I don't think its a bad law. It isn't trying to make anyone experts. They just are taking concussions a lot more seriously than ever before. With good reason. We have an online class/test here. It just describes symptoms, talks about what to look for and explains seriousness. It isn't trying to make us a treater. Just have some idea what to look for. Provides information to us they that want us to have..

If she didn't fall into the wall - is it still worthy of disqualification?

Until one of you "misdiagnoses" a concussion and is named in a lawsuit with a line of questioning like: "Did you or did you not watch the online video?"

Speaking from the perspective of an Ohio official. The law requiring the Concussion Certificate is not a bad one, because it also applies to all coaches both JrHS/HS and youth. When I am umpiring an ASA (now USA Softball) tournament in Ohio in the summer the law means that the coaches as well as the umpires are put on notice that we all are to put the safety of the player before anything else. The irony of the law is that there is now penalty for officiating/umpiring without the certificate. Only the OhioHSAA takes action against officials that do not have the certificate, and the OhioHSAA gives the officials to take action if they think that the player MAY be exhibiting concussion like symptoms.

MTD, Sr.

Not for me.

We're not asked to diagnose anything. Pretty simple here--if a kid has an event and /or he looks the least bit "off" send him out. School must then have him evaluated by certified trainer. If in doubt send them out. Easy.

Referees aren't getting sued every day and when we are we aren't losing. Law actually favors officials in liability area.

I might have because she made a point to get close enough to bend elbows and gave her pretty good 2 handed shove while in the air. Total non basketball play that could cause big damage, wall or no wall.

I don't care about the proximity of the wall or even how hard she was shoved, I care about the exposure of the offensive player in this situation.

She had no ability to absorb the content, she was in a compromised position, and in all likelihood didn't know she was about to get shoved from behind. These add up to a flagrant for me.

I had a similar situation a few weeks ago, smaller girl goes to foul a larger heavier set girl at the end of a game. The defender came and two hand shoved the other girl, but in this case the offensive player knew it was coming, absorbed it and even turned into the contact to avoid it. I called an intentional.

I never once said anything about a concussion. I said she should be checked. Coach is welcome to disagree and put her back in by T/O or re-entry rules.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

Me either.

As someone else has mentioned -- you can't separate cause and effect from these types of calls. If it's a two handed shove and she doesn't go to the ground at all, I'll go intentional, but flagrant would not fit the situation.

Not here. If she's sent off to be checked for a concussion, she's not returning without the approval of an appropriate health care professional.

I think putting the onus on officials is insane. Here we only send them off if they're exhibiting signs / symptoms -- then the health care professional makes the call. As they should.

Concussions I agree.

But running full force could cause other injuries. If you simply say Bob, #10 was the cause of my stopping play, you've said nothing about concussions, a broken finger or anything else.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

NY State they are done for the day and need a doctor's note clearing them for when they want to return to play.

So you're saying the shove on its own, without more info is worthy of the flagrant? I think the entire action, including the results need to be factored in. What if the shooter lands on her feet? I just don't think I could justify a flagrant in that situation, whereas an intentional foul is easily justifiable.

Here we send them out if they are exhibiting signs or symptoms of a concussion, in our opinion.

But whether they can return that day depends on the physician or LAT who examines the player. If that person decides the athlete does not have a concussion and is not exhibiting signs/symptoms and is fit to play, that's all that's required.

If there is no physician or LAT available, the player is done for the day.

If a concussion is diagnosed, the player is done for the day. If a player is exhibiting signs / symptoms to the doctor or LAT, the player is done for the day.

I'm not a doctor or LAT and I'm not the one who should be deciding these things. Even so, I can have a player removed if I'm not satisfied that the player is OK.

---------
WIAA (WI) Policy:

If you suspect a player may have a concussion, that athlete should be immediately removed from play. The injured athlete should be kept out of play until they are cleared to return by an appropriate health care provider. If the appropriate health care provider determines the athlete is not exhibiting the signs/symptoms of a concussion and does not have a concussion, they may return to play.

A physician or LAT may evaluate an athlete for concussion. If they determine that the athlete is not displaying the signs of a concussion or does not have a concussion, the athlete may return to play. If they determine that the athlete is displaying the signs of a concussion or does in fact have a concussion, the athlete may not return to play (with or without a note) that day.

WIAA Sports Medical Advisory Council identifies a physician and licensed athletic trainer (LAT) under the direct supervision of a physician as an appropriate health care professional for determining return to play other than the same day.