Jerseys during Warm-ups
 

Had something last night I've never seen before. Are players required to wear their jersey during warm-ups? I didn't find anything that requires it. We had a player that went through his full warm-up, up to about 1:00 before tip off, in just his compression undershirt. While it seemed wrong and didn't pass the common-sense test, I didn't have definite knowledge, so let it go, and then couldn't find anything in the book that said they had to have it at that time. Has anyone ever seen that?

Nearest I could find was that the game jersey shall be tucked in to the game shorts, which would obviously require one to be wearing a game jersey. But I believe this is only for players (i.e., after the game has begun.)

In hindsight, maybe I'd pull the old 2-3, go put it on and continue the warm-up.

Was his number listed in the scorebook? Oh wait, you couldn't check that because you didn't know what his number was. :confused:

OK, I'm not a BB ref, but how is this really any different than the player that has a warm up on over his jersey? Or who may not have a jersey on under that warm up because you can't tell what is under?

And that's one of my mental arguments for letting it go. I just don't want that to be a precedent that gets set either.

Also, what if the compression shirt was not of legal color based on it being an undershirt during normal game play? For example, the school colors are orange and black yet the shirt, let's go with short-sleeved, was the color purple. How about it they were wearing jeans? Or headphones?

What does the rule book say about jeans or headphones?

Who cares what color the compression shirt is during warm-ups (besides maybe just telling the player that it needs to be legal if s/he plays).

For this, and for the OP -- don't be a plumber (with apologies to Freddy(?))

Interesting ...
 

So a player can be charged with a technical foul for removing the jersey within the visual confines of the playing area, but there's no penalty for not wearing a jersey between the officials jurisdiction beginning and the beginning of the game? How about a player whom the official identifies as wearing an illegal undershirt, removing the jersey within the visual confines of the playing area to remove the illegal undershirt, and then putting his jersey back on before the game begins?

Whenever I see illegal gear, next to skin, that requires removal, I tell the player to go to the locker room. I usually add a quick blurb about it being necessary to avoid a T or something along those lines.

"Taking Off The Jersey Rule" ...
 

Good preventative officiating.

I, on the other hand, never tell a player that they have to remove anything, jewelry, illegal undershirt, etc. Per instructions by an attorney at a clinic many years ago (before the "taking off the jersey rule"), I just tell them that they can't play with illegal equipment, and leave it to the player, coach, and possibly, parent, to figure it out.

"Take out the earrings", stated by an official can have unintended (albeit very, very rare) health consequences that I just don't want to deal with.

Obviously, taking out earrings and taking off a jersey aren't (health wise) the same thing.

If I recall correctly, the "taking off the jersey rule" was to prevent a player who had just fouled out from showing resentment, or disgust, to the call by taking off the jersey on the way to the bench. I'll charge a technical foul in a New York minute every time in that situation.

Taking off a jersey to remove an illegal undershirt? Based on purpose and intent, I'm looking the other way.

I might mention to the player to go to the locker room if I have a direct conversation with them, but a player who decides to remove a jersey to remove an illegal undershirt on his own volition, I'm looking the other way. If the opposing coach questions my "call", I'm going with intent and purpose and the history of the rule.

Kicking the can down the road creating a problem for the next official in the same situation? Guilty as charged.

Let the stoning begin.

You don't.

SITUATION 4: During the pregame warm-up, the 12 members of Team A are wearing warm-up tops, but not their team jerseys. Approximately one minute prior to the opening jump ball, the 12 Team A members go to the team bench, remove the warm-up tops and put on the team jerseys. RULING: One technical foul is charged to Team A, and it is also charged indirectly to the head coach. COMMENT: In a situation where similar multiple infractions occur at the same time, it is not the intent of the rules to penalize each individual infraction as a separate technical foul. (3-4-15; 10-4-1h)

SITUATION 5: A1 is directed to leave the game with a blood-saturated jersey. While at the team bench area, he/she removes the jersey and changes into a clean, spare jersey. RULING: A1 is assessed a technical foul. Team B is awarded two free throws and the ball for a division line throw-in. COMMENT: The uniform rule is intended to be applied in all situations. It is not unreasonable to expect team members to leave the playing area to change uniforms. (3-4-15; 10-4-1h)[

Naked And Afraid ...
 

Great citations.

I wonder if they apply to frezer11's original post of putting jerseys on before a game, since the rule states that players can't remove the jersey and/or pants/skirt (nothing about putting jerseys on, and nothing was removed) within the visual confines of the playing area.

In fact Situation 4 doesn't exactly match the rule because the players are taking off warmups within the visual confines of the playing area, while the rule states that players can't remove the jersey and/or pants/skirt (nothing about removing warmups) within the visual confines of the playing area.

I wonder why an indirect technical foul isn't charged to the head coach in Situation 5, assuming the player directed to leave the game has already been substituted for and is now bench personnel.

Of course, Felix Unger told us what happens when we assume.

Jerseys during Warm-ups
 

It is this exact attitude that caused the NFHS to finally call out officials like you this year in the new book, letting you know that you are really part of the problem.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Double Jeopardy ...
 

Oddly, I agree with Big_Blue_Wannabe.

But in this very specific circumstance (telling a player that they can't play with an illegal undershirt, and then charging them with a technical foul when they go to the bench, on their own volition, and remove it) is not the way that I want to start my game, with both an irritated player, and an irritated coach ("But you told him that he couldn't play with that undershirt."), nor would almost all of my 300-plus local colleagues, some (sadly, more than just a few) that wouldn't even address the illegal undershirt, making me very confident that I won't be setting up the next crew for criticism from the coaches.

When in Rome ...

So tell the player "if you want to play, you need to leave the gym and take off the undershirt" -- or tell that to the coach and have him/her tell the player.

Now if they stay and do it, it's no them.

Always Listen To bob ...
 

Great advice from bucky and bob jenkins.

The "Taking Off The Jersey Rule" has probably been around for a decade. Here in my little corner of Connecticut, I've never seen it enforced on any level for anything other than a player who had just fouled out showing resentment, or disgust, to the call by taking off the jersey on the way to the bench.

I wonder how many Forum members enforce every "Fashion Police" rule? Or how many officials, in general, fully understand, and enforce, every "Fashion Police" rule? Sad to say, we don't do a great job in my local area. Better enforcement of the undershirt rule (a very simple rule to understand, not many choices for legal colors) would lead to fewer players having to change (although, to flip it, no enforcement of the rule would lead to no players having to change), leading to less chance of players trying to change in the bench area.

Still Naked And Still Afraid ...
 

I'd still like to some discussion about this interpretation, especially involving frezer11's original post.

Players legally remove warmups at the bench area all the time (albeit, usually with a jersey underneath). So is it illegal for them to put on a jersey, as well as remove a jersey, at the bench area?

Is it the intent of the NFHS that players not show any underwear (undershirt), or skin, within the visual confines of the playing area, before, or during the game (under the jurisdiction of the officials)?

Is it that simple? I sure hope so.

I'm assuming these citations are from a previous year's case book? I don't see them in the current book, and quoted rules citations are inaccurate. (Rule 3 Section 4 has 5 articles, not 15). What year's book are you referencing, or is this an interpretation from somewhere else?

You Can Look It Up (Depending On Where You Look) ...
 

2005-06 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations.

https://forum.officiating.com/basket...tml#post546075

Got ya, thank you.

I don't know if this applies to the original scenario or not. What it does show is that if you pull off any kind of warm up, you must have the jersey underneath. As far as adding the jersey without taking anything off? It appears that the rule, cases, and interpretation are centered around removing items in the visual confines, not so much about adding them.

For the record, I think the intent of that interpretation is that teams must warm up in the game jersey, and will from here on out interpret it as such. I don't mean to be overly nit-picky, I just don't see the clear connection in the rules to this scenario.

NFHS Follies ...
 

Even if they warm up in their warmups and go into the locker room to change into their jerseys before the game starts?

I believe that this (below) is the intent:

But I gave up trying to understand some NFHS rule and interpretation (see backcourt simultaneous last to touch, first to touch) oddities a long time ago.

I do not see where it shows that.

I feel it is skin.

I think the case play is assuming that the players had on ONLY the warmup tops, and not a t-shirt or something underneath.

IIRC (and my memory might be as faulty as Billy's), this all started with VB where the girls would (and still usually do) wear warmup tops, and then change into the jerseys later. They would do this at the bench, showing the sports-bras to all the HS boys.

So, imo, if the player is wearing the proper undershirt and then adds a jersey, that seems fine to me.

Once the jersey is on, though, it stays on.

The facts don’t care about your feelings. [emoji23][emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

See Bob's Post #12 above, Situation 4.

I did and still do not see where it shows that. I read it as the warm up top comes off to reveal bare skin. I do not read that it requires the jersey be underneath. Just my opinion.

I do not believe that it is the bare skin that matters. It is the doffing and/or donning of the jersey itself. Consider the case where a player gets blood on a jersey but has an undershirt on too. That player still has to exit the gym to change the jersey.

Doffing And Donning ...
 

Maybe by interpretation, but not by rule. The rule only states that players can't remove the jersey and/or pants/skirt within the visual confines of the playing area.

Does anyone see this being addressed by the NFHS? I do. Can you imagine a very physical team wearing all skin tight undershirts for warm ups? I do not feel the governing body would allow this.

What are your thoughts?

Not sure I get the reference to "a very physical team". :confused:

I was wondering the same. I'm guessing you mean a team that appears physically intimidating that is doing this for the purpose of intimidation?

A team that is all jacked/ripped/etc

Should that make a difference in how you rule?

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

Since there aren't enough rules already, I think NFHS should instantly jump on this as a critical concern, just in case some teams comes up with this stupid idea and tries it. . . :rolleyes:

And, since the team will just then go with tight jerseys, the rule will include a "coefficient of looseness" that must be measured and reported. The team roster must list accurate weights and all team members will be required to step on a scale before entering the game.

They won't limit this expansion of micromanagement to players, though. For 2019 all officiating crews will be required to include one bald official and one official with a BMI >35.

While I can understand the frustration of members having to play fashion police, I believe this situation is quite different. I believe this scenario directly relates to players not being properly equipped and ready to play. If players are on the floor during the jurisdiction of the officials they should be properly equipped - that means a jersey is necessary. In Indiana we are required to ask both coaches if all players are properly equipped during our pregame meeting. If they are not we typically address it then.

2.4.5 SITUATION B:

To the referee's pregame inquiry of coaches regarding all team members being legally equipped and wearing the uniform properly, both coaches responded "yes."

"Coefficient of Looseness." As a physics teacher, I appreciate this new term so much, well done.

I understand your point, but let me throw this at you: If there are players wearing 2 different knee sleeve colors during your meeting, and the answer to legally equipped is "No" (or for that matter yes, and you find out later), do you assess a technical foul? Or allow that player to adjust their equipment to make it legal? Back to the original scenario, if discovered, do you penalize with a T, or allow it, so long as it is fixed by game time?

[QUOTE=bob jenkins;1015117
IIRC (and my memory might be as faulty as Billy's), this all started with VB where the girls would (and still usually do) wear warmup tops, and then change into the jerseys later. They would do this at the bench, showing the sports-bras to all the HS boys.
[/QUOTE]

This was the only reason I attended girls VB games back in the day. That and spandex shorts

Let's Go To The Videotape ...
 

For the good of the cause:

2005-06 NFHS Basketball Rules Changes
3-4-15 Prohibits a team member from removing his/her jersey and/or pants/skirt within the visual confines of the playing area. The penalty is a technical foul.

COMMENTS ON THE 2005-06 RULES REVISIONS
JERSEYS/PANTS/SKIRTS PROHIBITED FROM BEING REMOVED (3-4-15, 10-3-7h, 10-4-1h): A team member is prohibited from removing his/her jersey and/or pants/skirt within the confines of the playing area. The penalty is a technical foul. The former uniform rule didn't require team members to actually wear the team uniform. This addition also addresses a growing behavioral concern of players removing their jerseys to demonstrate frustration or anger and as a means of attracting individual attention. The rule is intended to be applied in all situations - even when a player must change uniforms due to blood or other unusual circumstances. It is not unreasonable to expect team members to go to their locker rooms to change their jerseys.

2005-06 NFHS Basketball Points Of Emphasis
1) Sporting Behavior
A) Uniforms
Players are increasingly using their uniforms in unsporting ways. Examples include: Holding the uniforms out from the chest area to display the team name to the opponent or fans; pulling the uniform out of the shorts in an emotional display; and removing the jersey either on the court or near the team bench, especially after a disqualification. The committee expects jerseys to be worn properly and remain on. New Rule 3-4-15 adds, “A player shall not remove the jersey and/or pants/skirt in the confines of the playing area”. The result is a technical foul. Uniforms must be worn as intended and the rule must be enforced. The jersey must be tucked in and the shorts must be worn properly. When a player is in violation of the rule, the player is directed to leave the game. While an untucked jersey during the normal course of play is understandable until it can be corrected, too often there are multiple warnings for clear violations. Coaches bear great responsibility in ensuring uniforms stay on team members. Official must enforce the rule.

I understand your point, and basically agree, however......sounds as if you are disregarding Case 3.5 SIT A: The officials are on the court prior to the game observing the
team warm-ups. One official notices that a member of Team A is wearing a decorative necklace. RULING: The official should inform the team member to remove the jewelry immediately. Upon compliance, the team member may continue to warm up with his or her teammates and may start the game without penalty.


Just a little teasing:)

I disagree with it being considered an unsporting act. This is the part again, where in my opinion it involves skin.

Example: A1 is wearing a long-sleeve undershirt beneath his jersey. The jersey gets blood on it. A1, at the end of his bench, removes the jersey. IMO: I do not see that as being an unsporting act.

Now, same scenario, but A1 is not wearing an undershirt. I would err on the side of that being unsporting, since there is an exposed torso.

Example 2: A1 is wearing a long-sleeve undershirt beneath his jersey. A1 receives his 5th foul. Upon getting to the bench, A1 removes his jersey in disgust. IMO: I see that as being an unsporting act.

I feel, again just my opinion, that the intent of the NFHS was two-fold. One, it was to prevent exposed torsos (skin) and two, it was to penalize players removing jerseys in disgust.

I will try and follow the rules on it but if I encounter a player removing a jersey (not in disgust) with an undershirt, I would be hard-pressed to call a T.

Semper Ubi Sub Ubi ...
 

By rule, I don't believe that an undershirt exempts a player from this rule.

Esquire ...
 

My interpretation comes from an attorney, not the NFHS.

Things Officials Should Probably Not Be Saying In A Game

Calvin Coolidge once said, "The things I did not say never hurt me." Of course, he was not talking about basketball, but many officials would be smart to heed his sage advice as they communicate with coaches, and players.

"You have to take out your earrings”, is occasionally stated by officials to players in the pregame layup lines who are wearing earrings. It’s only a minor difference in semantics, but it’s probably better, for legal liability reasons, to instead say, "You can't play, or even warm up, wearing earrings". This puts the decision, to remove the earrings, or not to remove the earrings, on the player, or the coach, and possibly, on the parent, and takes any legal liability off the official’s shoulders.

Finally, a thought by Will Rogers, “Never miss a good chance to shut up.”

May you never have an attorney in the crowd directing you to call traveling then.;)

While I understand the point, I would not apply these to all situations. I always think back to when, among other times, Marc McGuire was being questioned about PED's. He never answered the question. By not answering, he was admitting guilt....in the court of social justice.;)

You Don't Say ...
 

Just those mentioned in the article:

Things Officials Should Probably Not Be Saying In A Game

Calvin Coolidge once said, "The things I did not say never hurt me." Of course, he was not talking about basketball, but many officials would be smart to heed his sage advice as they communicate with coaches, and players.

Good communication skills are important tools to have on any official’s tool belt. Good communication with a partner, with a player, or with a coach, can go a long way to maintaining control of the game, having good game management, and having a smooth game. Sometimes this communication takes place in oral form, talking to players, or coaches, in some cases to explain a ruling, or in other cases to prevent a violation, or a foul. However, probably for reasons of tradition, there have been things that officials often, or sometimes, say during a game that do not have any basis in the rules, and should probably not be said in a game. This article will cover some of those “best left unsaid” statements.

“He wasn’t set”, is often an official’s answer to a coach who is questioning a blocking foul on his player. This implies that a defensive player must be set, and can’t move, to take a charge, while, in reality, the rules say otherwise. A defensive player does not have to remain stationary to take a charge. A defender may turn away or duck to absorb contact, provided he, or she, has already established legal guarding position, which is both feet on the playing court and facing the opponent. The defender can always move backwards, or sideways, to maintain a legal guarding position, and may even have one, or both feet, off the floor when contact occurs. That player may legally rise vertically. However, if the defender is moving forward, then the contact is caused by the defender, which, in this case, is a blocking foul.

"On the floor”, sometimes stated by officials for fouls against players who are not in the act of shooting, is also not rule based. This implies that a player cannot be on the floor, and shooting, at the same time, when in reality the old fashioned set shot, still used by some three point shooters, is a classic example of a player, on the floor, who is also in the act of shooting. Better statement: “No shot”.

"Don't move”, said to an inbounding player, by an official, before a designated spot throw-in, is another statement that should probably go unsaid. According to the rules, that player can move laterally within a three foot wide area, can jump up, and can move as far back as time, and space, will allow. Better statement: “Designated spot”, while pointing to the spot.

"Hold your spots", said by the referee, or tosser, before the jump ball, is only rule based for some of the players. One exception to this rule, and there are others, is that players on the jump ball circle can move off the jump ball circle at any time: before the toss, during the toss, or after the toss.

"You can't stand behind him”, stated by the referee, or the umpire, before a jump ball, to a player who is directly behind an opponent, both whom are ten feet off the jump ball circle, is not rule based. The rule that players can’t stand behind, within three feet, of an opponent, only applies to players on, and within three feet of, the jump ball circle. Players farther back than that can stand wherever they want, as long as they get to that spot first.

"Everybody get behind the division line”, often said by an official before free throws for a technical foul, or an intentional foul, is also not rule based. According to the rule, the nine non-shooters shall remain behind the free throw line extended, and behind the three point arc, and do not have to stay behind the division line. In some cases, this may allow players to legally converse with their coaches.

"Over the back", reported by an official to the table on a rebounding foul, is, in reality, probably a pushing foul. Over the back is not necessarily a foul. There must be illegal contact to have a foul. A taller player may often be able to get a rebound over a shorter player, even if the shorter player has good rebounding position. If the shorter player is displaced, then a pushing foul must be called, and this should be reported to the table as such.

"Reaching in", reported by an official to the table on a foul against a ball handler, is not necessarily a foul. There must be illegal contact to have a foul. The mere act of reaching in, is by itself, nothing. If illegal contact does occur, it’s probably a holding foul, an illegal use of hands foul, or a hand check foul, and these should be reported to the table as such.

"Coach, you have one timeout left", is a courtesy often extended by officials to coaches, when, by rule, officials should only be notifying head coaches when their team has been granted its final allowable timeout. If there is any miscommunication, or mistake, involving the table crew reporting remaining timeouts, then the officials, by rule, need to stay out of the conversation. Let the coaches, and table crew, communicate about remaining timeouts, other than when a team has been granted its final allowable timeout, which by rule, is required to be reported to the coach by the officials.

"Sit down", is occasionally stated by an official to a coach who is acting in an unsporting way, but who has not yet been charged with a technical foul, is not rule based. Back in the “olden days” of the “seatbelt rule”, this was a common method of dealing with coaches who have gone, or who are about to go, “over the line”. Now, with the coaching box, officials can only tell coaches to sit down after they have been charged with a direct technical foul, or an indirect technical foul, and even then, there are still a few occasions when these coaches can still legally stand up.

"You have to take out your earrings”, is occasionally stated by officials to players in the pregame layup lines who are wearing earrings. It’s only a minor difference in semantics, but it’s probably better, for legal liability reasons, to instead say, "You can't play, or even warm up, wearing earrings". This puts the decision, to remove the earrings, or not to remove the earrings, on the player, or the coach, and possibly, on the parent, and takes any legal liability off the official’s shoulders.

Finally, a thought by Will Rogers, “Never miss a good chance to shut up.”