Coaching Box - Deaf Player's Interpreter Told No

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by griblets

Why couldn't the interpreter interpret from a seat on the bench? That's not denying the player access to the coach's instructions. It seems the officials made an appropriate accommodation for the interpreter and people are still upset!

I think the governing association and the officials decided like you that giving the player some access to interpreter met the athletes need and their obligations.

Beyond that there are 2 groups of people upset.

1) Fans/followers who are in a twist because they got something one way all season long and then when someone tries to enforce a rule they get up in arms. Welcome to being a fan/follower.

2) The head of the legal branch of National Association for the deaf said in the article:
"Regardless of what the rules are for who may be on the sidelines, even if they limit access to coaches only, denying an interpreter is a violation of federal laws mandating equal access for deaf people."

Rosenblum said what happened "denies equal communication" for Joey.

So from the legal side they are likely going to argue the idea of equal communication. That if A1 can have a private convo with the coach standing in the box, Joey through hi interpreter all. need to be able to have a similar conversation with the coach. The argument will be that the interpreter is is not getting to communicate the coaches message are clearly, effectivey and in an equal way as the communication is happening.

[RefsNCoaches]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

I think the governing association and the officials decided like you that giving the player some access to interpreter met the athletes need and their obligations.

Beyond that there are 2 groups of people upset.

1) Fans/followers who are in a twist because they got something one way all season long and then when someone tries to enforce a rule they get up in arms. Welcome to being a fan/follower.

2) The head of the legal branch of National Association for the deaf said in the article:
"Regardless of what the rules are for who may be on the sidelines, even if they limit access to coaches only, denying an interpreter is a violation of federal laws mandating equal access for deaf people."

Rosenblum said what happened "denies equal communication" for Joey.

So from the legal side they are likely going to argue the idea of equal communication. That if A1 can have a private convo with the coach standing in the box, Joey through hi interpreter all. need to be able to have a similar conversation with the coach. The argument will be that the interpreter is is not getting to communicate the coaches message are clearly, effectivey and in an equal way as the communication is happening.

The cynical side of me says...if Joey is looking over at his interpreter for signs while on defense, he's at even more of a disadvantage....but I would also agree that the interpreter should be allowed access to communicate coach messages both in the huddle and during game.

Only once can I recall in my officiating years (20) where this type of thing came up and it was in a youth league. Of course, we allowed the interpreter to be where needed (which coach requested endline)...as long as they stayed back off the endline and out of the way of the officials..

This is the second event in the last month where the IHSAA is under fire. Now this one is a little more cut and dry to me...

https://www.indystar.com/story/sport...aa/2949529002/

[Freddy]

SITUATION 15: Team A has a player who is deaf. The coach requests that both a signer and head coach be allowed to occupy the optional coaching box in order to relay instructions to the affected player.
RULING: The school principal shall make a written request to the state high school association which shall include written verification from a physician confirming the condition. The state association, if it approves, will return a letter of approval and this letter shall be presented to the game officials prior to each contest.

[BillyMac]

With apologies to General Douglas MacArthur.

Originally Posted by Freddy

SITUATION 15: Team A has a player who is deaf. The coach requests that both a signer and head coach be allowed to occupy the optional coaching box in order to relay instructions to the affected player.
RULING: The school principal shall make a written request to the state high school association which shall include written verification from a physician confirming the condition. The state association, if it approves, will return a letter of approval and this letter shall be presented to the game officials prior to each contest.

Nice citation. Thanks.

Nevadaref? Why are you posting under Freddy's username?

[RefsNCoaches]

I'm guessing there's going to be an attorney that picks this up and uses that situational ruling by the NFHS to levy discrimination suit against them.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by RefsNCoaches

I'm guessing there's going to be an attorney that picks this up and uses that situational ruling by the NFHS to levy discrimination suit against them.

Yup. Shame on all of us for not being sensitive to a 20-year old interp that hasn’t been publicly available since the turn of the century, and that was never published in the formal casebook to begin with, thereby ensuring that 90% of officials never read it.

Oh the humanity!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by RefsNCoaches

I'm guessing there's going to be an attorney that picks this up and uses that situational ruling by the NFHS to levy discrimination suit against them.

Against whom? The NFHS? They have accommodations for deaf players based on this old interp. To me, the player's parents, coach, and school dropped the ball when they didn't submit the requisite paperwork with the state.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

Beyond that there are 2 groups of people upset.



1) Fans/followers who are in a twist because they got something one way all season long and then when someone tries to enforce a rule they get up in arms. Welcome to being a fan/follower.

What is it about playoff games that causes officials to make issues out of stuff they would likely ignore the previous three months?

(Rhetorical question. Don’t actually answer. We all know the answer.)



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ilyazhito]

Is it the fact that officials are actually being watched, for the possibility of advancing to the State Semifinals/Finals and want to show their rules knowledge (along with good mechanics and the other needed abilities)?

If I had this team's coach in the game, I would treat the interpreter as the head coach for the purposes of communication with the deaf player, and ask the head coach to file an accommodation letter with the state office, if he has not already done so. If the player (and his coach) present me with an accommodation letter from his state, I will honor it and relay the specifics to my partners.

[Nevadaref]

Unless the state office has given written permission for the interpreter to stand, she will be sitting on the bench and signing from there.
I don’t grasp how sign language is different when sitting or standing, so I don’t see any negative impact to the deaf player.

[Pantherdreams]

As the nephew of a deaf couple I can say line of sight and clarity of purpose is important. It is easier if they can focus on speaker & signer instead of trying to distinguish the signer from a mass of bodies and movements and determine who's voice they are signing. The role of the interpreter is to sign any communication made by an individual towards the hearing impaired person

Just like the head coaches voice gets to be distinct than the other bench noise because of presence, proximity, ease of contact over when they are sitting, etc. I would assume that the desire or expectation would be to have the interpreter able to relay all those attributes in real time in as similar a way as possible. By physically being by the coach and relaying the message in real time with their lips it is also evident to the reciever who is speaking to them. There would be no need to say sign Head Coach tom says or Assistant Coach Paul says. If they are allowed to be proximate to the speaker.

When my aunt and uncle use an interpreter the expectation is that other persons don't speak to the interpreter and that interpreter doesn't speak "to" others. My aunt and uncle are supposed to be able to maintain eye contact/ line of sight with the person whom they are speaking while the interpreter in in the vision of the speaker and hearing distance of hearing capable person in the case where they are interpreting sign for them.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Unless the state office has given written permission for the interpreter to stand, she will be sitting on the bench and signing from there.
I don’t grasp how sign language is different when sitting or standing, so I don’t see any negative impact to the deaf player.

Because you haven't signed before. It's louder when you stand and can sign from a higher vantage point of course. The equivalent of typing in all caps.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

What is it about playoff games that causes officials to make issues out of stuff they would likely ignore the previous three months?

Even though it was offered as a rhetorical question, I would like to answer.

Here in Connecticut, previous to the state tournament there is a meeting for all officials selected to work the state tournament. Among many other topics, points of emphasis (not the same as the NFHS Points of Emphasis) for state tournament games are covered. These topics often include things like uniforms, equipment, coaching box, state medical and religious waivers, etc. One year a major point of emphasis was to keep players out of the jump ball circle during the announcement of the starting lineups. Lots of officials were "herding" players away from the circle before state tournament games that year.

Also, here in Connecticut we have six local boards that cover regular season games in six different geographic regions. We have a state tournament rule that states that officials (we only work with our local board partners, no crossovers) may only work games in which both of the teams, or neither of the teams, in a specific state tournament game be geographically affiliated with those local board officials (Connecticut is a very small state, with no state tournament geographic regions, state tournament officials can work anywhere in the entire state).

Last night I observed my friends work a game at a site (ninety minute drive for me, slightly longer for them) that they never worked at before, between two teams they've never worked, teams in two different conferences they've never worked, from two towns they've never worked in, with two coaches that they've never met.

Even though Connecticut is 100% IAABO, each local board may stress certain rules differently than other local IAABO boards. One may see varsity players wearing illegal sleeves in some local boards, but not at the varsity level in other local boards. Some local boards may stress coach deportment more than other local boards.

These differences often become apparent in state tournament games.

[CJP]

I watched first half on Youtube.

The player checks in the first quarter with 1:38 remaining and plays the remainder of the quarter. The signer is standing at the designated spot (ultimately where the officials told her to stay after the incident that generated the headline).

The player does not get any playing time until he checks in with 2:56 remaining in the second quarter. The signer is again where she is ultimately told to stand.

At 1:42 remaining in the 2nd, things have gotten a little chippy. The assistant is standing in the coaches box. The signer is at the designated spot. The assistant is told to sit and the officials get together. The player is near the officials and the signer moves out of her spot for the first time. She moves out onto the floor in what appeared to be an attempt to explain the situation. The coach brings her back. The officials break up their meeting and the official tells her to stay where she has been previously standing.

This is a big to do about nothing. It should not have made the paper. This spot is between the bench and the table. She is never next to the coach from what I seen. They are commonly seen 15-20 feet apart.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by cjp

this is a big to do about nothing. It should not have made the paper.

fake news!!!