NEW NFHS Helmet rule

[eme]

As the state rules interpreter for my area, I have bounced this new NFHS helmet rule around "the usual suspects." Since there is no mention of a penalty for an infraction and since the issue will come up, I have decided on the following.

1. 1-9-1A. All Players shall wear helmets of the same color. There is no penalty in the rulebook, just as there was no penalty for a sweatpants violation last year. Since a compression shorts violation IS listed as a technical foul, we will do the same for sweatpants and helmet violations to be consistent. Try to rectify the situation before the start of the game. If a team cannot start the game without violating the rule, award the ball to the other team and play the game. That will be the only penalty. If they can start the game with the proper number of correct helmets, then any ensuing violation is a technical foul.


I suppose I should clarify that sweatpants violations and compression shorts violations always can be rectified before a game....so the way that helmet violations are the same is that it is a technical foul

Your comments are welcome

[Laxref_36]

In the scenario you descibed the officials are caught between a "rock and hard place". The rule book states that the "player shall be asked to leave the game and may not return with this particular helmet until it is made legal."
(Page 61 1.9.1 Situation D NFHS 2005 Rule book)

A team would have to play "down a man". That seems excessive, but that's the rule.

In a related matter: I've looked through the rule book and the case book searching for the minimum number of players required to be on the field. Does the rule book address this at all? Can you start the game with one player? I would think not, but can't find anything at all in the NFHS book!

[LaxRef]

In the scenario you descibed the officials are caught between a "rock and hard place". The rule book states that the "player shall be asked to leave the game and may not return with this particular helmet until it is made legal."
(Page 61 1.9.1 Situation D NFHS 2005 Rule book)

A team would have to play "down a man". That seems excessive, but that's the rule.

I don't think that follows. They can certainly sub in someone for the guy with the bad helmet, and the guy with the bad helmet can borrow a legal helmet from someone else (or do a quick fix on his own helmet, if possible) and re-enter the game.

One thing that's really annoying is that the most obvious fix--spray painting the helmet--is not legal because it obbscures the NOCSAE label and it may be construed as altering the helmet in a way that could compromise its protective qualities.

In a related matter: I've looked through the rule book and the case book searching for the minimum number of players required to be on the field. Does the rule book address this at all? Can you start the game with one player? I would think not, but can't find anything at all in the NFHS book!

It's not clear. eme points out that the rules imply that you need 10 guys to start, but they don't say what happens if you don't have them.

[eme]

On that decal helmet...that situation refers specifically to the rule 1-9 that states "All helmet decals and external amrkings shall be school issued."
The light blue helmets the team wore in 2004 were school issued and the new green helmets for 2005 were school issued and there are only six of 'em because the budget allowed for only replacement helmets. That's the situation I am trying to adress as delicately as I can...

Regarding starting a game with fewer than 10 players. Nothing explicit. But it is implied in rule 1-1. and in rule 2-1. And you could argue it's a safety issue with 9 or 8 high-school age kids trying to play a 48 minute lacrosse game.

[CTLaxer]

Can someone fill me in as to what the sweatpants and compression shorts violoations are? TIA (sorry to hijack the thread a bit)

[BuckWyld]

imo these rules should not exist at the youth or highschool level, or at least allow players to use solid white or black helmets even if they do not match the team helmets. I sort of understand why they have these rules, players wearing different colors than the rest of the team could potentially confuse the other players on the field, but it is not a safety issue (as far as I can tell) and it was never a problem when I played youth or HS lacrosse, and it is not a problem now playing post-collegate club. Lacrosse is a relatively expensive sport to play and this just adds to the cost, had an older family member who played for a different team, sorry you can not use his hand-me-down helmet, want to buy a helmet that is on sale because it was part of a messed up custom order, sorry. These rules do nothing but increase the cost of starting to play lacrosse (for a player or a team) at a level where it should be about making lacrosse fun and accessable.

[LaxRef]

imo these rules should not exist at the youth or highschool level, or at least allow players to use solid white or black helmets even if they do not match the team helmets. I sort of understand why they have these rules, players wearing different colors than the rest of the team could potentially confuse the other players on the field, but it is not a safety issue (as far as I can tell) and it was never a problem when I played youth or HS lacrosse, and it is not a problem now playing post-collegate club. Lacrosse is a relatively expensive sport to play and this just adds to the cost, had an older family member who played for a different team, sorry you can not use his hand-me-down helmet, want to buy a helmet that is on sale because it was part of a messed up custom order, sorry. These rules do nothing but increase the cost of starting to play lacrosse (for a player or a team) at a level where it should be about making lacrosse fun and accessable.

Well, I guess I see both sides of the issue.

As an official, I have a lot of things to keep track of. Having a bunch of kids wearing different color helmets can be confusing. Most coaches, players, and fans don't understand this because they aren't trying to watch as many--or the same--things the officials are watching. Thus, they don't see what the problem is if everone on team A is in powder blue except for two middies and an attackman in dark blue with white numbers, and everyone on team B is in red except for two middies and a defenseman in black with white numbers. Dark blue and black are very similar, especially when guys are flying all over the place.

I did a game last year where one team was in jerseys with white shoulders and a green body, while the other team was in jerseys with green shoulders and white bodies. Tell me that's not confusing!

Different color helmets are also confusing. If everyone on team A has a white helmet, and two guys on team B do while the rest are wearing green, it's just one more chance to get confused.

I'm sure there are some officials who have no trouble keeping stuff like this straight. We all have our strengths and weaknesses; keeping track of a dozen different special cases is not my strength. And personally, I think making things easy for the officials is important, considering the officials shortages most areas experience in most sports.

OTOH, I do understand the expense issue. However, personally I have to blame the schools. They know a rule like this is on the way, so why not just put everyone in a white helmet (in other words, make the team helmet color white). That way people can switch schools or whatever and still use the same helmet. But no, the schools choose to have their helmets match their jerseys, and that's really what screws the kids over.

[Laxref_36]

On that decal helmet...that situation refers specifically to the rule 1-9 that states "All helmet decals and external amrkings shall be school issued."
The light blue helmets the team wore in 2004 were school issued and the new green helmets for 2005 were school issued and there are only six of 'em because the budget allowed for only replacement helmets. That's the situation I am trying to adress as delicately as I can...

Regarding starting a game with fewer than 10 players. Nothing explicit. But it is implied in rule 1-1. and in rule 2-1. And you could argue it's a safety issue with 9 or 8 high-school age kids trying to play a 48 minute lacrosse game.


As far as the school is concerned they've messed up this situation. As Laxref pointed out, the schools are given ample lead time to resolve the situation. Currently there is in the rule book (Page 14), Jersey Specifications for 2008 have been listed. Schools have 3 years to ready for this change.

The question is why would a school buy green helmets, when the original helmets were light blue. I would tell the administration to have the helmets repainted to match the originals. A can of spray paint, a piece of tape for the NOCSAE decal should get this done. Don't know the feasibility or the cost of this.

You as an official would not be accepting of this behavior if the team came out in blue and green uniforms!

The school has started this situation, they should be responsible and REMEDY it.

In regard to safety issues of not having ten players, are you going to forfeit games by teams that have only nine players? There is nothing explicit in the rule book to support this. I think your out on a limb if you do forfeit a game due to only having nine or less players.

[Jugthug42]

Is it ok if your shell is one color but your visor/chin are different than others? Some of our team have CPros/CPXs with red chins and visors, while everyone else has either white cascades with the black chin or a white triad with black. I also think we do have a black helmet. Oh and our goalie has a baby blue shell helmet. My team violates this rule I presume?

[BuckWyld]

stuff


That is true, I had not really thought of it that way. But wouldn't refs have the same problems if both teams wore all white helmets? I also to an extent think that at that level making the sport accessable to as many people as possible out weighs some small mistakes in officiating because of the mismatching.

[LaxRef]

That is true, I had not really thought of it that way. But wouldn't refs have the same problems if both teams wore all white helmets? I also to an extent think that at that level making the sport accessable to as many people as possible out weighs some small mistakes in officiating because of the mismatching.

If everyone is wearing the same color helmet, it doesn't provide any information at all, so you ignore it. But if everyone on team A has black helmets except for three guys with green, and everyone on team B has red helmets except for three guys with green and two with black, then it really starts to get confusing.

And people can say, "Well, I'm willing to accept some small mistakes in officiating," but they sure don't mean it. Considering how often we get abused for making the call by what the rules actually say--as opposed to what people imagine the rules are--I don't believe people have the ability to say, "Well, he called that foul on the wrong guy, but that's our fault for loosening up the color restrictions on helmets and making lacrosse more accessible to the masses."

There's also a slippery slope argument going on here. Joe wants to play with a helmet that doesn't meet color requirements, so we let him play. Now Dave wants to play, but he has a stick that's too short and can't afford a new one. Does he get a waiver as well?

Frankly, I'd like to see as many people be able to play lacrosse as possible, as well as other sports. Unfortunately, that isn't an economic reailty in today's world. With more and more schools moving to pay-for-play programs, the cost of equipment seems to be becoming a less significant proportion of the total cost of playing. However, some schools/clubs/programs do offer scholarships for equipment or have loaner programs.

[BuckWyld]

I have to admit in the > 10 years that I have been playing lacrosse, I have never been in a league that required matching helmets (including college club), so maybe I don't understand the benifits because I have never seen them. I do think your stick analogy is flawed because a stick that is too short gives the player an advantage that the others do not have, while allowing everyone to wear mismatched helmets does not give an advantage to any one player.

[LaxRef]

I have to admit in the > 10 years that I have been playing lacrosse, I have never been in a league that required matching helmets (including college club), so maybe I don't understand the benifits because I have never seen them.

You must not have played USLIA, then, because club teams in USLIA are required to play by NCAA rules. Either that, or your officials did a poor job of neforcing the rules.

I do think your stick analogy is flawed because a stick that is too short gives the player an advantage that the others do not have, while allowing everyone to wear mismatched helmets does not give an advantage to any one player.

I agree that it's different, but I still think there's a slippery slope argument, both in terms of equipment and uniforms. Do you let kids wear different colored sweatpants, too? Jerseys?

TPTB have determined that teams need to all wear the same color helmets, so they have to. They were warned this was coming years ago--long enough ago, I think, that they could have picked a color and gotten all incoming players to buy that color. Again, I blame the schools, not the rules.

[BuckWyld]

It was at Arizona St, so I think it was USLIA, but the last season I played was 2000 so maybe it was before they instituted the rule

[LaxRef]

It was at Arizona St, so I think it was USLIA, but the last season I played was 2000 so maybe it was before they instituted the rule

I'm fairly sure the helmet rule has been around since I started doing college games in 2000.

[senor_k]

Sorry to take this thread on a tangent, but in the first post, a "compression shorts" rule was mentioned. Would someone care to explain this rule? I don't want to break any rules unknowingly.

[rilax]

Can someone fill me in as to what the sweatpants and compression shorts violations are? TIA (sorry to hijack the thread a bit)

Sorry to take this thread on a tangent, but in the first post, a "compression shorts" rule was mentioned. Would someone care to explain this rule? I don't want to break any rules unknowingly.

Is it ok if your shell is one color but your visor/chin are different than others? Some of our team have CPros/CPXs with red chins and visors, while everyone else has either white cascades with the black chin or a white triad with black. I also think we do have a black helmet. Oh and our goalie has a baby blue shell helmet. My team violates this rule I presume?

Decided to answer some posts that went missing in the middle of the post.
Start with this both rule books say that the following items must be the same color:
Helmets
Sweat pants
Visible under-jerseys
Visible Compression shorts (the spandex type thing under the main shorts) (think this answer senor_k’s question)

NCAA only:
Gloves

Now in terms of penalties NCAA: illegal procedure 6-6-x which is change of possession unless you call it while the other team has the ball in there position 30-sec penalty. (Most officials wait until there is a louse ball to call this penalty). NFHS does not have a 6-6 reference to it but case book 1-9-2 sit A says A1 with possession of the ball is noticed wearing compression shorts that do not match those of his teammates. Ruling: Technical foul; award possession to Team B. Don’t see how helmets, sweat pants, or under jerseys would be different. (should answer Ctlaxer’s question)

As for Jugthug42 question: for a high school game I am not going to be looking to see if everyone has the same blue color just that everyone has in general something like dark blue. Also I would not be looking to see if some player’s visors are painted and others or not especially if they are different designs. However the goalie should not be using a different color as the rest of the team.

[senor_k]

Thanks for clearing that up. But I can't wear a white undershirt with my black uniform? What exactly is an "under-jersey"?

[rilax]

Thanks for clearing that up. But I can't wear a white undershirt with my black uniform? What exactly is an "under-jersey"?

A under-jersey is a tee shirt etc worn under the main jersey. Now if it is visible (ie you have mesh jersey) then everyone on the team has to have the same color under-jersey. The color of it has to be white gray or one of your teams colors. Now if your jersey is like 90+% of the ones out there used by varsity teams the under-jersey is not going to be visible. So if your team uses jerseys that do not allow the under-jersey to be show it can be any color you want it to be however if your jerseys allow others to see your under-jersey than you can use white if everyone else on your team uses white etc. Hope this helps.

[eme]

I have updated what I plan to present to the NFHS refs in our state association on this issue. I hope you are sitting down because I have made it consistent with NCAA rules. Herewith:
1. 1-9-1A. All Players shall wear helmets of the same color. There is no penalty for a violation mentioned in the rulebook, just as there was no penalty for a sweatpants color violation last year. Since a compression shorts violation IS listed as a technical foul (1-9-2 Sit.A), we will do the same for sweatpants and helmet violations to be consistent. This is also consistent with the penalty assessed in the NCAA rulebook (1-21 AR 22). Try to rectify the situation before the start of the game. If a team cannot start the game without violating the rule, award the ball to the other team and play the game. That will be the only penalty. If they can start the game with the proper number of correct helmets, then any ensuing violation is a technical foul.

[TheKOB]

As far as the school is concerned they've messed up this situation. As Laxref pointed out, the schools are given ample lead time to resolve the situation. Currently there is in the rule book (Page 14), Jersey Specifications for 2008 have been listed. Schools have 3 years to ready for this change.

The problem is that not all teams are school sponsered, especially where I'm from. Therefore, you have scraps of all different types of equipment. I've experienced the same problem, since I coach at the USL MDIA level and have kids from all different high schools coming to play. Not only do we have to watch out for the helmets, but also the gloves must be the same color. We're hoping to rectify the situation by purchasing team gloves next year, and also hopefully team helmets, but nothing monetary is ever for sure.

Also, in terms of painting the helmets, I've never heard of someone getting called because you couldn't read the NOCSE (probably not the right acronym). My helmet doesn't even have one on it, it's so old. Obviously a ref is going to be able to recognize a cascade when he sees one. If he can recognize that it's a lacrosse helmet, what's the problem? Also, paint generally wouldn't change the protective nature of the helmet any more than playing in overly cold or warm weather would.

[LaxRef]

The problem is that not all teams are school sponsered, especially where I'm from. Therefore, you have scraps of all different types of equipment. I've experienced the same problem, since I coach at the USL MDIA level and have kids from all different high schools coming to play. Not only do we have to watch out for the helmets, but also the gloves must be the same color. We're hoping to rectify the situation by purchasing team gloves next year, and also hopefully team helmets, but nothing monetary is ever for sure.

Well, there's nothing that says your league has to enforce these rules, especially if you're dealing with club teams. It is common in developing areas to say, "We're going to do NFHS (or NCAA) rules, but we're not enforcing the uniform requirements." You just need to make sure that you have the exact rule variations in writing for everyone to see.

OTOH, if your state high school federation recognizes lacrosse, and if you play as part of that federation, you are not allowed to vary any of the rules without approval from the NFHS.

Also, in terms of painting the helmets, I've never heard of someone getting called because you couldn't read the NOCSE (probably not the right acronym).

It's NOCSAE, and we've called people for using non-NOCSAE helmets. The rules state that the helmets have to have the NOCSAE seal and the warning still visible.


My helmet doesn't even have one on it, it's so old.

Then it's illegal.

Obviously a ref is going to be able to recognize a cascade when he sees one. If he can recognize that it's a lacrosse helmet, what's the problem? Also, paint generally wouldn't change the protective nature of the helmet any more than playing in overly cold or warm weather would.

In general, altering equipment is prohibited. I don't see anything in particular about the helmet, though, although we've been told before that a helmet in which the padding has been cut or altered is illegal.

I'll ask about the painting thing. One solution might be to have colored decals to put on the helmets intead of buying colored helmets. Thus, instead of buying blue or red helmets, you'd get everyone to buy white, and if they changed teams they could just put different decals on the helmet to change color. Of course, Cascade would prefer that everyone buy new helmets. . . .

[Laxref_36]

The problem is that not all teams are school sponsered, especially where I'm from. Therefore, you have scraps of all different types of equipment. I've experienced the same problem, since I coach at the USL MDIA level and have kids from all different high schools coming to play. Not only do we have to watch out for the helmets, but also the gloves must be the same color. We're hoping to rectify the situation by purchasing team gloves next year, and also hopefully team helmets, but nothing monetary is ever for sure.

Also, in terms of painting the helmets, I've never heard of someone getting called because you couldn't read the NOCSE (probably not the right acronym). My helmet doesn't even have one on it, it's so old. Obviously a ref is going to be able to recognize a cascade when he sees one. If he can recognize that it's a lacrosse helmet, what's the problem? Also, paint generally wouldn't change the protective nature of the helmet any more than playing in overly cold or warm weather would.

Coach K,

The objective of having the NOCSAE decal on the helmet, is that supposedly it gives the player a higher level of protection because it meets safety standards. According to the standards folk, helmets and its padding break down with usage, time and the elements. The label is the proof of the helmet meeting minimal standards during inspection.

Should a team choose to waive this rule, they do so at risk to its players and itself. I would imagine that no team which is school sponsored would be allowed to have this happen. I guess that the rule could be waived as suggested by Laxref, it really depends on how much risk (players health and financial) the school/team is comfortable with taking.

Laxref_36

[LaxRef]

Should a team choose to waive this rule, they do so at risk to its players and itself. I would imagine that no team which is school sponsored would be allowed to have this happen. I guess that the rule could be waived as suggested by Laxref, it really depends on how much risk (players health and financial) the school/team is comfortable with taking.

I can see where you might have thought this because of the way I worded my post, but I was not suggesting waiving the NOCSAE requirement!!! That would be liability suicide.

What I meant was that they could waive the "matching helmets and gloves" requirement so that the kids could play without being forced to buy new gear (since his whole argument was that it was unfair to make a kid who owns, say, a red NOCSAE helmet bave to go buy a green NOCSAE helmet).

As an official, I've had leagues try to tell me that they allow hockey helmets. I always tell them, "Well, that's nice, but I don't allow them." There's no way I'm going to knowingly put kids at risk of injury and myself in the position of being legally liable if someone gets hurt. (Hockey helmets may have the NOCSAE seal, but they aren't approved for lacrosse; personally, I don't think there's a whole lot of difference, but the courts wouldn't care about that).

[tokiolax]

so if i have black shorts, and white compression shorts under..i could be called with a foul???? or is it only if the compression shorts are visible??

[LaxRef]

so if i have black shorts, and white compression shorts under..i could be called with a foul???? or is it only if the compression shorts are visible??

It's tricky. For NCAA rules:

First, if they aren't visible, you have no worries. I'm certainly not checking down anyone's shorts. :chuckle:

If they are visible, you need to worry about two things:

(1) Are they white, gray, or a dominant team color? (e.g., if your team's colors are red and black, your compression shorts must be white, gray, red, or black)

(2) Are they the same color as the visible compression shorts of every other player on your team?

If the answer is yes to both, then you're good to go. If not, the officials should ideally notice it prior to the game and tell you to correct it. However--especially in high school games--the officials often can't get there early enough to do a good job as the fashion police.

The same thing goes for underjerseys--although if they're tucked in it's unlikely they'd be visible--and sweatpants.

[tokiolax]

well my colors are red black and white..so it looks like im good..thanks laxref

[OutBurst]

I am still just a little lost on the sweatpants issue. Who can and who may not weat sweatpants? If my jersey has black shoulders and red chest, what color sweatpants should I be wearing? What about socks?

[rilax]

I am still just a little lost on the sweatpants issue. Who can and who may not weat sweatpants? If my jersey has black shoulders and red chest, what color sweatpants should I be wearing? What about socks?

Hears the deal. Any one can where sweatpants. Now if one player decides that he is going to where sweatpants they must be: (a) a solid color in NFHS or (b) of a solid color that is limited to white, gray or one of that team’s official colors In NCAA. Now once one player wears sweatpants then all players must wear the same color sweatpants. So in NFHS if your team wears sweatpants they must all be the same color. In NCAA the color has to be black, red, white, or gray and everyone must use that color. Note that the jersey you descried will be illegal in NFHS play starting in 2008 (see 1-8-4-note). They same rules apply to compression shorts and under-jerseys. Note however that a team could have white sweatpants, gray compression shorts, and black under-jerseys and still be within the rules. NCAA makes all players use the same color glove but does not specify what color they must be. Interesting to note that neither rulebook mentions shorts per say as even being a required piece of equipment let alone color restrictions. Socks have no rules assosated with them.

[rilax]

It's tricky.



If they are visible, you need to worry about two things:

(1) Are they white, gray, or a dominant team color? (e.g., if your team's colors are red and black, your compression shorts must be white, gray, red, or black)



Do you see this any place in the NFHS rule book seams all they want is the same solid color?

[LaxRef]

Do you see this any place in the NFHS rule book seams all they want is the same solid color?

Good point. I've edited my post so now it specifies NCAA rules.

[monmlax]

I have an American flag sticker on my visor, and am theonly one on my team with it. Does that mean a ref could call me for illeagal equipment?

[TheKOB]

Then it's illegal.

When did the rules change then? I bought my Cascade (original) in '98 when (I'd assume) it wasn't required to have something showing.

I guess my point is that I'd assume most refs use common sense...they can see that it's a cascade, therefore a lacrosse helmet, therefore legal.

[rilax]

I have an American flag sticker on my visor, and am theonly one on my team with it. Does that mean a ref could call me for illeagal equipment?
Rule 1-9-1-a says that all “decals and external markings shall be school-issued.” It makes no distinction on rather they are give to all some few one etc players. Also there is no restrictions on there size etc. So if you have a flag I would probable do nothing as I really don’t know who gave you the sticker (aka “external marking”) although some officials may infer that since you are the only one who has it means the school did not issue it. Now if this happens all they can do is have you leave the game until you have a new helmet or that you remove the sticker. (this is assuming that it is a flag etc now there are some items that you attached to the helmet that was designed to taunt your opponents etc etc be prepared to put you team man down for 3-mins and miss that game and then some more)

[LaxRef]

When did the rules change then? I bought my Cascade (original) in '98 when (I'd assume) it wasn't required to have something showing.

I can't find my 1998 NCAA rulebook, but this rule has been around as long as I can remember. It's in the 2001 rulebook, the oldest I could dig up this morning. I'm sure eme can tell us when the requirement was added.

I guess my point is that I'd assume most refs use common sense...they can see that it's a cascade, therefore a lacrosse helmet, therefore legal.

So, by that logic, if a helmet was legal in 1939, it's still legal today? The bottom line is that there are certainly things that are lacrosse helmets but not legal under NCAA or NFHS rules. Has to have the NOCSAE seal, has to have the warning, or it's not legal.

You're lucky you're a lacrosse player and not a fencer. In fencing, they routinely upgrade the equipment safety requirements for international competitions, requiring people to buy all new gear. But they don't just make a large leap; they increase them a little every few years, so people are always having to buy new gear. The widespread belief is that the equipment manufacturers bribe FIE (the international fencing organization) to do this.

[TheKOB]

So, by that logic, if a helmet was legal in 1939, it's still legal today? The bottom line is that there are certainly things that are lacrosse helmets but not legal under NCAA or NFHS rules. Has to have the NOCSAE seal, has to have the warning, or it's not legal.

A Cascade is by no means from 1930's. Also, the only thing that has changed on the Cascade is the cage and visor, be it the original, C2, CPro, or CPX. The reason for this is because if they were to change the shell, they'd have to go through the approval process again.

Basically, the seal isn't what makes it safe and protective. This rule is to prevent people from duct taping newspaper to their heads (a la Mighty Ducks) and calling it a lacrosse helmet. Just because it doesn't have the warning doesn't mean it's not approved, since mine probably came with a sticker with that stuff on it and I had to remove it to put on my school approved (Copyright 1998 Archbishop Martin Spalding High School) stickers.

Using this line of logic, someone could figure out "hey, that's an original cascade, they're still legal, I'm going to make the educated guess that even though it doesn't have any sort of warning on it, it's still a legal helmet"...even though that may seem to be a huge leap of faith.

You're lucky you're a lacrosse player and not a fencer. In fencing, they routinely upgrade the equipment safety requirements for international competitions, requiring people to buy all new gear. But they don't just make a large leap; they increase them a little every few years, so people are always having to buy new gear. The widespread belief is that the equipment manufacturers bribe FIE (the international fencing organization) to do this.

You're lucky you're not a fencing official....slashes are legal. :chuckle:

[LaxRef]

A Cascade is by no means from 1930's. Also, the only thing that has changed on the Cascade is the cage and visor, be it the original, C2, CPro, or CPX. The reason for this is because if they were to change the shell, they'd have to go through the approval process again.

Basically, the seal isn't what makes it safe and protective. This rule is to prevent people from duct taping newspaper to their heads (a la Mighty Ducks) and calling it a lacrosse helmet. Just because it doesn't have the warning doesn't mean it's not approved, since mine probably came with a sticker with that stuff on it and I had to remove it to put on my school approved (Copyright 1998 Archbishop Martin Spalding High School) stickers.

It may be approved, but if it doesn't have the seal and the warning, the NCAA says it is not legal. Those are obviously not the same thing.


Using this line of logic, someone could figure out "hey, that's an original cascade, they're still legal, I'm going to make the educated guess that even though it doesn't have any sort of warning on it, it's still a legal helmet"...even though that may seem to be a huge leap of faith.

And yet, that type of logic will likely lose in the courtroom in the course of a liability lawsuit.

[QUOTE=TheKOB]You're lucky you're not a fencing official....slashes are legal. :chuckle:

Who says I'm not a fencing official?

BTW, "slashing"--cutting with the edge--is legal only in saber, not foil or epee.

[TheKOB]

It may be approved, but if it doesn't have the seal and the warning, the NCAA says it is not legal. Those are obviously not the same thing.

I guess it just gets to me that sometimes the spirit (what a rule is supposed to do or accomplish) of the rule isn't followed because the letter of the rule is being followed.


Who says I'm not a fencing official?

BTW, "slashing"--cutting with the edge--is legal only in saber, not foil or epee.

I thought about that right when I posted...you do seem to know more than the normal person. I'm also glad I'm not a fencer....a four letter word with three vowels is just too much for me.

[orangeman17]

since were on the topic of helmets, i was wondering if it is okay to put colored tape on a white helmet, like stripes or something, or is that illegal? cuz i just put blue electrical tape on my white clh, and it does look pretty sweet :grin: , but if a ref noticed it would it be a penalty or would i have to take off the tape etc....?

[yesdog]

while we're on the subject of helmet alterations and rules I have 2 questions that have stumped me:
1.) on page 13 section 9 letter b entitled player equipment, of the 2005 NFHS rulebook it says that "A face mask with a center bar from top to bottom and the lateral (horizontal) openings shall not exceed 1.5 inches...." I also took it upon myself to measure both my Gait field and C-PRO helmet on the last horizontal group of bars and both measure over a 1.5 space. Does that mean that all cascade and gait helmets are illegall under these rules? I might add also that the center bar does not extend (on C-PROs and Gait helmets) to the top on either helmet. Would that make it illegal?
2. My facemask was recently bent in on a shot. I bought a facemask manifactured by STX/Nami that has no openings (horizontally) over 1.5 inches and a center bar all the way to the top. So it matches all of the rules in the NFHS. The rulebook says in the same section as mentioned above that the helmet cannot be altered to decrease protection. If I add this facemask, since my mine is no illegal becasue of the huge dent in it, wouldn't my helmet still be technically legal?

[yesdog]

I was wondering if any of ya'll knew why the bottoms of all the facemask are larger than 1.5 inches when the NFHS rules say they can't be but everybody wears them?