Rule Amendments for CMAS

ouch.
maybe i should dig my old field hockey mouthguard out. should taste yummy after all these years. wonder if it will be mouldy.

Does anyone know of other sports where safety equipment is mandatory? I thought that sporting regulations focused on what you were not allowed (Rugby Union - no hard pads or helmets etc) and it was up to the players to choose what safety equipment they would use.

so there are liability issues for uwh players in the US.
there are no such issues in NZ.
why should nz club players be forced to comply with costs/regulations that only affect players in other countries? yes yes, it's not a big cost, but it's the principle that matters here [well it does to me]

i can see a case for requiring such protection if i want to play in a competition in the US - part of doing business there.

otherwise i personally think this should be a freedom of choice/personal responsibility issue. if you feel confident/lucky enough that you won't get hit in the face with a puck or foot, then don't wear a mouthguard.
if it wasn't for the need to be able to identify team membership/individuals i'd happily support the same freedom of choice wrt to headgear. they're my eardrums - if i'm happy to risk them by playing without a cap it's up to me.

will WAA rules allow for 'local rules' for it's member federations? ie no need to wear mouthguards. will uwh in NZ be forced to recognise/offer life membership [sorry different thread i know] to anyone granted such status by WAA?

Louise is right - go the individual.

__________________
http://snorkelbattlesafari.blogspot.com/

On the internal mouth guard front i know a lot of people have found them uncomfortable to use because they have not had them moulded with their snorkel in...it makes a huge difference

rach

Again I can only speak for US, but yes several major sports require safety equipment and even manidate how it must be worn. I think you need ot check with your different, popular sports.

I also believe it is up to your team mates if you wear safety stuff. If you play without, say, ear guards and break an ear drum, it is your team, beyond your personal pain and dollar loss, who suffers when you can't continue to play.

__________________
Carol Rose

Is the safety equipment, but in particular the mouthguard regulation, a CMAS rule or WAA rule or somehow both?
(this is a CMAS thread of course, so my question is directed at CMAS officials or members)

__________________
Slayer of Trolls amongst other things.
Made for the Love of a Good Woman, and not a bad little player too ;-)
Chumba Concept Salon
Professional Hair Stylist

Plenty of sports mandate safety equipment. Hell, probably the majority. Field hockey has mouthguards and shinpads as requirements, cricket has a whole bunch and rugby has mouthguards. Waterpolo have caps, motorsport have helmets, neckbraces etc. The list goes on.

Lets not leap to blaming the US. Plus, how strictly enforced are the safety requirements at club level here in NZ? I've only just gotten a mouthguard and haven't been questioned yet...

Carol,

I have an external mouth guard that was designed by one of the first ever UWH players in Oz, especially for UWH. I have been wearing it for over 13 years and never had a problem with it. Now I am being told that I have to wear one that offer's far less protection...how is that being safe?

Tan

I think Carol answered the question regarding using other types of Mouth guards earlier. yours probably is great and maybe should be mass produced . But the many many non-standard and one of a kind that may not work would be a nightmare to enforce. LAwyers would have a field day with the Organizing group for allowing non-tested safety equipment. you never know who may sue if their teeth are knocked out in a game. If the WAA or even CMAS loses a law suit the expense is passed onto all of us.
I only wish the US was not a litigious and health care was affordable so I could wholly agree with Andrew. It must effect others, not just US or we probably would not have the mouth guard rule.
I know they have saved my teeth two times at least so I will wear them but I understand the argument.

B-

so if i play in a competition in the US and i get a broken finger/knuckle because i am wearing a bespoke glove - can i sue the player on the other team and [as secondary respondents] the tournament organisers, usoa & waa [or cmas]?

or is there a waiver signed, that excludes such litigation, prior to participation?
if waiver is sufficient for fingers & gloves - then why not for teeth & guards?
if the argument put forth is that safety equipment is only standardised by some form of mass production, then what numbers of glove must i make in order to gain accreditation for homolugated status?
200? 500? 1000? 10,000?
will i need to then submit samples of my glove for accreditation/approval? what about testing procedures for equipment?
do mouthguards [mass produced or otherwise] need to be able to withstand 'x' number of blows of force 'y' kN without failing in order to be acceptable or is visual inspection all that is required?
if visual is good enough then refs can perform testing poolside prior to games like they do with snorkels
if a more rigorous standard is required then those standards need to be gazetted and trialled, otherwise subjectivity creeps into accreditation - a la refs deciding, poolside, which mouthguards are o.k and which are not.
boa shop gloves might get a pass, slovenian gloves might get rejected. presently neither is good or bad; just a matter of preference.
a better analogy with mouthguards might be: only 1 type of silicon glove is acceptable, but all latex gloves are fine.

carol - your point that i owe a duty of care to my team mates is nice - but do my team-mates owe me a duty of care not to get broken fingers because they might be wearing shoddy gloves? it's not something legislated against, i just accept that there might be some times when they cannot see out a game or competition. i think me losing a tooth and having to sit out a game or 2 falls into the same category. probably i'd get no more [or less] sympathy than the guys with the broken fingers - never mind that both 'injuries' can be seen as partially self-inflicted.

suggesting remedies to minimise risks is good, prescribing is not so good.

__________________
http://snorkelbattlesafari.blogspot.com/