Helmets for cricketers instead of cyclists

This sub-forum all discussions about this "lively" subject. All topics that are substantially about helmets will be moved here, if not placed here correctly in the first place.
User avatar
RickH
Posts: 3674
Joined: 5 Mar 2012, 6:39pm
Location: Horwich, Lancs.

Re: Helmets for cricketers instead of cyclists

Postby RickH » 1 Dec 2017, 4:27pm

thirdcrank wrote:My main point was that the conventions / instincts / whatever, which deter somebody from targeting the human head with a cricket ball are diminished if that head is protected with a helmet. I don't know what the current rules are about fielders wearing them as it's a long time since I watched any, but a fielder in a helmet might have fewer concerns about being close enough to the bat to risk being hit by it rather than the ball.

Reminds me of my friend at school.

He was knocked out while wicket-keeping (before anyone wore helmets, at least I don't remember seeing one in those days - mid 70s). A ball was bowled, the lad batting took a mighty swing back to hit the oncoming ball. As he did so he lost his grip on the bat which flew back over the wicket & hit my friend on the head! :shock:

Bonefishblues
Posts: 4506
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Helmets for cricketers instead of cyclists

Postby Bonefishblues » 1 Dec 2017, 5:41pm

The utility cyclist wrote:batsmen less skilled at high balls nowadays and get struck more often including death, classic risk compensation.
Helmet manufacturers have stated Phil Hughes death could not be prevented by ANY modern/improved helmet (he was wearing one), solution should be to ban bouncers {FFE - family-friendly edit }. I say this as an ex medium quick/
Gridiron had deaths and they brought in helmets, consequence, more TBIs and even more deaths, suicides, early onset dementia etc, boxing, more tbi cases, helmets are NEVER EVER THE ANSWER!

Are there stats on this?

User avatar
The utility cyclist
Posts: 1633
Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm

Re: Helmets for cricketers instead of cyclists

Postby The utility cyclist » 1 Dec 2017, 8:36pm

I haven't looked tbh but I've watched the sport a fair bit since the very early 80s played a couple of seasons in the North at a reasonably competitive std and two more in the South.
So anecdotal observations at all levels.
However just like nfl, just like cycling, just like boxing wearing helmets has had a negative effect on overall safety including to the head, the effects of risk homeostasis are very well documented and can be seen. You only have to look at the differences between rugby and gridiron (I've played both though gridiron briefly), rugby banned shoulder charges, have clamped down on head shots, have made penalising reckless tackles more so players have adapted what they do and take more responsibility.
In cricket the helmet clearly doesn't prevent death, in fact it's such a rare occurence even despite the reckless and deliberate targetting of the head that there are THREE incidents of death from a batter .dying after being struck by a ball, two in the helmet wearing era, one in 1870.
Wearing helmets was never the solution to something that was not a major problem before.