I would alwayscwear one. But rember losing it / not packing it for a game . I thought what are the chances of getting clobbered. Next game accidentally got clobbered by the back of someones head in a tackle and lost my front tooth. 30 years later i still have problems with the capped tooth.

Always worn one particularly after an early stray knock to my teeth in another sport. Could never get on with the ones you boil. Never regretted the investment in one from the dentist. Whatever your comfortable with it is well worth it and avoids years and £££s of expense replacing lost or damaged teeth.

I wore one when I played at a higher level but when I dropped down to more social rugby I stopped, partly because I wanted to talk more and partly because I felt I could handle myself better at that level.
I didn't have a problem but equally I saw someone playing at the social level get his teeth knocked out by falling forward and hitting a knee in the tackle. 6 new teeth needed, so it is worth while

And as explained above it protects more than just your teeth as it strengthens your "face position" if hit.

If you don't wear one, I think you're a numpty. In the same way as cycle helmets aren't compulsory, I wouldn't dream of going out without one. Rugby league is a collision sport, your mouth will get a smack at some point so get it protected.

Tried a few out when I first started playing however found it very difficult to communicate with team mates while it was in my mouth. I never wore one after that, though I would hate to lose teeth so if I did go back playing I would look into maybe a thinner one that was easier to talk with.

Thanks for all contributions and votesicon_biggrin.gif




This is exactly one of the main points I'm hoping to disprove, so called 'common sense' is actually causing more accidents and greater injuries through misunderstanding/misuse and actual limitations with the so called safety aid. Whether that be headguards in boxing, gumshields in rugby and helmets etc in other sports.

Wearing helmets in cycling for instance, at all levels including the pro peleton is one of the best examples with hard facts.
The statistics back up everywhere, more so in those countries that have compulsary helmet wearing such as Australia, NZ & parts of US that wearing a cycle helmet is actually detrimental to your health and from a population POV contributes to mass levels of unhealthy/obese populous.

Because the design perameters are so flimsy compared to the actual use (even at lower speeds) people take greater risks (risk compensation), thus blindly think that they are somehow going to be magically protected. The helmet mantra of ' a helmet saved my life' is just that, a mantra and has no real evidence to support it even though [isome[/i medical types might have you believe it, they are NOT qualified to understand the physics behind the helmet & said limitations.
In the pro peleton there have being more deaths and head injuries since helmet wearing became compulsary than when it wasn't..go figure huh! IN AUS & NZ there have being a greater level of accidents & head injuries per cyclist/km than before helmet wearing became compulsary, in a time when car safety increased for its occupents and also for those outside the vehicle, yet head injuries became more frequent.



The test perameter of a cycle helmet for instance is a straight drop onto a flat surface at approx 12mph(drop test from 1.5metres), that is the pass/fail test for impact, if a helmet splits, it has failed (not worked as people falsely think). There are greater risks from rotational brain injuries, strangulation and even increases in concussion/brain injury through amplfying the injury due to the increase in the size of the head, not to mention not twonking your head in the first place due to said increase in size.

It's my thoughts that although there are some mouth injuries in rugby, a gumshield isn't all that protective of such & its main function is supposed to lessen jaw injuries & concussions, but how effective is a gumshield in reality? Does it actually really give the protection that players think it does and do they in turn behave/play with less care than if they knew it didn't or weren't wearing one at all?
Does the overall benefit of wearing a gumshield actually outweigh any negatives from a cold hard factual POV, not just anecdotal, single person incidents?

Certainly in cycling & boxing (where they've stopped using headgear in amateur's due to increases in concussions through wearing them) the statistics show that the so called safety aid is anything but and does actually make you worse off.
Not as applicable to RL but you've more chance of having a serious head injury and/or dying from such whilst walking/falling out of bed than whilst cycling yet no-one in a civilised society would consider wearing them for walking around (though in a let's blame the victim culture that is worryingly more frequent calls for walking helmets!!)

Given we are supposed to be looking at player wealthfare at all levels I'm very much interested in the role a gumshield plays and indeed scrum caps which might actually increase the chances of an injury or worse allow a player to play whom actually isn't fit to play..
I think the RFL if they are really serious about player welfare need to look at this type of thing, garner some real in depth stats and see what is best with regard to player protection, with or without.
Personally I played mostly without as I've stated and took the perceived 'risk' in what I beleive to be an area that has a less chance of an injury & where the gumshield would be of limited use in any case.
I'm also a non helmet wearer in cycling, never have and never will.
thanks again to everyone who has contributed so far..keep them coming

I played both codes of rugby when I was a growing up for nearly a decade. I was never injured in any way and was probably hurt only a few times. I never wore a gumshield and to be honest I don't think I ever gave it any thought. In my mind it was simply not needed and I cannot remember anything ever happening during a game where I would have been helped by wearing one.

In terms of cycling it was pretty much the same. I never really needed a helmet so wearing one would have been pointless. Even though I had a BMX bike I was never any good at any tricks so didn't need one. I do remember one spectacular case of going over my handlebars because my front wheel locked for some reason. But I think even in that case it wasn't my head that needed protecting, it was my hands, arms and knees.

When I played I always wore one. As a kid, the cheap molding type then as I got older I had them made for me through a dentist so that it fit exactly and never fell out. They are definitely worth it if you value your teeth. The cost of a well made gumshield or the cost of reconstructive dental work?

It all depends if you like to gamble...

I get your point, but as someone who has gone through the windscreen of a car travelling at 30mph as a cyclist, my helmet undoubtedly saved my life. The wreck that was the helmet would have been my skull. I can say the same for gum shields, I suffered a fit after a particularly heavy blow to my head, clamping down hard. If my teeth had been bare, I would have bitten off the end of my tongue. As it is, 15 stitches later and I was fine. I do see where you are coming from, and agree that there is evidence to suggest that helmets can cause more harm, but in an everyday setting, with some of the drivers on the road, I wouldn't go out without one.

I always found it difficult to speak clearly with a gum shield in, but as a prop communication was never really a key requirement so it didn't matter. Many moons ago I was playing in a game and I got stiff armed in the face, and I actually saw star bursts like I was a cartoon character who had been bashed over the head. After the game when I took my shield out I found my jaw ached like mad, I dread to think what it would have been like had I not been wearing one.

The problem with the cycle helmet example is that it isn't taking any other factors in to consideration.
If having helmets makes it safer on the roads, there will be a bigger population cycling, therefore a bigger population of injuries, even though many may have been saved injury
Same with the push to get people cycling from councils
More cars on the road
Faster bikes
Cycling in teh Olympics making it more popular
etc etc

To say that helmets may not be as safe as first thought, because the injuries have increased, is not showing the complete picture.
My son will not be cycling without one.

I hate wearing a cycle helmet but I wear one to set a good example to my kids. Plus if you come across some of the drivers I have you'd wear one too.

How do you know that it saved your life? Common sense or actual facts? Because the facts bear out that the helmet gave you little if any protection and probably increased the dangers both beforehand and at the actual point of impact.
The point being that the design perameter of a cycle helmet is only up to 12mph, beyond that it is next to useless, at the speed you were going the helmet offers no crush protection and indeed can amplify the forces involved, as well as the risk of twisting forces to the neck and increased brain rotation injuries, you have no way of knowing what would have happened if you weren't wearing a helmet.
Many cyclists claim a 'helmet saved their lives' without any shred of evidence to support their stance and while they can/do offer protection against abrasions/cuts and brusies at low speeds, your incident was in extremis and the statistics show that your helmet just didn't save your life at all.

Similarly to your gumshield incident, there's no way of proving one way or the other what would have happened if you weren't wearing one but data sets (as in cycling, boxing, NFL) show that so called safety aids actually don't give the protection that common sense would dictate they do and overall can/do make matters worse than commpared with no safety aid at all.

That you quote every day settings on the road as being most dangerous is interesting but in stark contrast the safest countries in the world for cycling (& have the highest rates of cycling) are the Netherlands and Denmark where the rate of helmet wearing is extremely low/virtually non existant, yet their rates of incidents/head injuries is far far lower than ours. You rarely see any kids with helmets even from very young ages.

Whilst cycling isn't RL of course, that safety equipment and the covering of heads to protect from a previous head injury & the use of gumshields to protect teeth/mouth/jaw/concussions 'seem' like the common sense thing to do, it is my belief that actually they make matters worse when looking at it from a large number POV, although I admit that from singular/anecdotal evidence there may well be [isome[/i increase in protection, it just isn't overall and especially when you see the infrequency of the injuries compared to other injuries in the sport which pretty much disproves the 'common sense' theory completely.

Get a gum shield that fits properly (from your dentist) and wear it and for cycling, its an absolute no brainer.
Until your head hits the road, its an inconvenience but, they can and do save lives.

The gum shield wont save your life, only your teeth.

I know because at its thinnest point the helmet compressed to around a quarter of its original thickness in the crash and I still sustained a fractured skull. No helmet = massive fracture.

So the helmet failed then to stop you from a fractured skull? You do realise that the amount of forces that the helmet 'possibly' stopped were miniscule compared to the absolute total forces?
Ergo it was your skull that took the majoirty brunt of the impact NOT the helmet, that the helmet probably amplified the impact made the forcs involved even worse counter acting any lessening from the crushing of the foam..
As I said, the facts bear out that helmets just do not work but people still believe that they saved their lives, I'm glad you're ok in any event.

I wear one, more to prevent being knocked out or concussed over losing my teeth but at the same time, who really wants to lose their teeth?

I never wore one because I always felt I was above getting hurt, never mind getting injured. I got hurt maybe a few times in all the time I played. I think if getting hurt and getting injured was something I thought was going to happen, I might have stopped playing a long time before I did.

The same with cycling. I personally feel that the roads are unsafe for cyclists and have no issue whatsoever with cyclists breaking the law and riding on the pavement. If I'd been through the windscreen of a car then I wouldn't be an advocate of helmets, I'd be an advocate of not cycling.

I know people who have lost teeth WEARING a mouthguard!
Are they a guarantee that you won't lose teeth or are they just there to 'assist in protecting'?

Would the fact there is an object between the glass and the skull not distribute at least some force away from said skull? As the first point of impact it seems to me some force would be sent round the helmet rather then directly into the skull. I also suspect a helmet would provide better protection from lacerations from the broken glass than bare flesh and bone. We could always test it. You have a pane of reinforced glass smashed over your bare head and I'll wear a helmet. I suspect I'll come off better.

As for gumshields, I've always worn one since having a tooth kicked out in a game (accidentally). I'm fairly certain they've saved teeth on a few occasions but I'm sure you'll disagree despite not being witness to my personal experience.

You've clearly made your mind up despite personal testimony from several people to the contrary. I'm not even sure why you've asked the question seeing as you clearly know better. So let's see some of these facts you keep citing as, well, fact.

As someone else said, in my opinion not wearing one is simply stupid. It's very easy to take a stray elbow, head or knee in the mouth and I know I'd sooner put my trust in a gumshield. It's simply a barrier to absorb and redistribute the force of an impact, and to separate the soft tissue of the lips from the teeth.

How many of the Tour de France riders didn't wear a helmet?

As for gumshields, I always wore one playing League bar the odd game as I got older. It certainly didn't make me any more likely to suffer injury. I played exactly the same way as I did without a gumshield.
I didn't use one in Union, but far fewer tackles and a more mature atmosphere meant I was far less likely to take a hit above the neck anyway.

The UCi brought them in as a compulsion (in 2003) for two reasons..one money, second there had being a death.
However they did it on a knee jerk basis (which is what the UCI do anyway for pretty much anything) WITHOUT any reference to the statistics & efficacy of helmets
Deaths in pro cycling
1950s 8, 60s..4, 70s..4, 80s..5, 90s...3, then up to 2003 before the helmet law there were 2, following the law there were 8 more deaths in the remaining 7 year period of the 2000s..Even with massively advanced technology in medical science, air ambulances, medics with all the latest kit on the scene within minutes the death toll went up when helmet compulsion was brought in.
Pro cyclists take far more risks than they ever did, they go beyond their own abilities far too often and the amount of crashes exceeds by huge amounts than what used to happen..lucklily the majority of incidents end up with arm/shoulder injuries, in fact many hits to the head would be avoided altogether if the rider hadn't being wearing a lid that increased their head size..I've seen this hundreds of times were the head would not have hit anything at all except for the fact the rider had a helmet on.
Safety aids such as these make people more reckless, they give a false sense of increased safety (risk compensation) but only recently have some professional bodies taken the stance of looking at the actual FACTS and making a decision which whilst not popular DOES save greater injury and indeed the frequency of such.

This is the same in RL IMO, it should be an area that the RFL spend some serious money on as especially in the junior game were schools are pretty much insistant that kids wear gumshields.
In the East Riding back in 2004 there was a case of a £30,000 payout because of a serious mouth injury in a hockey game at a school. However it was the lack of highlighting use of gumshields by the LEA that led to the 'negligence' aspect, that a gumshield would certainly not have given the protection offered in such a severe case failed to be highlighted at all. That at school level basic level moutguards offer very little protection anyway..but that is another matter altogether.

Basically it was falsely taken as a given that the gumshield would have saved the individual from a hockey stick swipe that did quite a nasty injury..In my belief and from other quarters it simply wouldn't.

Except in 2 stages of the Tour de France helmets weren't compulsory yet I didn't see many, if any, not wearing one.
Therefore they must see a benefit to wearing one.

I disagree on the issue of helmets. It might make some people cycle in a more dangerous manner but that's the same with any safety equipment. It's down to the individual to make that choice and to have the maturity and responsibility to deal with that choice. In the same way as you wouldn't take airbags out of an 18 year olds car.

As for RL, you are way, way off. Gumshields do not make people play in a different way. If you're going to get hit in the mouth then you're going to get hit in the mouth irrelevant of whether you wear a gumshield. And it certainly does not make kids more reckless. If anything it reminds of the fact they're doing something that's more dangerous than usual.

As Cronus said, it appears as if you've just made your mind up and will ignore any evidence to the contrary.

This.

I always wore a mouth guard. I started off with a cheap mould it yourself version which was crap. It didn't fit properly. I doubt it would give much protection.

I got one fitted by the dentist. It was much better. It's saved me from umpteen elbows in the mouth, stray knees and boots.

Getting teeth fixed is a long expensive and painful process. I'd always recommend getting a proper dentist fitted mouth guard.