ASTM and US Lacrosse
since 2012 have pursued a women’s lacrosse-specific headgear standard that would be consistent with the sport’s current rules. Among factors in the development of a standard are ventilation and compatibility with existing protective eyewear. With headgear being optional, comfort, fit and ease of use also have been considered in the draft standard. In more specific language, the standard states: • The exterior surface of the headgear must be flexible, confirmed by
using the drop apparatus, a quarter-inch rod on a flat modular elastomeric programmer (MEP) anvil and contact paste. • During testing, the peak acceleration of any impact shall not exceed 80g. The helmet shall remain intact with no visible cracks or damage through the thickness of the outer covering. • Materials coming into contact with the wearer, except replaceable padding, shall not undergo significant loss of strength or flexibility, or other physical change as a result of perspiration, oil or grease from the wearer’s skin and hair. • Each manufacturer will test independently and regularly each model and size of headgear
offered for sale. The independent laboratory will be accredited by the American Association for Laboratory Accreditation (A2LA) for this specification.
“I don’t think this is the last we are going to hear about this.”
— Vero Beach (Fla.) coach Shannon Dean
“US Lacrosse has been working with ASTM to develop a consensus headgear standard for women’s lacrosse based on the results of research and the importance of appropriately balancing player safety with game integrity,” Carpenetti said.
After the initial FHSAA ruling, US Lacrosse has implemented a call to action among coaches, athletics directors and other lacrosse constituents in Florida to contact members of the FHSAA board of directors, asking them to reconsider their mandate. ”It’s crazy the FHSAA would make a decision like this, assuming they know more about this than US Lacrosse,” Jensen Beach (Fla.) High coach Michele
Ruth said. “It changes our game. I’ve already heard from some college coaches that they will not recruit Florida players if they are wearing helmets and no one else is. I’m not in favor of a rule change that makes us play differently than everyone else.” An online petition to overturn the decision had gained more than 3,200 signatures by June 22. The board’s next meeting is Sept. 28-29.
A similar situation occurred in February 2013, when a pair of Maryland state delegates introduced a bill in the state assembly to require youth and high school girls’ players to wear helmets. The proposed legislation was later drastically modified and effectively pulled after US Lacrosse’s input. It changed to requiring mandatory sport-specific education, training and certification for youth and high school coaches consistent with US Lacrosse curricula. “I don’t think this is the last we are going to hear about this,” Dean said. LM
— Corey McLaughlin and Laurel Pfahler contributed to this story.
A Publication of US Lacrosse August 2014 >> LACROSSE MAGAZINE 25
Headgear debate centers on Florida
STUNNER Sunshine State
after ‘short-sighted and vague’ mandate By Paul Ohanian
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68