Is there a Dr. in da house

[ODJ]

Originally Posted by Hartee14

I would have said the same thing. The ATC would then have to take that up with the powers to be.

But, my 2 cents. We are umpires. At the end of the day, whether we are doctors, lawyers, teachers, etc, when we are on the field, WE ARE UMPIRES. WE ARE NOT DOCTORS, ATHLETIC TRAINERS, etc. If you have a Certified Athletic Trainer at the game, you need to let them make the decisions. Who am I to tell an ATC that the player who just got hit should not return to the game? That is not my call. That is his/her call. That is what they get paid for. Unless you see the athlete laying there unconscious and they have to do CPR or mouth to mouth breathing, there is no reason not to let them return. I think the umpire made the wrong call.

An AT is NOT an MD/OD. Give me the official letterhead from an MD that says the kid can play.

[BoomerSooner]

I know I'm late into the discussion, but I agree with the general concept that the rule should be followed to the letter. Loss of consciousness = signed release from MD/DO.

What I don't agree with, however, is some the posters that have implied that any signs, symptoms, or similarities to a head injury require a doctor's release. I understand the concept of better safe than sorry, but just because a kid takes a pitch to the head and takes a second to get up doesn't mean he was unconscious. Just because a kid takes a pitch has a knot on his forehead, doesn't mean there is a loss of consciousness. I'm sorry, but for all the preaching about following the letter of the law, there seem to be alot of posters that want to declare a kid unconscious just to be safe rather than because he was actually unconscious. This is just my interpretation of what others are saying. If we are going to play the better safe than sorry angle then shouldn't we be requiring full neuroloical work-ups including EEG, CT scans, etc? The purpose of the rule is to protect the kids, not the umpires.