Strange Case Continued ...

[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 JRutledge

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.

2-8-5: The officials must: Immediately remove a player from the game who exhibits signs, symptoms or behaviors consistent with a concussion as in 3-3-8. (See NFHS Suggested Guidelines for Management of Concussion in Sports.)

3-3-8: Any player who exhibits signs, symptoms or behaviors consistent with a concussion (such as loss of consciousness, headache, dizziness, confusion, or balance problems) must be immediately removed from the game and must not return to play until cleared by an appropriate health care professional. (See NFHS Suggested Guidelines for Management of Concussion in Sports.)

Here in Connecticut, we ignore these NFHS rules. Officials receive absolutely no concussion protocol training. None. We don't even review the NFHS Suggested Guidelines for Management of Concussion in Sports.

By State law (that trumps the NFHS), properly trained and certified coaches and/or health care professionals (trainers) make all the concussion, or concussion-like symptoms decisions, not officials. Does the player have a concussion, or concussion like symptoms? Does the player come out of the game? Can the player renter the game? Can the player participate in the next game? All decided by coaches and/or health care professionals (trainers), not officials.

If there is no health care professional (trainer) present, as in almost all middle school games, and a lot of freshman games, it's all on the coaches, including allowing, or not allowing, said player to reenter.

As I said earlier, the only thing Connecticut officials can do is to stop the game and say, "Hey coach. Check out number twenty-four. She may be hurt".

Well worth my CIAC Officials Association $13.00 annual fee. Since they lobbied in support of officials at the State legislature, nobody ever complains about these dues anymore (as some did in the past). One less headache we have to worry about.

Note: CIAC Officials Association $13.00 annual fee (mandatory for all local IAABO board members) pays for background checks for new officials, gets us into all regular season sports, for all three seasons, for free (nice if one has children, or grandchildren, playing in interscholastic sports), and gets us into all basketball state tournament games for free (lets me observe and "yank chains").

[JRutledge]

All wonderful, but all I said is we report the incidents, that is pretty much it. If a player is hurt we already remove them from the game. If is involves CLS, then they just have to inform us we are coming back. We report similar to a teacher that can report abuse or other things with children. Simple and not a big deal honestly. It rarely comes up.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... we report the incidents, that is pretty much it. If a player is hurt we already remove them from the game. If is involves CLS, then they just have to inform us we are coming back. We report similar to a teacher that can report abuse or other things with children.

Do you have a responsibility, as an official, to immediately remove from the game any player who exhibits signs, symptoms or behaviors consistent with a concussion (loss of consciousness, headache, dizziness, confusion, or balance problems), and/or to not allow them to return to play until cleared by an appropriate health care professional (not the coach)?

If so, that may come with some legal liability issues if an official doesn't remove such a player from the game, or allows said player to return with just a coaches recommendation (as in a middle school game), and they suffer more serious injuries as a result of continuing to play, or because of being allowed to reenter. That could be viewed as legally negligent behavior.

Thanks to our State legislature, we don't have that problem here in Connecticut. If a coach allows an inured player to continue, or to renter, that's 100% on him, and he can get sued, he's trained, he's certified, and not covered by Good Samaritan laws.

Not a Connecticut official's job legally. We're not trained, we're not certified. No legal liability. Thank you State legislature.

Also, regarding teachers reporting abuse, it may certainly be different in your area, but in Connecticut, and in many other states, teachers (and school administrators) are mandatory reporters. It's not that they CAN report suspected abuse, it's that they MUST report suspected abuse, or be subject to criminal arrest for not reporting (up the legal ladder) suspected abuse, and we've had a few arrests in Connecticut for such irresponsible and negligent behavior. Same mandatory reporting laws also apply to doctors, nurses, social workers, etc.

[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 BillyMac

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)

[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.