Helmet Debate Escalates in Girls Lacrosse
July 2, 2015
Recently the Florida High School Activities Association escalated the girls lacrosse helmet debate to higher levels by mandating the equipment during competition involving its member schools. I’m guessing their hearts are in the right place; but without a recognized performance standard yet established for such protective head gear, there are important practical questions added to the philosophical debate over the efficacy of such a requirement at this time. Here’s what we posted on this topic nearly two years ago.
One of our newest sports – girls lacrosse – is today presenting one of the oldest conundrums in competitive athletics.
On one side of the complex issues are many moms and dads who cite the dangers their daughters confront from contact to the head and face by other players’ sticks or the ball. They want hard helmets with face masks required in girls lacrosse. Many coaches and administrators agree.
On the other side of the issues are the “purists,” including the official position of US Lacrosse, who are concerned that by increasing head and face protection the rule makers would invite the kind of hard and high contact that would fundamentally alter the nature of the game and lead to more serious injuries in girls lacrosse.
This is the classic dilemma that the leadership and playing rules bodies of sports organizations have faced many times over many years for many sports. Justifiably.
When football added helmets, then face masks and then mouth protectors to the list of required equipment, there was a significant reduction in broken noses and chipped teeth, but techniques of blocking and tackling changed. The protected head and face became much more of a target and weapon than it had been before, and the unprotectable neck and spine became more at risk.
Some would argue that ice hockey’s experience is similar to football’s history. The discussion in the soccer community regarding hard helmets for goalkeepers and soft helmets for all other players often revolves around similar questions. Will required protective equipment change the game? And will one of the changes be that the game becomes still rougher and even more injurious, trading “moderate” injuries for more catastrophic?
While the debate continues over additional head protection requirements for girls lacrosse, and other sports, both sides seem to agree that the burden of the rule makers to be out-front in the search for ways to improve the rules is matched by the in-the-trenches responsibility of coaches to teach the game and officials to administer the contests in accordance with existing rules which already place a premium on participant safety.
Focus on Fun
June 2, 2017
Thousands of hours of professional development programs have been devoted to the topic of change and how to cope with what has changed, what is changing and what will change. But I’ve been impressed recently that it is more worthwhile to focus on what has not changed, is not changing and is unlikely to ever change.
John O’Sullivan, author and creator of Changing the Game Project (see changingthegameproject.com), brought this most powerfully to my mind in an article he wrote for the Spring/Summer 2017 edition of Midwest Sports Planner, titled “Some Things Never Change: Applying the Amazon Business Model to Youth Sports.”
While I can think of several things about the Amazon business model that could corrupt youth sports, the point Mr. O’Sullivan makes is based on this answer Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos gave in an interview. Mr. Bezos said:
“I almost never get the question: ‘What’s not going to change in the next ten years?’ And I submit to you that question is actually more important (than what is going to change) because you build a business strategy around the things that are stable ...”
Mr. O’Sullivan asks: “What if we did the same thing in youth sports? What if we stopped worrying about everything that changes and instead focus on the one thing that does not?”
That one thing, according to O’Sullivan, is why kids play sports. “The answer, according to every piece of research I have ever read, in nearly nine out of ten athletes surveyed, is this: ‘Because it’s fun. I play sports because I enjoy them.’”
This squares with all the research we’ve received at the Michigan High School Athletic Association, and it admonishes local, league and state leaders of school sports to search for and deliver policies, procedures and programs that will keep fun foremost in school sports.
Fun does not mean frivolous or inconsequential. It doesn’t mean there can’t be high standards of eligibility and conduct. It doesn’t mean there are not aches and pains or highs and lows or lessons to be learned.
When properly focused, competitive interscholastic athletics trades in difficult fun, devoted friendships and dedication to fitness throughout life. And we should market ourselves accordingly.