Should be it compulsory to wear a helmet ? The Rock says no !.

Bud Wiser · July 07, 2009, 08:33:45 AM

The Rock is in charge of training a juvenile team. Has anyone asked him his views on whether young lads who are learning the game should have helmets and if like him they choose not to wear helmets that it is clear as to who is responsible if there is a serious incident, the person in charge of the training or the young lad without the helmet. I admire Diarmuid O'Sullivan for his contribution to the GAA and particularly his coaching of young lads, (I mentioned on another thread that he was coaching young lads on an opposing team during a game) but I fail to see how his decision over a helmet is deserving of such debate other than it was, as already stated, a reason for thrashing out more GPA rubbish. In any event, we now have a situation where a Cork player refuses to wear a helmet to add to the ones who wants to play with a different hurling ball, the ones who refuse to wear their socks pulled up for the parade, the ones who go on strike etc, etc and it is becoming clear that soon a few more will be refusing to wear helmets in Cork, not because of the uncomfortable attributes of the helmet but because their heads have got too big for them.

Bing Crosby . · July 07, 2009, 12:44:59 PM

No way should it be compulsory . It's up to the indivdual and that's it .
C u n t i n g insurance interfering yet again on our liberties .

Bud Wiser · July 07, 2009, 01:07:46 PM

I'd say its the boys who want to sell the helmets that are interfeering more than the insurance. Wasn't there a few of the Cork boys trying to endorse ones for Aldi and Lidl. See, I can't post without mentioning Cork.

Bing Crosby . · July 07, 2009, 01:47:26 PM

Quote from: Bud Wiser on July 07, 2009, 01:07:46 PM
I'd say its the boys who want to sell the helmets that are interfeering more than the insurance. Wasn't there a few of the Cork boys trying to endorse ones for Aldi and Lidl. See, I can't post without mentioning Cork.

Yes I've noticed this Cork thing with you Bud . Are you sure your not Gul/RedRebel/Relliers aswell ?

.

Re Helmets . Are you sure about this ? I wouldn't be too sure about that . There is simply no way any helmet manufacturer would ( or should ) hold any sway on the rule makers within the GAA . It has to be the scummy insurance crowd encroaching further into all before it .

AZOffaly · July 07, 2009, 01:54:19 PM

Or perhaps there's a genuine safety reason for it? I mean in fairness people have died from getting belts on the head, and it's common sense that wearing a protective helmet reduces the risk significantly. In soccer, you must wear shinpads, in boxing, you must wear gumshields and in amateur boxing you must wear a protective headgear. I don't see the problem in the GAA enforcing a rule like this to be fair.

If you cycle a motorbike, you wear a helmet, if you drive a car you wear a seatbelt. If you hurl, you wear a helmet. Sometimes people need to be forced to take care of themselves.

INDIANA · July 07, 2009, 01:58:33 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on July 07, 2009, 01:54:19 PM
Or perhaps there's a genuine safety reason for it? I mean in fairness people have died from getting belts on the head, and it's common sense that wearing a protective helmet reduces the risk significantly. In soccer, you must wear shinpads, in boxing, you must wear gumshields and in amateur boxing you must wear a protective headgear. I don't see the problem in the GAA enforcing a rule like this to be fair.

If you cycle a motorbike, you wear a helmet, if you drive a car you wear a seatbelt. If you hurl, you wear a helmet. Sometimes people need to be forced to take care of themselves.

You won't be insured if you don't wear a helmet. Thats the long and short of it.

Bud Wiser · July 07, 2009, 02:08:05 PM

True enough AZ but, in soccer the players can do little cameos when they score a goal and that very picture can appear on an endorsement later so if you are wearing a big helmet with your face covered up your earning potential is reduced considerably. For example, say Diarmuid caught a big high ball in the All Ireland Final and landed Martin Comerford or Shefflin on his arse in doing so and a week later Halifax had a big add in the paper saying "With HALIFAX, Your Investment Is As Solid As A Rock" the add would be a lot better if all you could see his full earning potential instead of a big helmet.

Or is it just me that has a fixation with Cork and Sponsorship and the GPA

Bing Crosby . · July 07, 2009, 03:22:15 PM

If this new rule is serious and enforced from next year on I'm afraid there will be plenty who will be walking away from the game . Ten years down the road was plenty of time for this rule change . This is a disgraceful new rule . Mark my words this rule will be put back for a few years .

monny14 · July 07, 2009, 04:39:14 PM

Definitely,the rock cant just change any rule he wants,like what pintsofguinness said good riddance

seafoid · July 07, 2009, 08:52:41 PM

The Rock was cleaned out several times last year if I remember correctly. So the helmet isn't the only reason. I remember reading a great story in a Gaelsport annual from 1980 where the hero played on despite a head wound and won the county final at the price of being scarred for life but things have changed in the meantime.

I think it would be more meaningful to insist on making bank shareholders responsible for the performance of their boards.

Bud Wiser · July 08, 2009, 10:05:32 AM

I wouldn't go as far as to say good riddance, he is a gaa man first and foremost and he is still coaching young lads. His attraction to rugby is not a sin either but rather outlines his dedication to the GAA over the years and it was our gain that he put hurling before rugby up to now. If he is retiring though he should do so without firing salvos on behalf of the Greatest Pricks of All-time.

Bing Crosby . · July 08, 2009, 12:56:05 PM

Quote from: Bud Wiser on July 08, 2009, 10:05:32 AM
I wouldn't go as far as to say good riddance, he is a gaa man first and foremost and he is still coaching young lads. His attraction to rugby is not a sin either but rather outlines his dedication to the GAA over the years and it was our gain that he put hurling before rugby up to now. If he is retiring though he should do so without firing salvos on behalf of the Greatest Pricks of All-time.

Here Here .

He still is a bit of a p***k though .

seafoid · July 08, 2009, 07:55:05 PM

You can'ay good riddance to the Rock. Any man that can set the stadium in thurles humming on the back of one rousing clearance will be missed.

ziggysego · July 16, 2009, 01:22:24 PM

What a rebel

awfulynice · July 16, 2009, 03:09:59 PM

Quote from: Bing Crosby . on July 07, 2009, 03:22:15 PM

If this new rule is serious and enforced from next year on I'm afraid there will be plenty who will be walking away from the game . Ten years down the road was plenty of time for this rule change . This is a disgraceful new rule . Mark my words this rule will be put back for a few years .

Exactly my sentiments, no one is stupid enough not to wear a helmet to act "the hard man" as has been suggested earlier in this thread. It is compulsary at underage and id say about 60 - 70% of hurlers at senior grade wear them at the moment. Within a few years players who grew up without a helmet will have retired so why not wait and let them have their last few years of hurling in peace. I know quite a few hurlers from my own club in their thirties...and indeed early forties that play at junior level. I think its a great thing to see, i hope im still playing at their age, but you will lose them players next year if you bring in this rule as they arent going to buy a helmet at their age and especially not with the recession!