[jaybird]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The point you are missing is the language puts responsibility on us from others if we do not notice something or not. We already did not allow players to play if they were hurt for a play, but not say this is the reason they do not play longer and give us a note to prove they can play unless they were knocked unconscious. Concussions (as I have said before) are not that easily diagnosed. And these descriptions that they give are not the only signs of a concussion. So if a player has trouble seeing and we are never told that by the player, we might not know. And please if you have been officiating long enough you should know that people that are totally ignorant of rules, claim we are responsible or incompetent of our duties. This policy puts a bull-eye on the officials.



I am not just worried about what the NF thinks, I am worried about what the courts might say or not say. And the only way you can prove that is a court case.

Maybe you are not aware, but there have been officials that have had to take depositions for civil lawsuits because a kid was paralyzed in a football game. That does not mean the official got sued, but because of language or procedures of a company, anyone that was in the area or a witness to actions of the medical people involved. And if there is language that puts more responsibility for us to prevent a player to play, we now can be held responsible by a lawyer.


I have given this example before and since the 20th year anniversary of the death of Hank Gathers this must be mentioned. When Hank Gathers died on a basketball court in California years ago, the family or the lawyers sued every person in the building that had something to do with helping or did not help but had training to do so. In other words there were doctors that got sued that were just watching the game because they could have done something. Now that does not mean they lost court cases, but they had to defend themselves in court which we have said costs money.



I did not say we did not try to figure out if a player can compete. I said that we do not diagnose an injury. There is a difference between seeing a player limping or not being able to get up because there arm hurts. It is quite another thing to determine if that reason is a concussion.



Not true if you read the press release correctly. We have to get approval (meaning the officials) in order to allow a player to play if they have a concussion. That means we have to have them either tell us they are OK or we need something in writing. And the rule about the unconscious player made it clear that an MO/DO were the only ones that could give that authorization. This press release does not specify who is allowed to give that kind of authorization. Maybe it will when the rules come out, but right not that is not the case.



I can speak for my personal experience. I had a hamstring tear a few years back and I was told three different things depending on who the medical professional was. Now I am talking about an orthopedic issue, not a head injury issue, which has a different set of circumstances and expertise. I just feel we should not be in the business to help decide a player should or should not play and clearly who the medical personnel need to be defined. And I hope if it is not defined my state will make that very clear to cover this issue up for the officials. But please do not tell me these are not concerns because you think you understand what they are saying. You are about the only person that has talked about this that seems to completely understand what they are saying. Everyone else has some concerns, some more than others, but concerns none the less.

Peace

Good post Rut. You have captured the thoughts of numerous concerned officials in your writings.