Eye protection - Good or Bad?

AndyGaut 7
keely 6
IRN BRU 5
ragyrascal 5
The.Rampage.Rado 5
shepdogg 4
juveniliahockey 4
JiMMM 4
Bulsara 4
Rutter 3

 The Field Hockey Forum is the resource for players, coaches and umpires of Field Hockey. Join FHF now to have full access to all that we have to offer! Don't be satisfied with lurking when you can interact with thousands of other FHF’rs, take part in Competitions, win Prizes, download Coaching Papers, discover our vast Photo library and get rid of this message - Register Now!

[SavageFH]

Here in the US many schools are making players wear eye protection, some States it is compulsory to wear them in any High School games. One of the local schools in my area had a bad eye injury last year where the ball deflected up and hit a girl above the eye, obviously schools these days are worried about legal action, but personally i refuse to stock the goggles in our store because i think it increases other injuries! 1) because the false sense of security it gives and more importantly 2) by their nature the goggles have blind spots and obscure the line of sight.

My argument does not sit well sometimes with parents who are obviously concerned, but i believe there is risk in everything we do, i've broken bones in my hand, spilt my head open a few times, and got knocked unconcious once. Is it the 'where's there's blame, there's a claim' society or is goggles the way forward? Personally, i think it's sometimes down to poor coaching, tackling from wrong side, playing skills learnt on astro on grass ie flat sticks too lown down. I would like to know what other people think. I never saw goggles being used in the UK or Europe until coming here 8)

[Dan]

To me the reason to buiy from a store instead of online is to have a chance to try things on, as well as get advice on sizing, fit ,etc. 

If your store were in my area, your attitude would be one less reason to buy from you and one more reason to go online.  I say this as someone who used to run a mail-order business (not sports gear but I know how much service matters and how little it takes to impress a customer; either positively or negatively).  Give them a reason to go elsewhere for one thing and if they have a decent buying experience, you've lost a customer permanently.

If you feel strongly about this, type something up and post it near the rack of goggles.  Some will chosoe not to buy them based on your advice and feel great that you saved them money.  Others will decide to bujy them and may still be glad to have seen your opinion of the pros and cons.  But making the decision for them seems like a bad business decision.  It's not as if goggles will take up a lot of space or cost a lot to keep in inventory.  Why risk alienating your customers, especially if their coach is recommending goggles?

[nerd_is_the_word]

Yeah savage i agree with you m8. this idea of goggles is just stupid, first of they would limit your line of sight. Secondly unless they are made of bullet proof glass and cost a fair bit then there is a chane that they will shatter upon gettin hit and u have even more troubles. Im willing to be corrected on this point but personally i have never seen nor heard of somebody losing their eyesight from a hockey game? ive seen bruises and cuts and all that but they are always back playing, so unless these goggles significantly reduce the chance of a certain injury i dont see the point.

And personally i rekon these thing will create more troubles... wat happens when somebody sprays water from the turf up into your face? thats not going to help your eyesight is it. I reckon america has to get out of this 'im hurt and its not my fault' idea and just learn that shit happens, its not the small stuff you sweat. Like how often do you see a really bad eye injury in hockey that causes perminant damage?

[garli]

I've never seen this in field hockey, are they like the lacrosse goggles?  I'd assume the parents that want them are the same parents who want them for their lacrosse daughters.  Even though they're required for lax. 

Do you only stock field hockey gear in your store?

[Magpie]

While people are buying goggles offer them some buble wrap for the rest of their body, or suggest a nurf ball instead of a hard hockey ball or how about a marshmallow hockey stick (soft, sweet and you can eat it).

when going out to umpire and there is no ball i'll say to who ever will listen "At least no body will get hurt now"

[garli]

What if you trip?

[hockeystore]

i rather people keep the "goggles" optional.  :-\

[Magpie]

The bubble wrap should protect you. As this started out as a serious post I feel I should contribute in a positive manner.

I do not see the logic in the use of goggles asspecially if they are mandatory, the rules already provide advice on protective equipment;
Field players are permitted to wear gloves for protection which do not increase the natural size of the hands significantly. It is recommended that field players wear shin, ankle and mouth protection.
Having local rules does not always serve a greater good if anything it can be a detrement to them. It is like associations that ban a type of skill for local games then these kids go to a state torurnament and find out that a skill is allowed and they are at a disadvatage because they have not praticed it or been exposed to it.

[SavageFH]

Dan,

Many thanks for the advice! My argument is with goggles, but thanks for the business tip!

I am predominatly a distributor for a well known hockey manufacturer and sell field hockey equipment only, so unless we make it, i dont really stock it! I might of lied a little on not stocking goggles on my principles, but i was trying to get some views on the use of goggles. I'm all for personal choice, same as wearing gloves, boxes, face masks, not sure if making it mandatory is the right way. But I feel it is on it's way nationwide.

Garli, yes they are lacrosse goggles. Mandatory in Massachussetts, but when they play in futures nationals, they choose not to wear them.

[Wassie]

Savage, I agree that poor coaching and technique makes a player more at risk for head injuries. Laying your stick on the ground to trap is a very very bad idea. It is a lazy and poor trapping/tackling technique picked up from indoor that has found its way to turf hockey. Also, many players bend at the waist instead of bending their knees and thus have their head and eyes pointing down. This gives them poor peripheral vision and makes it difficult to duck or swerve out of the way.

Let us not get into tackling on the wrong side or the reverse stick tomahawk hit!! They are just major accidents waiting to happen!

[zippytime]

tackling on the wrong side

I cant believe people are still talking about a wrong side for tackling seen as though there isnt one

[fh4me2000]

Maybe soon we'll give everyone full body armour and we'll call it Ice Hockey on turf.  ;D
It's just wrong. I kills your peripheral subjecting you to increase danger. I know it's mandatory in MA, and I hope it stays there only. I thinks it's a money making scam. These goggles manufacturer see the potential of mega $$$$ if they can get every Field hockey player in the US to wear goggles. I've always that if you too afraid of being hit, then you will get hit.
If you want to wear goggles, swim don't play Hockey.

[garli]

Hey Savage.  When you say box, are you refering to pelvic protector? 


My current team nearly died when my coach told me to stop adjusting my box and get on the field ... because here, it's got a bot of a different meaning.  One which would make that comment all kinds of not appropirate. 

[Kilmory]

If you want to wear goggles, swim don't play Hockey.

 ;D ;D ;D

I also disapprove of making goggles mandatory, but perhaps for a slightly different reason. I firmly believe that the more protection you provide, the less care players care about creating danger. How many times have you 'pulled' a hit when you realise your back swing/follow through may hit another player? If they were protected would you back off as easily as you are less likely to really hurt them?

Don't believe me, just look at keepers for instance. Not so long ago raised shot at goal were a rarity, and if the relitivley unprotected keeper was hit then the offending player would (usually) appologise. Protection has improved drastically, and now some players seem to enjoy trying to hurt keepers and certainly pay no regard to their safety even though there is nothing in the rules that say the keeper is not protected.

I also agree with the point that if you have protection on you feel safer and therefore will potentially take more chances. I think the goggles will provide the required protection from a loose ball, but even a keepers helmet wont stand up to a stick!

[Magpie]

Zippytime - for most of us oldies the wrong side means the left side due to the way the rules used to be (or the way they were umpired). The "wrong" side reference should disapperar with time.
Garli - Box does mean other things (even here in Oz). I guess it was the context it was being used in, it is so much easier to say Box than Groin/Pelvic protector (again us old politicaly incorect farts). Think of the reaction if the coach said "do you have/use protection?"

I suggest that somebody ask for the evidence that support the introduction of goggles. I'm with kilmory in that goggles will only encourage people to take more risks.