Are goggles enough? Area girls lacrosse coaches and players weigh-in on the safety/equipment issue of their sport

Believe it or not, lacrosse is the oldest team sport in North America. Dating back to the 17th century, the modern-day game originated from Indigenous tribes in Canada. The sport didn’t pick up in popularity in the United States until the 19th century, which also happened to coincide with the first-ever game to feature women.

In 1890, female students at the St. Leonard’s School in St. Andrews, Scotland played an hour-long contest, with eight players per team. Since that barrier-breaking match, more than a century later, the women’s/girls game has grown to be one of the most popular sports played.

In 2021, nearly 100,000 girls participated in high school lacrosse, according to a study led by the National Federation of State High School Associations. In comparison, outdoor track and field was found to be the most popular high-school sport with more than 400,000 female participants.

Throughout the evolution of the sport however, there still remains glaring differences between the boys’ and girls’ games. Most notably, with equipment, or in the case of the girls’ game, the lack thereof.

Boys lacrosse is similar to hockey in that it is a full-contact sport, with body checking allowed. Boys wear protective equipment from head to toe, including helmets.

Girls lacrosse is almost the exact opposite. Watch any girls game and the only protective equipment you’re likely to see on the 11 players on the field (not including the goalie) are goggles.

Now, girls lacrosse is a non-contact sport, meaning no body checks are allowed. There are also numerous rules in place to protect players, including a ‘shooting space’ penalty, which prevents defenders from entering a shot lane against an attacker in the process of shooting.

Given all that information, area high school girls coaches have strong opinions on whether they think it’s time for more equipment, specifically helmets, to be phased into the rules of the girls’ game.

“I always thought that we should wear helmets regardless,” South Hadley head coach Danielle Clark said. “I think if we could be a little bit more aggressive and not have many calls, I think it would be awesome if we were able to wear helmets. I think it would be safer for all of the girls to wear helmets anyway.”

Clark, a former South Hadley standout, played lacrosse in college at Southern New Hampshire from 2016-19. Clark mentioned she witnessed multiple teammates suffer head injuries throughout her career with the Penmen, which has helped shape her views on the equipment issue.

“I had one teammate that wore, the whole time I played with her, she wore a helmet,” Clark said. “I just think it’s safer overall. I got hit in the head a few times playing and it’s not fun.”

Amherst girls head coach Andrew MacDougall echoed Clark’s sentiment. While the Hurricanes haven’t had to deal with any concussion injuries at the varsity level so far this season, MacDougall revealed at least three players on the JV squad have already suffered concussions.

MacDougall cited the unpredictability of the game as his reasoning for wanting more players to adopt head protection.

“My sense is, I would like to see more of it just from the errant ball that comes around,” MacDougall said. “It just seems like it’s a no-brainer.

A research team led by Dr. Dan Herman, Dr. Shane Caswell and Dr. Andrew Lincoln of the USA Lacrosse Sports Science and Safety Committee conducted a three-year research study that tracked the effectiveness of headgear in female high school lacrosse players. Following the conclusion of the study in 2021, it was determined that players not wearing headgear had a 59 percent greater chance of suffering a concussion.

None of the players on the Amherst girls varsity team wear helmets, but that may change soon. MacDougall said he ordered two helmets for the team to have, in case one of his players would like to try it out at some point.

“It’s an expensive sport, so I get that, but if we can have a couple on the sideline just as part of maybe our return-to-play protocol, just say look ‘once you’re cleared by the doctor, we still want you to wear this for a week or two,’ and maybe they’re going to like it,” MacDougall said.

Hampshire Regional head coach Grace Ahrensdorf sees both sides of the hot button topic.

“That’s a tricky one for me,” Ahrensdorf said. “Being a former player myself, I can’t really imagine playing in a helmet, but at the same time, one of our strongest players [in an April 17 game], Mary Thibault, got checked in the head two different times and that’s happened a couple times through this season already. So it’s obviously something that’s a concern. [The checks] didn’t take her out of the game entirely, but it definitely messed with her own morale and the team morale enough to not have her out there and be the presence that she can be.

“In some ways I think that it definitely would be wise to protect heads a little bit more,” Ahrensdorf added. “It’s a tough game because it’s physical and there’s not a lot of protective equipment for girls lacrosse. I don’t know which way I would lean more, I guess. It’s definitely tough and I think the game is getting more physical so it’s also tough to see more checks to the head and harder defensive contact with the same amount of equipment that we’ve always had.”

Kiko Bhowmik, a junior attacker for Amherst, offered an interesting solution that resembles more of what ice hockey does between the boys’ and girls’ games.

“I understand the use of a helmet is to keep your head safe,” Bhowmik said. “I would like to be more safe out on the field, but I think if they just give us helmets or they just say to wear a helmet, that is the only protected area on my body and that means that when other people see that, they’re going to come for my head, so why not just give us the padding too? If you’re going to give us the helmet, give us the padding and let us play like the guys. Let us have more contact and then that way people won’t go after the only protected part of your which is your head, but they’ll go after your body, which is better, it seems. Maybe you’ll get a bruise, but I won’t get a concussion.”

That’s how ice hockey operates. Body checking isn’t allowed in the women’s/girls game, however they still wear all the same equipment that the men/boys do.

Bhowmik added that she prefers the style of play in the boys game.

“My dad’s a coach for the guy’s team, my brother played, my cousin played, everybody played so I grew up playing with the guys,” Bhowmik said. “So I like the game that the guys play and it’s hard sometimes transitioning over into the girls game after the season off with my dad. If it could be more unified, I would love it.”

Something to keep in mind is that helmets are optional to wear as currently stated in the National Federation of State High School Associations rule book. The MIAA refers to the NFHS rule book in regard to its equipment, which says helmets aren’t mandatory but if used, must be American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standard F3137 helmets. Just the single JV player in the Amherst girls lacrosse program wears a helmet, yet that’s more than most teams can say.

Bhowmik acknowledged the taboo-aspect of sporting helmets in the girls game, but hopes that mindset will shift as more players at the higher levels make it more common.

“I think there’s also a social concept of it, people think that it’s weird or whatever, because nobody else wears it,” Bhowmik said. “I think it’s good seeing people at the collegiate level wearing it sometimes so the younger players can be inspired by it and be like ‘oh, it’s OK if i wear a helmet.’”

Injuries are, unfortunately, part of sports. There will never be a solution that completely eradicates them, however in a sport that sees numerous players deal with head injuries year after year, the local girls lacrosse scene seems eager for change.