Wrong. If you allow a player to wear a hairband that is prohibited under rule 3-5-3 and an injury somehow results, you had better believe that you are liable.

And, yes, I just phoned one of our officials who is a lawyer and got a legal opinion on that.

My tongue was planted firmly in my keyboard as I typed.

If I saw it, and allowed it, I would be in trouble. But if I tell the coach, he kinda takes responsibility if he allows the player in, and I don't see it.

But, of course, that wouldn't stop me from getting sued. It might keep me from being liable.

You must have a long tongue.

....which certainly can be a plus.....

....which also brings to mind a coupla jokes, which I think I'll hold in abeyance until Mother Teresa gets back from her retreat.:D

Gene Simmons used to come to me for advice.

You also have to be aware of it. Not all players have the same hair color or use things that contrast with their hair color. So you would first have to recognize it than then turn the other cheek. That may not happen in our case.

Peace

So your lawyer says that you are liable for a green hairband that is worn instead of a blue hairband to match the uniform?

No, but you're liable if you allow illegal equipment to be worn that ends up causing an injury.....which is what I've been saying all along

You have to be aware of it.

There was a case somewhere in a football game where a player put a tack in his glove and purposely shook the hands of opponents to cause injury. There was another case were a player sharpened the face mask so that anyone touching him or the player could use the facemask as a weapon to cut players on their hands and arms. The player's were penalized and to my knowledge the officials were never held responsible. You have to be aware that something is illegal.

We are debating over a string, not a knife or other weapon. The officials have to know this is illegal. If we just put our hands in a player's hair, we would be responsible for other issues. Our responsibility is only going to go so far.

Peace

Agree. If it's not obvious and you weren't aware of it, it would certainly be hard for anyone to claim gross negligence on the official's part imo. Not that they wouldn't try though...they name everybody including the janitors in these lawsuits. If you knowingly allow something unsafe to be worn though, and someone then gets hurt, methinks that there' s a good chance that your azz is gonna be in a hairband.

The good thing is that the rules allow the R to use his judgement as to whether something really is safe or not. If someone else disagrees, then let 'em go to the State governing body and get a definitive ruling....which they shoulda done in the first place anyway on anything iffy.

You will never be able to completely avoid a lawsuit. There are officials that have been sued all over this country for things when they followed the rules to the letter. This is no exception. I just think we are not going to do a lot to make sure something is legal when at first glance it looks normal.

Peace

And if it's iffy, I think that most of us will lean towards letting the kid play too.

Not according to Merriam-Webster Online:

Main Entry: 1band
Pronunciation: 'band
Function: noun
Etymology: in senses 1 & 2, from Middle English band, bond something that constricts, from Old Norse band; akin to Old English bindan to bind; in other senses, from Middle English bande strip, from Middle French, from Vulgar Latin *binda, of Germanic origin; akin to Old High German binta fillet; akin to Old English bindan to bind, bend fetter -- more at BIND
1 : something that confines or constricts while allowing a degree of movement [this certainly defines what a hair band would do, but it doesn't say it has to be continuous]
2 : something that binds or restrains legally, morally, or spiritually
3 : a strip serving to join or hold things together: as a : BELT


I haven't received my new rules/case books yet so I can't comment on anything that may or may not be in there, but there's nothing I can find in either the '05-'06 rules or case books that disallows strings or ribbons to tie up hair.

In all seriousness, what am I missing? :confused:

And if the whole issue is tied up [no pun intended, but I like it anyway] in the definition of the word "band" then there is most certainly room for interpretation. An elastic piece of cloth can't be a string, i.e., "a strip serving to join or hold things together, as a belt"? The NFHS needs to be clearer and more specific if they mean a continuous piece of cloth or rubber.

Absolutly. Heard last year a game where a "set" oif fingernails were culprit in drawing blood on an opponent.

Chapter meeting later had a field day this one.

Consensus was to remove player BEFORE game in regrds for all players saftey. Could return if corrected.

NFHS 3-5-3...... Changed the guidelines for headbands and sweatbands.

I was watching a H.S. football game last night. Some of the players had on "bands" above their elbows. The NFHS basketball rule regarding sweatbands says they must be worn BELOW the elbow.

Question: Does anyone know of a "band" that could be legally worn above the elbow in basketball? I know we had some issues with this last year...some people say that these "bands" (that look an awful lot like a sweatband) are indeed supports for the upper arm. :rolleyes:

Sweatbands are illegal when worn above the elbow. Compression sleeves worn for medical reasons are legal. If the band is made out of cotton or some other material that doesn't compress, like most sweatbands, tell 'em that they can't play while wearing them. Protective guards are also legal on the upper arm and shoulder, even if they are made out of a hard, unyielding material, as long as they are padded properly.

The way the rule is written is that if there's any doubt, the R makes a judgement call as to the legality. In this particular case, I would say that the criteria that you are looking for are (1) is it decorative? (2) is it worn for non-medical reasons? and (2) could it be hazardous to another player? If the answer is "yes" to any of those, I'd rule them illegal.