Last weekend Major League Baseball witnessed a series of dangerous blows to the head.

This is what happened.

“A shot... Oh, it hits Koroda, it appears that it hit Koroda right in the head”

“You know the interesting part of all of this is what David Wright said about his family.  It was probably worse on his family than it was on him.”

And then Ian Kinsler of the Texas Rangers got pelted in the head with a fastball.

Reports indicate they suffered only mild concussions-- but they will be sitting in the dugout for a while.  The scary incidents sparked the question: Are more protective batting helmets needed?  

Commentators on ESPN’s Baseball Tonight discussed the current helmets and their safety, and they all offered support for the new one.

“On the inside there is some plastic, and some padding as you would expect.   John you had a chance to wear one of these did you adequately feel protected?”

“I felt it would keep me alive but it wouldn’t keep me protected.”

Rawlings, a sporting goods company, introduced a new helmet last week that can withstand fastballs as fast as 100 MPH.  But the helmet isn’t appealing to everyone.

New York Mets player Jeff Franceur told the New York Times:

“I could care less what they say, I'm not wearing it. There's got to be a way to have a more protective helmet without all that padding. It's brutal. We're going to look like a bunch of clowns out there.”

But some players have already expressed support for the new helmets.  Ironically, before he was hit in the head, David Wright was quoted on MLB.com saying:

“I’m not worried about style or looking good out there, I’m worried about keeping my melon protected.”

According to Newsday, MLB released a memo to its players saying that the new helmet will be ready for use Sept. 10th, but ultimately it will be up to the players to decide: safety or style?

So do you think baseball should require players to wear the more protective helmets?