Concussion Type Headbands ???

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

That's the way it's supposed to work, but it doesn't always work that way. I respect IAABO. I respect our state board. I respect my local board, but we're certainly far from perfect. An interpretation is made, it's announced at a meeting. Some guys miss the meeting. Some guys aren't paying attention that the meeting. Later, rookie officials, and transfers from other areas, including non-IAABO, never attended that past meeting. Even before such interpretations are made, some local board interpreters aren't aware that there are minor unannounced changes in NFHS rules that might be confusing, and such interpretations are never made.

They announced their ruling by putting the information out on their website (We all have a personal website from the IHSA) and they got the word out with the IHSA Clinicians and Rules Interpreters. So if people did not know the ruling, shame on them. Attending a meeting is not the only way to get out information. All you had to do was read an email, website or attend meetings if you belonged to an association. And in many cases the Arbiter is used to make these rulings even more public as the assignors pass along these important rulings.

Sounds like IAABO is just what people say they are. They do not seem like a very competent organization if this is a problem. I thought IAABO made their own rulebooks and mechanics material?

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I thought IAABO made their own rulebooks and mechanics material?

NFHS rulebooks. IAABO mechanics.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

NFHS rulebooks. IAABO mechanics.

IAABO seldom (almost never) makes up their "own" rules and interpretations, counting on the NFHS to do that. One infamous exception was a few years ago when IAABO decided, unilaterally, to come out with a "protect the free throw shooter" interpretation when the NFHS made the change from hit to release. The NFHS made the IAABO "protect the free throw shooter" interpretation "official" the following year with a NFHS rule change. If the NFHS hadn't made the rule change, IAABO would have looked pretty silly with an interpretation that could not be supported by a "written" rule.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

They announced their ruling by putting the information out on their website (We all have a personal website from the IHSA) and they got the word out with the IHSA Clinicians and Rules Interpreters.

Sounds like you guys really have your act together.

Are all protective headbands illegal in Illinois?



This protective headband (above) looks like it would pass for an ordinary legal headband if worn with a blue uniform jersey (solid color, nonabrasive, unadorned, maximum of 2 inches, one visible logo permitted).

JRutledge: I'm curious. How was the Illinois protective headband restriction worded?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Sounds like you guys really have your act together.

Are all protective headbands illegal in Illinois?



This protective headband (above) looks like it would pass for an ordinary legal headband if worn with a blue uniform jersey (solid color, nonabrasive, unadorned, maximum of 2 inches, one visible logo permitted).

JRutledge: I'm curious. How was the Illinois protective headband restriction worded?

I do not remember and do not care. I do not go around worrying about things that never are used or try to get into the weeds about things that are not an issue in the first place. Never saw the other device that you mentioned, so why would I worry about something else? I am sure someone insisted on using the device and the IHSA ruled on the usage of the device.

Again, there are some people that worry about things and others just do their job that is in front of them.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... things that never are used.

You probably never see them because they are prohibited in Illinois (why would a parent waste $50.00).

I've seen these ...



... in Connecticut about once, or twice, a year for the past five years, usually in girls games. The first time was in a scrimmage before any ruling was made regarding their legality. I ruled them legal for the scrimmage because we weren't enforcing equipment color restrictions, and it seemed legal under NFHS equipment rules (not dangerous to others, not designed for a player to gain a competitive advantage, not confusing, and, in my opinion at the time, appropriate for basketball).

I have not seen these (although I may have seen them and just believed that they were ordinary headbands) ...

[JRutledge]

I have not seen them because the state outlawed them. Problem solved.

Peace

[bob jenkins]

I would allow the second -- it meets (from the picture) the rule requirements. The first does not (logos, size).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I have not seen them because the state outlawed them.

If the state outlaws protective headbands, then only outlaws will have protective headbands.

[Nevadaref]

Hey Billy,
Have you seen this?
http://www.nfhs.org/media/1015199/20...headgear-1.pdf

[BillyMac]

My local IAABO interpreter will be attending the IAABO Fall Seminar this coming week and the NFHS meetings in Indianapolis the following week.

He has promised me that he will get to the bottom of the padded protective headband controversy, that is, the NFHS seemingly viewing padded protective headbands to be like head coverings, medical devices that must be approved by state associations on an individual basis, with no mention of color restrictions either way; while IAABO views padded protective headbands to be like knee braces, medical devices that are always legal, with no color restrictions.

I'll let the Forum know when I get a definitive NFHS interpretation, hopefully in a few weeks.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

My local IAABO interpreter will be attending the IAABO Fall Seminar this coming week and the NFHS meetings in Indianapolis the following week.

He has promised me that he will get to the bottom of the padded protective headband controversy, that is, the NFHS seemingly viewing padded protective headbands to be like head coverings, medical devices that must be approved by state associations on an individual basis, with no mention of color restrictions either way; while IAABO views padded protective headbands to be like knee braces, always legal, with no color restrictions.

I'll let the Forum know when I get a definitive NFHS interpretation, hopefully in a few weeks.

My breath is being held.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by deecee

My breath is being held.

Exhale, it will be a few weeks, if there is a definitive NFHS interpretation.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Exhale, it will be a few weeks, if there is a definitive NFHS interpretation.

Why would you think that a definitive NFHS interpretation would come out of an IAABO Fall Seminar?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Why would you think that a definitive NFHS interpretation would come out of an IAABO Fall Seminar?

Because of this:

Originally Posted by BillyMac

My local IAABO interpreter will be attending ... the NFHS meetings in Indianapolis the following week.