A male high-school athlete was participating in a team sport when a player from the opposing team attempted a goal. The male athlete was the only obstacle between the opposing player and a winning goal. The high speed shot, taken from less than 10 feet away, impacted the male athlete directly in the groin. He immediately fell to his knees in pain. Thankfully, he was wearing an new athletic protector (known colloquially as a “jockstrap”), which should have prevented injury even at such close quarters. Dr. John Lloyd was retained to perform a biomechanical analysis athletic protector.

The athlete sat out the remainder of the game. Later that evening he became concerned as the swelling continued. The following day tests revealed that amputation of one of his testicles was medically necessary. As a young man, with his whole life ahead of him, the physical and emotional pain of losing a testicle was almost unbearable.

The young man had conducted his research before purchasing the new athletic protector. The packaging had promised comfort and protection. Why then did he sustain this life-changing injury?

Athletic protector biomechanics expert Dr. John Lloyd, was retained to evaluate a potential product liability case.

It was quickly discovered, interestingly, that there are no American Standards on the performance requirements of athletic protectors. Therefore, Dr. Lloyd devised a test method to evaluate exemplars of the subject jockstrap with comparison to models sold by other product manufacturers.

Balls were shot at various speeds from a pitching machine aimed at the athletic protectors affixed to a male mannequin. Each impact was recorded using a high-speed video camera, while Dr. Lloyd’s associate, standing behind the mannequin, measured the speed of each impact using a radar gun. A total of 70 tests were performed.

As the following high-speed video recording shows, the subject athletic protector deforms completely upon impact, providing the wearer with little, if any, protection from injury.

Several new design models also collapsed upon impact, while others cracked and broke

Fortunately, the old style jock strap with which many of us are familiar was among the few models that held up to impact and actually provided adequate protection.

Based on biomechanical analysis I concluded, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, that the subject athletic protector provides inadequate protection of the male genitalia from injury associated with impact from a moderate speed ball. This conclusion is based on evidence of extreme deformation of the jock strap upon direct impact from a ball. 

Had the manufacturer evaluated their product under real-life conditions, as described herein, they would have learned that this product provides inadequate protection against injury to the male genitalia.  Further, comparative testing of other available athletic protectors identified products that provide better protection.