I played for 15+ years without any protection. As a setter I spouted the "limits my mobility" line as my defense for not wearing them, despite everyone around me, also not wearing them, getting injured.
3 months ago while blocking the goon on the other side came under, I came down on his instep, and suffered a Grade 3 sprain (the worst) with tibular ovulsions (the ligaments tore bone chips off as they seperated from the tibia).
I can't forsee ever playing again without that ankle braced. My doctors actually didn't think I'd be able to put weight on it for 2+ months, let alone be back on the court by the fall. I'm progressing well ahead of schedule (having missed the 2nd outdoor season in a row, but planning on being ready for indoor in the fall), but it's always going to be weak from now on.
Would Active's have prevented the injury? Yeah probably. Would they have transferred the injury up my leg and resulted in a blown knee instead of a broken ankle? It's possible, though not terribly likely. Is "they limit my mobility"
really a valid excuse? Nah, not really. I've played with them on in the past and honestly, they don't affect you much - if at all. Even as a setter I was able to get around the court fine with them on. Not wearing them was more a matter of not wanting to hassle and the "stud" factor of going without protection.
I imagine that I'll be wearing Active's on both ankles next time I'm on the court. The constant thought of having to reach down and put my dislocated foot back into place again would probably be more limiting to me than any physical hinderance I could dream up for the braces.

In the sand next summer it'll be either tape or a wrap plus a sand sock.
D