Purpose <p>The purpose of this study was to investigate the protective performance differences of commercially available field hockey face masks whilst proposing and evaluating a methodology using commonly available equipment suitable for use as a dynamic performance test standard.</p> Methods <p>Field hockey balls were propelled at realistic and repeatable speeds (26.8 ± 0.25&#xa0;ms^-1 and 35.8 ± 0.25&#xa0;ms^-1; mean ± SD), with acceptable impact location precision (± 11.3&#xa0;mm; radial SD), at outfield face masks preconditioned to a range of field hockey relevant end-use temperatures. Masks were mounted on the ubiquitous Hybrid III headform and neck assembly to represent, with reasonable biofidelity, some of the potential consequences for human users at the tested impact locations.</p> Results <p>Qualitative and quantitative laboratory-based measures showed that field hockey mask performance varies with speed, temperature, and impact location. Testing showed that some commercially available masks perform better than others, with key weaknesses including mechanical failure and facial contact.</p> Conclusions <p>The potential for some masks to fail catastrophically, and others to provide a wide range of protection, has been demonstrated and reported to governing bodies and industry. Limitations of the equipment and methods utilised have been identified as the impetus for further work. Nonetheless, the current approach provides a testing methodology for the field hockey PPE industry.</p>