Smitty, just like their test questions, they are never worded that clearly. According to our rule committee guy, the chest pull is a definite unsporting act of not wearing the jersey properly and unsporting acts are to be T'd. As for our scenario, he stated that the officials, since they still had proper jurisdiction, SHOULD, and the NFHS WANTS each official to, assess technical fouls for each player they see doing this and award Team B the subsequent number of free throws since the free throws may impact the outcome. He did acknowledge that most officials in this situation would simply keep going to the locker room. He prompted more discussion by saying what if the Team B coach runs over to the officials before they've left pointing out the behavior? What should the officials do then? As I said, the discussion was lively.

They did say it, for crying out loud: :)

POE 1A- <i>"Holding the uniform out from the chest area to display the team name to opponents or fans"</i> At the end of that section, it says <b>"The result is a technical foul"</b>.

Can't get much clearer than that.

I'm unsure about that......gentle harp music......it's a Warm Summer Night in New Bedford....the year is 1973.....Summer Adult Park League Game. A1 (by best friend) crouches in prepartion for the Center Jump. As the ref tosses the ball A2 (me) reaches over and grabs the bottom of his shorts. (They were short-shorts back then.)

I distinctly remember a no-call on this by the Ref. In fact, he was laughing pretty good.

AI later retaliated by filling the pockets of my street clothes with talcum powder and Vitalis. (At least I smelled nice when I picked up my date after the game.)

Yeah ok, ok. I initially looked at that and thought the sentence "The result is a technical foul." referred to only the previous sentence, but reading it again, it refers to the entire paragraph. For crying out loud.

I think that pulling it out falls under unsporting behaviour and that's why they just made it a POE and lumped it all in together.

Bob:

I am not questioning you but what if A15 had previously been in the game and has scored/fouled?

I don't know about you guys and gals...but, if I have a situation where I am telling a player to leave the game because of blood on their jersey...I'm reminding the coach that the player will have to be escorted "away from the confines of the playing area" to change his jersey.

Hopefully, that will take care of any of these possible T's for shirt removal.

We haven't had the State Interpreter come yet...if he says don't worry about it...then I won't worry about it.

Me too. I'm guessing that our state interpreter is going to have a lot of quotes that say things like, "officials please use some common sense with this" and "understand the intent of this rule" and "we've never had a problem with this around here so let's not go looking for trouble."

Z

our state interp. didn't say anything of the sort!!
 

he said here is the rule!!! if they take off the shirt "FOR ANY REASON", automatic Technical foul!! They know the rule, we enforce it, period!!!! Gave all the examples, blood, frustration, etc... all were to be called techs!!! They don't want to leave a gray area where someone can make an excuse and maybe get away with it, so they just said if it comes off, expect a T.

I don't understand the question. It doesn't matter. A1 can switch shirts (outside the visual confines ...) with another player, or wear a practice jersey that's not confusing to the other team, or ....

See case 3.3.6A

Why would this be two T's? I am not saying it is not but my thinking is you don't give 5 T's for the starters not being in the book. You don't give 12 T's for the coach not having all the numbers right in the book. I understand that these are two different situations but two seems like you would be doing nothing more than creating a hostile coach and environment. I would prefer to rule this one incident thus only having to assess one T.

Anyone agree/disagree?

[Edited by ThickSkin on Oct 28th, 2005 at 04:16 PM]

Of course this would be the best route to go. Although I have worked with a few guys here who would bird dog the situation just so they could assess a T! It must make them feel powerful. To me a T is just another foul.

Re: our state interp. didn't say anything of the sort!!
 

Ok little jr...:D...do what your interpreter tells you to do, I certainly would. (Well, most of the time) ;)

Anyway, I believe Z and I (from the same state btw) were talking about shirts removed because of blood and because the official told the players to remove their shirts. IMO, this is much different than a player removing his/her shirt because of frustration, etc...that is clearly unsporting...whereas, removing a shirt because an official advised you to is not unsporting. Yea, I guess it could be offensive to some...but, I put it in another catagory.

As I said, I'll see what our State Interpreter's philosophy is with regards to blood shirt removal...and go from there.

Re: Re: our state interp. didn't say anything of the sort!!
 

I would think most interpreters, if they use NF rules and mechanics, will also go with the NF ruling on the bloody jersey as well - it's a T if removed on the bench. The NF specifically mentions this on-line, and in their publications. Not all states use NF mechanics, so if your state interpreter has no problem with the jersey being changed on the bench, then by all means follow that interp. In IL, they do not want the jersey being changed in the bench area. As far as giving a T because you're telling them to change the jersey - don't tell them that. All the official is required to do is tell them they can't play. Of course, with a little preventative officiating you can remind the coach the player can't change on the bench, but it's not our job to tell the player to change the jersey; it's only our job to tell them they can't play with it on.

Excellent point...thank you for clarifiying that.

And as you stated and IMO, use preventive officiating when telling the coach of the blood on the jersey.