new this season - Massachusetts is requiring all players (all HS levels) to wear a mouthguard while on the court. It's up to the coaches to make sure they do, but officials are told that "In the event a player intentionally participates without a
mouthguard, the game official will require that the player be replaced at the next dead ball whistle. The removed player may not re-enter until after the clock has started and a substitution opportunity occurs."

Any other states have this requirement?


[Edited by mdray on Oct 3rd, 2003 at 11:29 AM]

Haven't heard anything about this anywhere near me, but a question - is this just basketball or all sports?

Have not heard that.
 

Never heard of this either. The only sport that requires this that I am aware of is football (I am sure hockey might have a similar provision, but I do not do hockey). It sounds like a Massachusetts thing. At least it is not in the new rules.

Peace

In MA, the mouthguard is also required for soccer. Don't know about any other sports.

Here in Florida it is not required but in Hillsborough County, (Tampa area) it ie required for all sports participants at all levels.
If a player doesn't have it in, then they end up burning a substitution (baseball and softball) or like your example in basketball they have to go out and wait for another opportunity to reenter.

In my area, mouthguards are required only for the debate team.

Actually, I think they should be required for all coaches, and held in place with duct tape across the mouth.

You are Crazy!!!
 

Mark, Mark, Mark!!!!!!

Back in the old days...
 

...1964 to be exact, we were required to have mouthguards "on our person". When asked for my mouth guard, I pulled it outa my sock.
Didn't like it much. ...And, I had a face mask (Really!) for that reason. :cool:
(<I>Dumb Rule not dissimilar to the seat-belt law.</I>)
mick

Mark, this is the first I'm hearing about this. Who told you this? I just talked to my HS interpreter on Wednesday and we talked about changes, he didn't mention it. Is this a 100% for sure thing?

Re: Back in the old days...
 

You lost me, mick. You had a face mask? For what reason? And you're talking about coaches being seat-belted, or drivers in cars being seat-belted? :confused: (I've been using that "confused" smiley an awful lot lately. . . :( )

Re: Re: Back in the old days...
 

My fault: REf: Rut and football

<U>Maybe</U> I should apologize for the confusion.

Chuck,
I rec'vd an email message from the MIAA announcing the rule. The details are on their website: http://www.miaa.net

Mark, I just went to the website and I gotta say, I think it's pretty dumb. They're going to require every HS basketball player (V, JV, Fr, boys and girls) to wear a mouthguard on the court? I think that a real over-reaction. Plus, what do we do when teams visit from out of state? We get teams from NH, RI, and CT regularly. They likely won't have mouthguards. And what about our Hall of Fame tourney, where we'll have teams from NY, MD, etc? Are we going to require them to run to the sporting goods store to buy 15 mouthguards? Dumb.

I have just read the rule on the MIAA website, and all I can say is that at least there is no color requirment for the mouth guards.

Chuck:
I agree, this is REAL dumb. I mean, haven't we been playing basketball without mouthguards since Naismith and the peachbaskets (or whatever his name was)? This will be received by HS referees about as seriously as the "helmet and bat check" by HS baseball umpires.

I think the reason that they make that stipulation is that in lacrosse (and maybe football, I don't know), the rule used to be that the mouthguard could not be clear. This was so that it was easier for the officials to tell who had them in.

Weren't they a bubble gum pop group in the 60's? :)

Yeah. They had that big hit, "Are Those Two Basketballs In Your Pocket, Or Are You Just Happy To See Me?"

The flip side was a song about both a coach and his assistant getting whacked. It was called "T for Two".

...Another freedom of choice issue down the drain.

Re: Mouth guards
 

As a parent, I applaud your diligence and care for your kids. But will you tell other parents that they must make their kids wear one?

When is the last time that you actually saw a kid take an elbow to the mouth? I've reffed HS ball for 11 years, and college ball for 6 and I have never seen an elbow to the mouth. Does it happen? Maybe. Could it happen? Absolutely. But do those possibilities justify the requirement of wearing a mouthguard? JMO, but I don't think so.

It's a dumb rule.

Well, if that's the case, then let's make 'em wear lacrosse or football helmets!! Those would be much more effective, and would provide protection against an awkward fall, which is a much more likely source of head injury.

Additionally, as I've already stated, it will be a problem when we get teams from out of state who do not bring mouthguards with them.

As always, just my opinion.

Re: Re: Mouth guards
 

Ya know, I was thinking the same thing when I read jdccpa's post. Not saying I've never seen a kid take one in the chops, not saying I've never seen *some* blood in a players mouth, just saying I've never seen any more mouth damage than a kid might sustain in ordinary daily life.

BTW, I've heard of the occasional player getting cold-cocked, no mouth guard is going to protect against that.

Re: Re: Mouth guards
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ChuckElias

Quote:

Originally posted by jdccpa Quote: Protecting a great smile is only a secondary purpose of a mouthguard, preventing brain injuries is the primary reason for wearing one. Well, if that's the case, then let's make 'em wear lacrosse or football helmets!!

When the rule was first proposed for football,I remember our Association being sent a multi-page study on why the rule was being proposed.The main reason was prevention of concussions.The results of the study that I read back then showed that mouthguards reduced concussions by about 75%,if I remember right.That's on top of the helmet being worn.That's why hockey,rugger and lacrosse adopted them,too.I'm not sure if they're mandatory in soccer,but I've seen a lot of players wearing them there too.I would imagine that other sports are thinking of making their use mandatory for the exact same reason.

Gotta be studies concerning this on the internet somewhere.However with 14 NFL games and 3 MLB playoff games on the dish today,I do believe that I will wait for another time before looking.

I gotta do everything around here??

http://www.flash.net/~dkennel/guards.htm
http://www.canadiansportstherapy.com...oncussions.htm
http://www.chadashot.org.nz/art12.php
http://www.wipss.com/JOEL%20FABREY_USMC_mouthguard.htm

Re: Re: Mouth guards
 

I think it's a good rule from a safety standpoint for contact sports like football,hockey, lacrosse,rugger,etc. The studies that Dan found seem to support that view. Basketball is becoming more and more like a contact sport every year.The amount of contact allowed in today's game is much greater than what was allowed 20 or 30 years ago imo.I don't know whether mouthguards really are necessary for basketball yet,but I think we will be getting to that point some day.

Well, I'm a HS baseball umpire and I check every bat and helmet prior to every game. Part of my job.

Rich

Re: Back in the old days...
 

Have I finally met another person who believes that legislating the mandatory wearing of seatbelts and enforcing it with fines is not the purpose of government? I am with Mill on this one; paternal legislation is not a good thing for society. People need to think for themselves and make their own decisions.

Now a couple of comments. I have played soccer since I was six. I played in high school, on a regional select team from the west coast, and at Georgetown. Never did I wear a mouthguard. Never have I had a concussion. Never have I chipped a tooth or had one knocked out. There is clearly no need for them to be required.
I now officiate soccer and can tell you that mouth guards are definitely NOT required. The current rule is, "Intraoral (within the mouth) mouth and tooth protectors, including those with an occlusal (protecting and separating the biting surfaces) and/or a labial (protecting the lips) portion, are legal."

For those that believe all the studies and WISH to wear them, I think that is great. They should have the freedom to do so, but no one should tell others that they HAVE to wear them. They should have the freedom to not.

If I were in Mass I simply wouldn't enforce this rule; just as I don't enforce the NFHS rule on shinguards in soccer. If the kid doesn't want to wear them, the parents don't make him, and the coach doesn't care, why should I? Certainly not because the NFHS says so!

Then again remember that I am from Nevada, where we have guns, gambling, legal prostitution, and can get a beer 24/7. I guess that I am just used to living free. Unlike those who suffer under the senatorship of Ted Kennedy.
When it comes down to it, the bottom line is that it is my life and my body, I'll take care of it the way I choose.


[Edited by Nevadaref on Oct 6th, 2003 at 02:11 AM]

If I were in Mass I simply wouldn't enforce this rule; just as I don't enforce the NFHS rule on shinguards in soccer. If the kid doesn't want to wear them, the parents don't make him, and the coach doesn't care, why should I? Certainly not because the NFHS says so!

[/B][/QUOTE]Do you enforce the jewelry rule in basketball? If you did football,and a player didn't want to wear his helmet,would you go along with that if the parents and coach were in agreement?

Have you ever thought of the legal repercussions that you could be looking at if you ever had a disabling lower leg injury in a soccer game, and it happened to someone that you had let play without making them wear shinguards?

Do you know that if you carry sports liability insurance,you could possibly void it if you didn't enforce written safety rules?

Are there any other rules that you don't like,so you just don't bother enforcing them?

Just wondering.

In Kentucky, we call them toothguards and no, we don't require them to be worn during basketball games due to the low probability that the tooth will be hit.

Re: Re: Mouth guards
 

Unless I'm going blind, jdccpa has deleted his post where he originally wrote the following:

Quote:

Originally posted by jdccpa Protecting a great smile is only a secondary purpose of a mouthguard, preventing brain injuries is the primary reason for wearing one.

I've just now gotten around to checking the links that Dan provided and it just doesn't seem to be the case that the above comment is true.

http://www.flash.net/~dkennel/guards.htm This web site provides a list of reasons for wearing the mouthguards:

The first four reasons listed deal with oral injuries. Reduction of risk of concussion is listed fifth here.

http://www.canadiansportstherapy.com...oncussions.htm states that


An additional concern is that the only mouthguards that are considered truly effective have to be custom fitted at a cost of at least $85 each. This is a tremendous expense to place on every HS athlete's family, b/c I guarantee the schools aren't going to pay for them. If anything, the schools will provide the cheapest -- and thus the least effective -- option.

And finally, as I've stated before, how often do you actually see a kid get an elbow to the face? In basketball (in Massachusetts, anyway), it's almost never. The mouthguard is only useful if the contact occurs on the head or jaw. This almost never happens, even at higher and more physical levels of basketball. Is the risk of this type of injury so high that it justifies mandating high-cost protective equipment? I just don't think so.

After doing some research as jdccpa suggested, I guess I can see that the mouthguards really do provide some protection from concussion, and that really is a good thing. It just seems like over-reaching on the part of our state athletic association.

Re: Re: Re: Mouth guards
 

It might be over-reaching in basketball,but I don't think that it is for contact sports. I "googled" this under "concussion reduction through the use of mouthgaurds",and found a whole bunch of reports on-line.They are pretty well unanimous in agreeing that mouthguard usage in contact sports is recommended,and that the chance of concussions occurring will be lessened through the usage of them.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Mouth guards
 

I agree. In football and lacrosse, where contact to the head happens all the time, I can see that the risk is significant and may justify an across-the-board mandate.

I think a more protective piece of equipment to require for basketball would be "nard guards".

I thought <b>NardGuard</b> was a male deodorant?

Mouthguards are required in New Hampshire--we even have to enforce the rule while players are warming up--i don't like it but it is the rule

I guess Johnny Damon should have been wearing a mouthguard! ;)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Quote:

Do you enforce the jewelry rule in basketball?

Yes, because it is not paternal. The point of the rule is more for preventing others from being injured by a player's jewelry than himself.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Quote:

If you did football,and a player didn't want to wear his helmet,would you go along with that if the parents and coach were in agreement?

Yes. It is his decision to protect himself or not. Not mine, not the NFHS's. Do you remember when NHL players did not have to wear helmets? Do you recall when they grandfathered their mandatory wearing into the league? Now look at face-shields in the NHL. They can wear them if the want the extra protection, but they aren't required. When are we going to let people in this country make their own decisions?
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Quote:

Have you ever thought of the legal repercussions that you could be looking at if you ever had a disabling lower leg injury in a soccer game, and it happened to someone that you had let play without making them wear shinguards?

I have thought about it, JR. But I don't let stuff like that scare me. I also don't wear my seat-belt when I drive and no stupid fine is going to make me, ever!
I have told players and coaches both before games that a players shinguards are not up to the NFHS standards and when they whine about it, I just say, "It is your responsibility if you get hurt." They all say ok, and we play.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Quote:

Are there any other rules that you don't like,so you just don't bother enforcing them?

Yes, three seconds in basketball, travelling when there is no defense present, the new hand-checking rule (placing a hand on is a foul), and obstruction in boys soccer.

Wow!

At least I'm consistent. You have to grant me that. :)

Having read through this thread, I'm not so sure you should be proud of being consistent.

IANAL, but I'm not sure how well that exchange would hold up in court . . . . . .

Nevadaref,

Your philosophy is seriously flawed. All of the rules and/or laws you choose not to follow seem to be based on the idea that you just don't like them and no fine will make you follow them. When "Big Brother" steps where you don't like, the heck with him seems to be your mantra.
(By, the way, I think we all have that in us a little.)
But to shout it from the mountain top makes you look a quite silly. How can you justify blowing a whistle to some kid's argument that the kid just doesn't like the rule.
Now you are the same "Big Brother" that you spoke about from the mountain top.