Strange Case Continued ...

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

My daughter-in-law is a professor at Hofstra University, teaches media studies, and is considered an expert in social media (book and professional articles published, "go to" person for print, radio, and television news in the New York City market).

She advises me to stay off Facebook and Twitter (on any topic, not just basketball), tells me that I'll be eaten alive and spit out.

I didn't say it was for everyone. I use even Facebook for some very specific reasons. It works for me but then again I do not use it to say everything that comes to mind.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Great, the all important status of a 2012-13 POE is now moot.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It appears so because it's been changed.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

One of the old POE parameters isn't interpreted the same as it was in the old POE (an elbow in movement but not excessive should be an intentional foul) ...

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... are still valid as long as there are no relevant rule changes or interpretation changes to invalidate such ...

“I meant what I said and I said what I meant.” (Horton Hatches The Egg, Theodor Geisel (Dr. Seuss), 1940)

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

QI just now watched the video and have not read a single comment in this thread yet; I will read the threads tomorrow and address the comments made in the thread, but without reading a single comment I will now present the only correct RULING.

I have a Pushing Foul on W23. I can hear everyone yelling: WHAT!!! ARE YOU CRAZY!! Not in the least. Let me elaborate:

R23 secured a Defensive Rebound and W23 took a Defensive Position with his torso perpendicular to R23's torso. W23's Defensive Position was such that his legs straddled R23's legs and his body was just short of contact with R23. W23's position put him inside R23's Cylinder of Verticality which means that W23 is responsible for any contact between him and R23 that occurs inside R23's Cylinder of Verticality.

I am now going back to the Tampa Bay at Torornto baseball game on the MLB Network.

MTD, Sr.

[BillyMac]

Here's what I've gleaned from the three new casebook plays, existing definitions of intentional foul and flagrant foul in the rulebook, and the general purpose and intent of the old point of emphasis.

Contact Above the Shoulders: Player safety should be a high priority for all officials. In order to reduce concussions and decrease excessive contact situations, officials should consider penalty upgrades for illegal contact above the shoulders. Players shall not excessively swing arms or elbows, even without contacting an opponent. Excessive swinging of the elbows occurs when arms and elbows are swung about while using the shoulders as pivots, and the speed of the extended arms and elbows is in excess of the rest of the body as it rotates on the hips or on the pivot foot.

1) Excessively swinging arms or elbows without contacting the opponent is a violation.
2) Contact with an opponent above the shoulders with a stationary elbow may be incidental (legal), or a common foul (possibly a player control foul).
3) Making contact with an opponent above the shoulders with elbows that are excessively moving is considered an intentional foul.
4) If contact with an opponent above the shoulders is violent or excessive, a flagrant foul shall be ruled.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Here's what I've gleaned from the three new casebook plays, existing definitions of intentional foul and flagrant foul in the rulebook, and the general purpose and intent of the old point of emphasis.

Contact Above the Shoulders: Player safety should be a high priority for all officials. In order to reduce concussions and decrease excessive contact situations, officials should consider penalty upgrades for illegal contact above the shoulders. Players shall not excessively swing arms or elbows, even without contacting an opponent. Excessive swinging of the elbows occurs when arms and elbows are swung about while using the shoulders as pivots, and the speed of the extended arms and elbows is in excess of the rest of the body as it rotates on the hips or on the pivot foot.

1) Excessively swinging arms or elbows without contacting the opponent is a violation.
2) Contact with an opponent above the shoulders with a stationary elbow may be incidental (legal), or a common foul (possibly a player control foul).
3) Making contact with an opponent above the shoulders with elbows that are excessively moving is considered an intentional foul.
4) If contact with an opponent above the shoulders is violent or excessive, a flagrant foul shall be ruled.

Contact above the shoulders is not a problem in the game of basketball or at least not with elbow contact. Does it happen? Sure. But it is not an "every game" issue that takes place and we have to constantly deal with. Actually, some of the contact is not even an elbow, it is legal situations or situations that would involve running into another player like a screen. We have a concussion protocol and it is rare I have ever had to invoke it during a basketball game. We have to file a report if we send a kid out for a possible concussion or "concussion-like symptoms" regardless of the sport. I have even gone through most of a football situation and had no such protocols invoked.

I do not see anything special about these plays other than that is how we would have done it anyway (at least where I am). I said before I was in a game where a kid threw an elbow and hit his defensive opponent and we called an Intentional Foul after a PC foul was initially called. I gave information and the official agreed that we upgrade and no one said much of a word. No one went on about the language or the casebook we called what fit the wording we already had. It was excessive even if the player did not do something on purpose.

I simply think this supports what we would have likely done anyway.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

We have a concussion protocol and it is rare I have ever had to invoke it during a basketball game. We have to file a report if we send a kid out for a possible concussion or "concussion-like symptoms" regardless of the sport.

Connecticut officials are very fortunate in that we never have to deal with concussions. Several years ago the State legislature considered giving officials the responsibility of dealing with concussions.

Luckily, we have an officials arm (CIAC Officials Association, $13.00 annual fee) of our state interscholastic sport governing body (CIAC) that attended public hearings and lobbied for us. As a result, the State legislature decided that only health care professionals and coaches will determine whether, or not, players have been concussed, and how to deal with such.

Coaches at all levels of interscholastic sports (even middle school) must be trained (and periodically retrained) in concussion protocols. As officials we are told to only observe and advise, and we are actually told to never to use the word "concussion" in describing an injury to a coach, instead it's more like, "Coach. Check out number twenty-two. He may be injured". After that it's 100% up to the health care professional (trainer) and/or coach to decide how to move forward, officials have nothing to do with anything concussion related.

[JRutledge]

We do not deal with concussions other than observing and reporting incidents where a player might have concussions. We do not diagnose them and it is required by state law to be documented. Players play based on medical professional's positions and we just let it be known that there might be an issue. And we have to pass a concussion protocol exam to keep our license every 3 years.

But again in basketball, it is very rare. In football, it is much more common and you know when a kid might be likely "dinged" by their behavior after a hit or contact. All we do is report when a player leaves the game and report when they are coming back in. We do not diagnose anything. If the medical professional says they have not experienced a concussion we let them come back in the game. Just like you decide if a player is too hurt to continue immediately. Ultimately someone decides if they are medically cleared to play or not. Even the coach cannot sign off on a player playing without information from the medical professional. And since you love the rulebook, it is stated in the rulebook.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Connecticut officials are very fortunate in that we never have to deal with concussions. Several years ago the State legislature considered giving officials the responsibility of dealing with concussions.

Luckily, we have an officials arm ... of our state interscholastic sport governing body (CIAC) that attended public hearings and lobbied for us. As a result, the State legislature decided that only health care professionals and coaches will determine whether, or not, players have been concussed, and how to deal with such.

Coaches at all levels of interscholastic sports (even middle school) must be trained (and periodically retrained) in concussion protocols. As officials we are told to only observe and advise, and we are actually told to never to use the word "concussion" in describing an injury to a coach, instead it's more like, "Coach. Check out number twenty-two. He may be injured". After that it's 100% up to the health care professional (trainer) and/or coach to decide how to move forward, officials have nothing to do with anything concussion related.

After reviewing this thread, and questioning the apparent conflict between NFHS and Connecticut concussion protocols, I asked our local Connecticut IAABO interpreter to review Connecticut concussion protocols.

All local Connecticut IAABO interpreters, and the Connecticut IAABO State interpreter, agree that this (above) is still the concussion protocol here in Connecticut.

Connecticut is a 100% IAABO state for all scholastic (high school and middle school) games.

This NFHS casebook play was cited.

2.8.5 SITUATION: A1 and B1 hit heads in diving for a loose ball and both appear injured. However, A1 is immediately removed from the game by the officials as he/she is exhibiting signs consistent with a concussion. Later in the game, A1 reports to the scorer’s table to reenter the contest. RULING: The rules permit A1 to return to the game once he/she has been cleared by an appropriate health-care professional. The responsibility for obtaining that clearance rests with the coach/school, and need not be verified by the officials (unless state procedures require verification). If A1 appears at the scorer’s table to reenter the game, the officials shall assume the coach/school followed the appropriate return-to-play procedures and A1 is eligible to participate.

"Unless state procedures require verification". What's true for Connecticut may not be true for other states, or localities, so check your local listings.

Regarding legal civil liability, I feel more confident now that I have the backing of my local board, state board, and the NFHS (as well as our State legislature) when I say, "Coach. Check out number twenty-two. She may be injured", and leave the followup to the head coach, especially if there is no trainer as is always the case in my middle school games.

Of course, as usual, and always, when in Rome ...

And remember, this is America, anybody can sue anybody for anything at any time, and if one is summoned to criminal, or civil, court, one needs to hire an attorney and attorney billable hours aren't inexpensive (even if one wins in court).

"Safety is number one priority" (Crazy Russian Hacker)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I simply think this supports what we would have likely done anyway.

I like the "overturning" of the old (and controversial) Point of Emphasis, and I like that there are now a few "permanent" casebook plays to refer to for guidance.

With the old Point of Emphasis now moot, I'm now not quite certain how the NFHS wants us to handle an elbow in movement, but not excessive, striking an opponent in the head, it used to be be an intentional foul in the old Point of Emphasis. The new casebook play only describes making contact with an opponent above the shoulders with elbows that are excessively moving, calling for an intentional foul.

But I've been to lots and lots of rodeos, and around the block many, many times, so I'm pretty sure that I will be able to figure it out when it happens in my games. That's why basketball officials get paid the big bucks.