The helmet thing = grrrrr.
Small marks on the shell or damage to the gel coat should NOT be reasons for a knock back. Ditto minor surface rust on chrome plated buckles.
To knock back or hassle competitors for these things, shows a lack of knowledge of how a helmet works, and a lack of knowledge of what the actual signs of damage are.
Few scrutineers actually get to see the real signs, because it is so rare for a competitor to present such a helmet...
The old saying about "dropping a helmet onto the ground can ruin it" is 99% bullshit - unless it had a bowling ball inside it at the time. Dropping an empty helmet onto the ground presents a small risk of structural damage to the hard outer shell - structural damage to the shell can usually be seen and/or felt.
The buckle obviously does an important job. But you have to stop and ask yourself whether some surface rust on a D-ring is compromising its strength... The whole assembly is MASSIVELY stronger than the person inside it (ref Marco Simoncelli...).
There is a reason why most helmet scrutiny is nothing more than checking for a standards sticker, and obvious faults.
Anything more is virtually doomed to being a witch-hunt - the real problems are hidden, so the scrutineers pick on irrelevant nonsense instead.
Checking for wear and a proper fit would be a million times more productive and relevant than complaining about chips out of the gel-coat....
Sorry for the rant, but it's been a significant irritation in the car motorsport for me for the last twenty years - the bike world had escaped most of the nonsense, but I see it creeping in.
