[Freddy]

Hi (state association director),
These "fashion police" changes by NFHS are getting out of hand. There are errors this year, and what worked great last year for the first time is being retracted again this year.
Any chance the (state association) can be convinced to waive the change the NFHS made once again to the color restriction regarding optional adornments? Right when they got basketball rule 3-5-3 and 3-5-4 to a point that it was easily enforcible (white, black, beige, or a single solid school color for arm-sleeves and leg-sleeves and for headbands and wristbands). No problem with that last year whatsoever. The players finally had a rule they could live with . . . and they did. Easy for everyone. And now this year they change "single solid school color" to "predominant color of the uniform."
This "fashion police" retraction to how it was previous years is not only borderline senseless, given the hesitancy of many officials not to mess with these rules at all, it will become a chaotic, unenforced, inconsistently enforced situation like it was two years ago and prior. What in the world precipitated this change? Were there rampant problems with last year's rule or something?
Any chance the (state association) can waive this new NFHS change and revert to how these two rules were last season when they worked just great?
Also, the unintended contradiction between 3-5-4a and supporting casebook 3.5.4 needs to be corrected.
Also, the phrase in 3-5-3a, "Anything worn on the arm and/or leg is a sleeve" is not correct, given 3-5-4 obviously gives separate rules for wristbands and headbands.

Please consider the headache trainers are gonna have with these errors and seemingly unnecessary changes and waive these NFHS changes for our state this and following years.

Looking forward to your seasoned and directive response.