PDA

View Full Version : Life without a helmet - Ben may have been saved


stlrtruck
06-13-2006, 08:38 AM
Maybe Ben was lucky not to have a helmet on yesterday morning. If you look at the impact position of the car, it looks like he was close to hitting the side of the vehicle as well. From the location of the hit, I believe if he was wearing a helmet, he could have suffered a broken neck, because a helmet would have limited his neck movement upon impact.

So for everyone out there talking about how stupid he was for not having a helmet on, take a look at the other side of it.

GoFor6
06-13-2006, 08:50 AM
That is ridiculous. I guess we shouldn't wear seat belts in case I drive into the MON and forget how to operate the release. Maybe I should get rid of my airbags so I don't get injuried by them and for that matter lets get rid of child car seats and seat belts from airplanes and forget about doing all those crash tests.

Ben had a responsiblility when he took $9m ADVANCE from the Rooneys. He is young - he made a mistake - it may cost him his career but please don't tell me how a helmet would have killed him - it is just idiotic. Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda.

I rode for 4 years in california with and without a helmet, somedays when I went to the beach, I was only wearing a bathing suit on the bike (no shoes, no shirt, no helmet). Yes, I was a fool. No matter how careful you are - there are plenty of people who will just NOT see you.

I am praying for you Ben to have a complete recovery and if you can't play again - so be it - just get well.

Ambridge
06-13-2006, 08:58 AM
That is ridiculous. I guess we shouldn't wear seat belts in case I drive into the MON and forget how to operate the release. Maybe I should get rid of my airbags so I don't get injuried by them and for that matter lets get rid of child car seats and seat belts from airplanes and forget about doing all those crash tests.

I agree.

You have to put the smart money bet on wearing and using the appropriate protective gear.

99.9% of the time protective gear will do the job and you have to like those odds in your corner.

stlrtruck
06-13-2006, 09:03 AM
I'm not saying he wasn't irresponsible, I'm just saying that in this instance, he may have been saved for not wearing the helmet.

For as long as I rode a motorcycle, I always strapped the dome and I believe it is a sign of immaturity and irresponsible when people don't.

BUT, there are cases where that lack of maturity and/or responsiblity can turn out to be a blessing and I just think this is one of those cases.

Santonio4
06-13-2006, 09:51 AM
Ben would of walked away easily if he was wearing a helmet. So stop with your physics lesson.

BlackNGold203
06-13-2006, 09:54 AM
Ben would of walked away easily if he was wearing a helmet. So stop with your physics lesson.


Walking away easily may be a bit of a stretch....but a helmet would definitely have limited the damage

stlrtruck
06-13-2006, 09:57 AM
Ben would of walked away easily if he was wearing a helmet. So stop with your physics lesson.

Your statement, like mine, I believe is based on opinion. So I think I'll stick with my physics.

I guess this is a thread where we will have to agree to disagree on our opinions.

And realize that our common thought truly is that Ben gets better and as previously stated, if he can play again that's great but if he can't then just get better.

Ohio Steeler
06-13-2006, 10:11 AM
Walking away easily may be a bit of a stretch....but a helmet would definitely have limited the damage


yes it would have, however it was Ben's choice not to wear one and I respect that.

TasmanianTroy271
06-13-2006, 11:09 AM
Ben would of walked away easily if he was wearing a helmet. So stop with your physics lesson.

How would the helmet have protected his knees?

PisnNapalm
06-13-2006, 11:24 AM
I imagine if he'd have been wearing a full face helmet it would have been the helmet that hit the car and not Ben's face.

stlrtruck
06-13-2006, 11:36 AM
I agree with the helmet hitting the car instead of his face but I believe that impact would have done damage to his neck instead of his face.

Ohio Steeler
06-13-2006, 11:37 AM
How would the helmet have protected his knees?


See you dont seem to get it Everyone wants to blame Ben and the fact he did not have a helmet on, no one has said anything about the person who caused the whole thing the driver of the car, who cares if ben did not have a helmet on it was his choice not to wear one, however it was not his choice to have someone run him over.

OX1947
06-13-2006, 03:48 PM
If you're riding a harley, YAH, i guess maybe you can sort of justify not wearing a helmet if your in a group and not on major highways. HOWEVER, and I didnt know this until the accident, if you are riding the fastest bike legalized to ride on public roads, maybe it would be in your best interest to wear a helmet.

caseydog
06-13-2006, 04:26 PM
Your statement, like mine, I believe is based on opinion. So I think I'll stick with my physics.

I guess this is a thread where we will have to agree to disagree on our opinions.

And realize that our common thought truly is that Ben gets better and as previously stated, if he can play again that's great but if he can't then just get better.

Okay, I just can't resist putting my $.02 in, although I doubt it will matter.

I have been an advocate for seatbelt and helmet laws for 20 years. And, for 20 years, I have heard the stories of people who "whould have been killed" if they had been wearing seatbelts (although I must admit, this is the first time I have heard someone speculate that a biker may have been killed by a helmet).

The statistics just don't support those claims. Car crash injury and fatality data has been collected by the government since 1975, and 30 years later, it has been proven that you are about 40% safer with them than without them.

I hope that when this is all over, that Ben will be a major advocate for helmet use. He's in a position to make a huge difference, especially with young, "it can't happen to me" drivers/riders like he was two days ago. Now he knows, "it can happen to me".

caseydog
06-13-2006, 04:30 PM
See you dont seem to get it Everyone wants to blame Ben and the fact he did not have a helmet on, no one has said anything about the person who caused the whole thing the driver of the car, who cares if ben did not have a helmet on it was his choice not to wear one, however it was not his choice to have someone run him over.

I don't imagine that the 62 year-old lady in the car set out that day to run over a Super-Bowl quarterback.

Accidents happen. That's why helmets are a good idea.

Elvis
06-13-2006, 05:48 PM
First of all I honestly dont understand how ANY state can enforce seat belt laws but doesnt have a helmet law... How smart can we get? This is just my opinion so dont let me make anyone mad at me..
God Bless All..
Elvis

BBC
06-13-2006, 06:38 PM
Maybe Ben was lucky not to have a helmet on yesterday morning. If you look at the impact position of the car, it looks like he was close to hitting the side of the vehicle as well. From the location of the hit, I believe if he was wearing a helmet, he could have suffered a broken neck, because a helmet would have limited his neck movement upon impact.

So for everyone out there talking about how stupid he was for not having a helmet on, take a look at the other side of it.

You don't know much about this subject do you? No negative effects could have come from wearing a helmet in this situation. Leave speculation such as this to the people who are trained to do it.

RoethlisBURGHer
06-13-2006, 06:38 PM
It could be true that a helmet could have killed him or caused worse injury,but the chance is better that the injuries would have been less if he had a helmet on.

silver & black
06-13-2006, 07:01 PM
Maybe Ben was lucky not to have a helmet on yesterday morning. If you look at the impact position of the car, it looks like he was close to hitting the side of the vehicle as well. From the location of the hit, I believe if he was wearing a helmet, he could have suffered a broken neck, because a helmet would have limited his neck movement upon impact.

So for everyone out there talking about how stupid he was for not having a helmet on, take a look at the other side of it.
That is a ridiculous thing to say!

How do you figure that a helmet would limit neck movement?

As a mtn. biker, I can assure you that a helmet is an esential tool for making it through some rides. I have hit my head on trees, rocks and the ground in crashes that have dented and cracked my helmet. I walked away from those crashes with no head injuries... or a broken neck.

You can spin the no helmet thing all you want but, it won't make not wearing one any less foolish.

RoethlisBURGHer
06-13-2006, 07:12 PM
First of all I honestly dont understand how ANY state can enforce seat belt laws but doesnt have a helmet law... How smart can we get? This is just my opinion so dont let me make anyone mad at me..
God Bless All..
Elvis

Very good point,it's actually really hypocriticle since it's more dangerous to not wear a helmet while riding a motorcycle than it is to not wear your seatbelt.

SteelShooter
06-13-2006, 07:36 PM
That is a ridiculous thing to say!

How do you figure that a helmet would limit neck movement?

As a mtn. biker, I can assure you that a helmet is an esential tool for making it through some rides. I have hit my head on trees, rocks and the ground in crashes that have dented and cracked my helmet. I walked away from those crashes with no head injuries... or a broken neck.

You can spin the no helmet thing all you want but, it won't make not wearing one any less foolish.

You're on the mark Bro!

This would have, most likely, saved his teeth from being chipped, his nose from being broken, and his jaw from being fractured, not to mention the 9 inch laceration on the back of his head.

Someone posted earlier about saving his knees. Follow-on reports this morning stated that they were l"lacerations and contusions", translated as: scrapes and bruises. No problems..... it could have been much, much worse. Thank God it wasn't.

Back to the subject though, to quote you "You can spin the no helmet thing all you want but, it won't make not wearing one any less foolish."

Reps to you on this one!

Haiku_Dirtt
06-13-2006, 07:55 PM
yes it would have, however it was Ben's choice not to wear one and I respect that.

Couldn't disagree more. This is about money not freedom. If you have no fiscal responsibilities then we can go to the Bill of Rights and any other applicable law. But the Rooney's are paying him millions and millions of dollars to be on the field every Sunday in the best condition possible. When you take money from someone and you sign your name to paper the spectrum of rights narrows in proportion to the stakes.

Since you can't go to K-Mart and get a Super Bowl caliber QB the stakes are supremely high. Now you may say the Steelers lapsed when not writing stronger language into his contract and I would would say your 1000% right. But he disrespected the Organization when they asked him to honor the request even if the Steelers forgot to include it in his contract.

If you are one of only say 10 people in the entire world who can play QB in a Super Bowl, then what don't they understand about loss of freedom mixed in with $25-100 million (what might be his next contract)!!!! If you can't find other ways to relax with that size bank account then there is more to the problem. Find a couch or anything other than a motorcycle.

Or give the money back and flip burgers if its that important.

melroseplace
06-13-2006, 08:40 PM
everything happens for a reason. whether that reason is because had he been wearing a helmet he would've been in worse shape, or to prove a point to Ben (and others who don't wear a helmet) we'll never know. all we can do is be thankful that he's alive and will be able to walk (let alone play football again)

BigSteelThrill
06-13-2006, 09:07 PM
I'm not saying he wasn't irresponsible, I'm just saying that in this instance, he may have been saved for not wearing the helmet.


:dang: :sofunny: :blah:

stlrtruck
06-13-2006, 10:43 PM
You don't know much about this subject do you? No negative effects could have come from wearing a helmet in this situation. Leave speculation such as this to the people who are trained to do it.

I know enough about the subject. I've ridden and been around people that still ride. I have heard people who are trained to do it, talk about such instances where not wearing a helmet has been a benefit to the rider after an accident.

However, I will admit that it's normally the exception, not the rule.

stlrtruck
06-13-2006, 10:45 PM
You're on the mark Bro!

This would have, most likely, saved his teeth from being chipped, his nose from being broken, and his jaw from being fractured, not to mention the 9 inch laceration on the back of his head.

Someone posted earlier about saving his knees. Follow-on reports this morning stated that they were l"lacerations and contusions", translated as: scrapes and bruises. No problems..... it could have been much, much worse. Thank God it wasn't.

Back to the subject though, to quote you "You can spin the no helmet thing all you want but, it won't make not wearing one any less foolish."

Reps to you on this one!

Just to reiterate, I never said that it wasn't foolish not to wear the helmet.

Ohio Steeler
06-13-2006, 11:41 PM
I don't imagine that the 62 year-old lady in the car set out that day to run over a Super-Bowl quarterback.

Accidents happen. That's why helmets are a good idea.


no I dont think she did however she should have been more aware of what is going on around her what if that was a kid on a bicycle instead of Ben or someone puching a baby across the street....

and even if he had a helmet on we would still be talking about his knee's along with his neck

stlrtruck
06-15-2006, 08:39 AM
Check out www.kdka.com

They have a video dated 6/14 where they ask "professionals" about the helmet in relation to this accident. There is a dental/facial doctor who argues that a helmet could have been more damaging.

stlrtruck
06-15-2006, 08:54 AM
Sorry, date of video is 6/13

caseydog
06-15-2006, 11:00 AM
One other thought.

This whole discussion is happening because it was Ben Roethlisberger who got hurt in a bike crash. But, I hope the Ben "Smiths" out there who work regular jobs and ride motocycles are paying attention.

I cringe every time I see some 20-something kid on one of those Japanese crotch-rockets zipping down the freeway in jeans and a t-shirt, and no helmet.

When I heard about Ben's accident, my first thought was not how it would effect the Steelers, but whether he was going to be another young man living the rest of his life with the horrible consequences of a bad choice.

CD