, he was a CATCHER). I told him if I got hit with his bat again, I was going to dump him from the game. So, imagine the next at-bat. He hits the catcher with his backswing! Right in the side of the head. I know the kid pretty well (no, he doesn't play for me, but his older brother who is now catching in Milb did) and rather than dump him I told him I'd kick his butt if either of us got touched by his bat again. Guess what, we had no more problems. Sorry to go on a bit of a tangent, but the point is you can get hit in the side of the head, and while it may be rare, it doesn't matter how rare it is when it is your own coconut that's getting cracked! If I'd have been wearing a traditional mask over a cap, that metal bat to the side of my head would have likely been 'lights out'!

I've been hit in the mask with a number of foul balls, and only 1 impact was very bad. Noticably, when a ball strikes the cage part and the shock absorbers get a chance to do their job, the impact doesn't seem too bad at all. My biggest beef with hockey style masks and getting hit is how loud it rings in your ears when that ball strikes, and you can't do much about that unless you don't want to hear what is going on, and that isn't an option. I do think it is important to choose a hockey style mask that is more stremlined, and in this regard it seems that All-Star, Rawlings and Wilson do a good job. I'm not that impressed with the Easton masks, probably because my son used one and while he liked it, the screws holding the cage on broke on a couple occasions. I'm kind of intrigued by the Mizuno helmet, as it appears very streamlined, so I doubt many balls can make a solid impact. The others, I simply have no interest in.

My nephew is a cathcer one a D1 team in the WAC, and all he uses since leaving high school is the traditional mask and skull cap. The majority of the other catchers I formerly coached who have gone on beyond high school are also using the traditional mask, so go figure. They've told me they like the comfort of the skull cap and mask, and they seem to do just fine with it. I'm a believer that collisions at the plate are at least as big a concussion risk as foul balls, even though they rarely happen at lower levels these days. I believe having a hockey mask is a better option for those rare occasions.