After seeing your clarifications in this post, I believe that our positions are not so different afterall.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgncjn
If the offensive team has the bleeding player, and they are not attempting to score or run a play, and for all practical purposes are more concerned about the blood, why are you unable to justify stopping play at that moment?
|
Because an official shouldn't stop play based upon what a coach or player says, but rather based upon something that the official actually observes.
Now if the official acutally observes the improper situation then there is justification for stopping play under such circumstances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgncjn
I am always going to look to verify the blood before officially stopping play.
|
Good. I agree. And I would do the same with jewelry. If I can't see it, we aren't stopping until the next normal stoppage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgncjn
Tonight's game, for example, involved the opposing coach alerting me about the potential problem. I observed the player bleeding, and stopped play while his team was dribbling in the front court.
|
I have no problem with that. I just want you to be consistent. The rules make no distinction between blood and jewelry. They are both illegal items for a player to have on his/her person during a game. As a fellow official I was merely probing to ensure that you understood that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgncjn
For wearing hidden jewelry, I believe that addressing the situation during the next dead ball is sufficient. As I previously stated about reasonable suspicion, I would consider notification from a player/coach reasonable suspicion to approach the topic with the team's head coach / possible offending player.
|
Again, I believe that is proper, and I hope that you would do the same for a player who is bleeding, but you couldn't see it during the course of play.