The protection paradox of helmets in cricket

Helmets changed the way batsmen play, and in doing so altered the dynamic of the game fundamentally. Whereas, pre-helmets, batsmen tended to move back and across initially, post-helmets, they advanced to the bowler more; whereas, pre-helmets, batsman hooked cautiously, infrequently and off the back foot, giving themselves a fraction longer to see the ball, posthelmets they hooked off the front foot with added danger. The balance between bat & ball, aggressor and defender, shifted: batsmen are now, figuratively and literally, on the front foot, says Mike Atherton.

Initial reactions from cricketers and observers were that Phil Hughes’ was a freak accident, having apparently been struck on a part of the neck not normally covered by a helmet.

Helmet manufacturers Masuri confirmed the reactions saying that Hughes was struck by the ball to the rear of the grille and below the back of the shell, missing his helmet. This is a vulnerable area of the head and neck that helmets cannot fully protect, while enabling batsmen to have full and proper movement.

Most of the improvements in batting helmets have focused on the front part to strengthen grilles and reduce the gap between the grille and peak of the helmet to prevent balls from penetrating and causing serious facial injuries.