[Helmets] Thudguard

Mark McNeill bashed at the keyboard and came up with:

Quoted message said:

=3FCorrect and rapid decision making is essential for a batsman at the
crease and our research could have significance not just for cricket but
for other mentally demanding sports and professions where people have to
wear head protection.

What is mentally demanding from cricket? They dont even have to count
anymore.

Chris Malcolm said:

Baldness is common enough in men...

Jenny the other day:
"Daddy, why don't you have enough hair?"
:-(

This follows, a few weeks ago:
"Daddy, why do some men have short hair?"
(I don't, because DW prefers it long).

--
Danny Colyer (my reply address is valid but checked infrequently)
<URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

Helen Deborah Vecht said:

I propose we design a cotton-wool all-in-one suit (like a Babygro) for
the first morning of the second quarter of 2006. (Maybe Sheldon Brown
would be interested?)

This suit would only have small apertures for the eyes, ears and mouth.

It would be constructed of finest flame-resistant materials (cotton wool
might need much flame-proofing) and have poppers to facilitate
nappy-changing. Available in blue or pink, this would, no doubt, satisfy
many anxious grandparents and first-time parents.

Poppers? Nappies? I don't think we need go that far.

Quoted message said:

After all, one injury to a baby is one too many.

THINK OF THE CHILDRUN!

Sod the children. I want one for myself!

James
--
James Annan
see web pages for email
http://www.ne.jp/asahi/julesandjames/home/
http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/

Mark McNeill said:

=3FWe do however stress that improved safety when wearing a helmet far
outweighs the small negative effects of wearing one.=3F

Whether the last para is true of cycle helmets, I don't know.

Whether it is even true in context seems somewhat speculative. When I
was at school no batsman ever got hurt by a cricket ball in the face
(and I did my best to make sure that a few got hit). But of course it is
de rigeur for anyone presenting data which proves limited or negative
effects from helmet wearing to summarise with "but we still believe they
are really useful" (c) Crook and Feikh.

James
--
James Annan
see web pages for email
http://www.ne.jp/asahi/julesandjames/home/
http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/

James Annan said:

Mark McNeill said:

=3FWe do however stress that improved safety when wearing a helmet far
outweighs the small negative effects of wearing one.=3F

Whether the last para is true of cycle helmets, I don't know.

Whether it is even true in context seems somewhat speculative. When I
was at school no batsman ever got hurt by a cricket ball in the face
(and I did my best to make sure that a few got hit). But of course it is
de rigeur for anyone presenting data which proves limited or negative
effects from helmet wearing to summarise with "but we still believe they
are really useful" (c) Crook and Feikh.

Depends what you mean by 'not hurt'. Bloody nose and broken glasses
were a not unknown occurrence.

...d

David Martin said:

James Annan said:

Mark McNeill said:

=3FWe do however stress that improved safety when wearing a helmet far
outweighs the small negative effects of wearing one.=3F

Whether the last para is true of cycle helmets, I don't know.

Whether it is even true in context seems somewhat speculative. When I
was at school no batsman ever got hurt by a cricket ball in the face
(and I did my best to make sure that a few got hit). But of course it is
de rigeur for anyone presenting data which proves limited or negative
effects from helmet wearing to summarise with "but we still believe they
are really useful" (c) Crook and Feikh.

Depends what you mean by 'not hurt'. Bloody nose and broken glasses
were a not unknown occurrence.

Sure, but that's not got much to do with cricket :-)

James
--
James Annan
see web pages for email
http://www.ne.jp/asahi/julesandjames/home/
http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/

James Annan said:

Mark McNeill said:

=3FWe do however stress that improved safety when wearing a helmet far
outweighs the small negative effects of wearing one.=3F

Whether the last para is true of cycle helmets, I don't know.

Whether it is even true in context seems somewhat speculative. When I
was at school no batsman ever got hurt by a cricket ball in the face
(and I did my best to make sure that a few got hit). But of course it is
de rigeur for anyone presenting data which proves limited or negative
effects from helmet wearing to summarise with "but we still believe they
are really useful" (c) Crook and Feikh.

Hate to bugger up the stats but I managed to catch a cricket ball with
my face once. It is really something I do not wish to repeat. Then
again, it didn't actually do any real damage - unless you count blood
and pain.

Bertie Wiggins said:

At last, the protection every child deserves!

http://www.thudguard.com/

WTF is the DTI recording stats like this for? Dept for Health I might
believe.

Not Responding wrote on Friday 21 October 2005 17:01:

Quoted message said:

Hate to bugger up the stats but I managed to catch a cricket ball with
my face once. It is really something I do not wish to repeat. Then
again, it didn't actually do any real damage - unless you count blood
and pain.

Happened to me too - down on one knee to pick up a trickling ball in a
rough outfield, ball hit tussock, jumped up and the seam chewed my lip.

--
Alex

From address is a spam block.
Reply-to address is valid.

Not Responding said:

Hate to bugger up the stats but I managed to catch a cricket ball with
my face once. It is really something I do not wish to repeat. Then
again, it didn't actually do any real damage - unless you count blood
and pain.

I bet you didn't. I bet you dropped it with your face, not caught it
unless you had your mouth wide open ;-)

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

"Bertie Wiggins" <cycling_remove_bertie@yahoo_dot_co_dot_uk> wrote in
message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

At last, the protection every child deserves!

http://www.thudguard.com/

Why is that the posts with the word 'helmet' in the header produces the
longest thread.

"Cliff" <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

"Bertie Wiggins" <cycling_remove_bertie@yahoo_dot_co_dot_uk> wrote in
message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

At last, the protection every child deserves!

http://www.thudguard.com/

Quoted message said:

Why is that the posts with the word 'helmet' in the header produces the
longest thread.

The 'Tyres of Gorgonzola' thread is *much* longer on my newsreader...

--
Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
Edgware.

Not Responding said:

James Annan said:

Mark McNeill said:

=3FWe do however stress that improved safety when wearing a helmet
far outweighs the small negative effects of wearing one.=3F
Whether the last para is true of cycle helmets, I don't know.

Whether it is even true in context seems somewhat speculative. When I
was at school no batsman ever got hurt by a cricket ball in the face
(and I did my best to make sure that a few got hit). But of course it
is de rigeur for anyone presenting data which proves limited or
negative effects from helmet wearing to summarise with "but we still
believe they are really useful" (c) Crook and Feikh.

Hate to bugger up the stats but I managed to catch a cricket ball with
my face once. It is really something I do not wish to repeat. Then
again, it didn't actually do any real damage - unless you count blood
and pain.

Hey, I'm not saying no-one got hit - on and off the sports field :-) My
point is precisely that the incidence of _serious_ injury is so low as
to be effectively negligible.

James
--
James Annan
see web pages for email
http://www.ne.jp/asahi/julesandjames/home/
http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/

Cliff said:

Why is that the posts with the word 'helmet' in the header produces the
longest thread.

Because it's a matter of opinion, conflicting information, gut
feeling, peer pressure and tradition much more than of tangible facts
or statistics that actually answer the Big Question.

At least that's what I got from hundreds of postings and dozends of
more or less obviously flawed articles.

Robert

Alex Potter said:

Happened to me too - down on one knee to pick up a trickling ball in a
rough outfield, ball hit tussock, jumped up and the seam chewed my lip.

Net session. Batsman drives ball back along the carpet at speed.
Bowler waiting in front of me sticks out foot. Ball flies up into my
face.

R.

Robert Kiessling said:

Cliff said:

Why is that the posts with the word 'helmet' in the header produces the
longest thread.

Because it's a matter of opinion, conflicting information, gut
feeling, peer pressure and tradition much more than of tangible facts
or statistics that actually answer the Big Question.

At least that's what I got from hundreds of postings and dozends of
more or less obviously flawed articles.

So that is your opinion based on your gut feeling?

...d

Graeme Dods said:

Helen Deborah Vecht said:

Bertie Wiggins <cycling_remove_bertie@yahoo_dot_co_dot_uk>typed

Quoted message said:

At last, the protection every child deserves!

Quoted message said:

http://www.thudguard.com/

How horrible!

My son has proprioception problems which means he falls over a fair bit
more than most other kids. I wouldn't dream of sticking one of these
monstrosities on his head! He runs/walks along, falls flat on his face,
gets a bump on his head, he gets up again. Without a "thudguard" (or
similar) he's now got to the stage where if he falls (which is getting less
common), he almost always protects himself so that his head doesn't contact
the ground. I'm pretty certain that with one of these lumps of foam he
wouldn't have developed to that stage anywhere near as quickly, if at all.

I was in Lewisham hospital once and a young man (perhaps mid twenties)
came in. He clearly had extreme motor co-ordination difficulties
(cerebral palsy perhaps), and could not walk properly. He wore a soft
foam helmet - it seemed to me an excellent way of preventing minor
bumps, cuts or abrasions.

On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 17:08:34 +0100, Al C-F
<[email hidden]> said in
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

WTF is the DTI recording stats like this for? Dept for Health I might
believe.

It used to be the old HASS/LASS scheme which was with DtI for
historical reasons having (I believe) grown out of industrial accident
recording. But that's all moot since it's now been outsourced to
RoSPA.

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken