I'm really kind of surprised at all the people who are against their daughters wearing masks. No disrespect to anyone but it's surprising.

Not sure if this was in part including myself in "all the people", but just to reiterate, one thing I am not is against my daughter or any player wearing a mask. My point is and always will be, that it should be the player/parent/family decision. Personal freedom. Personal responsibility.

 

I've seen other online venues with people posting pictures/videos of their kids after being hit in the face as a means to show support by somehow trying to shame or belittle those who disagree with the new rule.....my question to them is simply, if you are such a supporter, why wasn't your kid wearing a mask to begin with? Does someone have to TELL you it's OK to protect your child in a manner you wish?

Just make it mandatory and there won't be any pics like that

Technology overall has improved so much that it has become dangerous in some cases of misplayed balls. It has and will always be an inherent danger of the sport, but why would we not use technology to protect from serious injury as well?

 

I have had two players, both excellent defenders, take balls to the face - one broke an orbital socket and one had several teeth knocked out. Less we forget how important vanity still is to teenage girls.

 

Check out this video:

 

 

I was at this game in Tampa sitting right behind first base dugout when it happened - it sounded like someone dropped a watermelon off the 10th floor of the hotel into the parking lot. Gruesome and very similar to the Aroldis Chapman comebacker a few years ago.

 

Accidents and injuries will continue to happen and be part of the game. And its the right of each player and/or parent to decide whether or not to wear a facemask. But if you are not wearing one because of what a college coach or others may think, then you need to re-evaluate your decision making process. I am glad the UK pitcher who started to where a facemask several years ago broke the macho mold of thinking and brought this issue to the forefront.

 

Science and technology are available and can make the game safer. We have vaccinations available to protect our daughters (and sons) - polio, TB, HPV, etc. As parents, why would we ever choose to take on inherent risks that can be prevented?

But again, to each their own.

 

This is a reasonable take.

 

And not to argue, because it is a fair response...however, my qualm with the technology angle is this.....If improvements in the equipment has moved the sport to a level of being overtly unsafe for the participants, then why not address the offending equipment rather than mandating heretofore unnecessary protective equipment?

This is a reasonable take.

 

And not to argue, because it is a fair response...however, my qualm with the technology angle is this.....If improvements in the equipment has moved the sport to a level of being overtly unsafe for the participants, then why not address the offending equipment rather than mandating heretofore unnecessary protective equipment?

 

Games, equipment, and players change and evolve over time. Players are also more skilled, bigger, stronger, better trained than ever before. Couple that with the evolution in equipment, and we are where we are currently at. It's not one thing, one piece of equipment that has "suddenly" made the game more dangerous. It's been a slow evolution. I get the idea of personal freedom. But part of the reason why games have rules is to create a safe environment. In a structured, regulated game, I see no reason why the powers that be shouldn't be able to implement a rule or mandatory use of equipment that would make the game safer. Getting rid of hot bats will not eliminate the possibility of facial injuries. Facemasks will.

This is a reasonable take.

 

And not to argue, because it is a fair response...however, my qualm with the technology angle is this.....If improvements in the equipment has moved the sport to a level of being overtly unsafe for the participants, then why not address the offending equipment rather than mandating heretofore unnecessary protective equipment?

 

There is too much money in the industry to regulate the equipment. Organizations come up with guidelines and requirements and bat companies figure out ways around it. So bats can be tested originally and then stamped "okay" but there is not a way to effectively or cost wise check bats on a ongoing basis. There is a lot that can happen to bats once they are purchased off the shelf. Most bats today get hotter with use. Or once they are "broken in". And then you have the ability to modify bat performance as well. So monitoring equipment is not as easy as it sounds.

Like I said earlier 1st, 3rd, and pitcher should be the ONLY players required to wear them....if it goes beyond that, soon we'll have 9 catchers on the field.

Facemask or no facemask, it's all about getting the job done. My daughter was personally told by a college coach to wear a facemask and heart guard. I figure that you need to keep thoughts to minimal and focus on task at hand. If wearing a facemask provides you with confidence and focusing on said task, then wear one. I've seen a pither and a couple of fielders take a ball to face with mask on to still be able to get outs. If they didn't have the mask on, I'm not to sure they could of produced the outs, especially the pitcher. Luckly, I've never seen a player get hit without a mask, but I've seen plenty of girls hesitate with mask on and without. Only solutions are to keep working on becoming a better fielder and using whatever means to take doubt out of ones mind even if it means wearing a suit of armor but you best get the outs:)

Not sure if this was in part including myself in "all the people", but just to reiterate, one thing I am not is against my daughter or any player wearing a mask. My point is and always will be, that it should be the player/parent/family decision. Personal freedom. Personal responsibility.

 

I've seen other online venues with people posting pictures/videos of their kids after being hit in the face as a means to show support by somehow trying to shame or belittle those who disagree with the new rule.....my question to them is simply, if you are such a supporter, why wasn't your kid wearing a mask to begin with? Does someone have to TELL you it's OK to protect your child in a manner you wish?

 

Should catchers be able to choose to play without a mask or chest protector?

 

Should batters be able to choose to not wear a helmet?

 

What about other sports that mandate face protection? Should they be allowed to opt out of wearing it?

The personal freedom/responsibility part I could possibly agree with on a travel/club team level but not on the HS level. There is a large distinction between the two, but we are talking KHSSA regulating for HS participation and I tend to agree with their decision on this one. (that was hard for me to say lol)

At this level, there is a greater disparity between talent of players/teams that individual players (and even HS coaches) don't recognize. At HS level, there are girls who do not participate year round, small schools (meaning often "asked" to play), broad age range, sometimes quasi recreational -based on the same field versus full-time, high-level (sometimes D-I)caliber, older/bigger/stronger, very serious players/teams................that is why mask should be required at corners & Pitcher.

I have witnessed HUGE disparities on HS fields where I truly feared the outcomes of not protecting players put in these positions.

 

On the travel/club level....closer age, similar level and you signed on knowing the caliber, more of a personal choice/responsibility thing.

I think all high school, middle school and travel teams should wear masks. I also think adult slow pitch pitchers should wear masks. Just my opinion of course

Why not just move the bases back to 90 Feet where they belong?

Why not just move the bases back to 90 Feet where they belong?

 

Because it's softball and not baseball.

Plus they would stay play in to protect against the bunt.

Because it's softball and not baseball.

Plus they would stay play in to protect against the bunt.

 

Thats my point why is it different to start with?

Thats my point why is it different to start with?

 

You really want girls running 90 foot bases while the players play 45 foot from home plate? The outfielders would be playing right outside the If.

Why not just move the bases back to 90 Feet where they belong?

 

It wouldn't change positioning. Softballs are less tightly wound than baseballs. Add in the obvious physical differences between women and men, and the ball simply isn't hit as hard. The shorter bases scales the game back to fit those two factors. Infielders would still be playing in to prevent infield hits and bunts. 90 foot bases would also put second base into mid center field with the average 200 ft fences. 90 foot bases would really unbalance and mess up the game.