Rules Interpretation Meeting--Bicep Bands
 

I just came from the Rules Interpretation meeting. The issue that I was most concerned about was the usage of the bicep bands in basketball. Like football, basketball adopted the rule that disallowed the use of wrist bands to be put above the elbow. Well we were given a ruling that the bicep bands are to be allowed to be worn above the elbow and on the bicep in football. The head clinician told us today that the bicep bands would be allowed in basketball for the same purpose that they were allowed in football. Bicep bands are made to be worn on the bicep which makes them legal. If they wear a wristband up on the bicep, the player would have to remove them.

Peace

What is a bicep band? How is one to differentiate between a bicep band and wrist band? Did the head interpreter give you the restriction for a bicep band? i.e no more than two inches in width yada, yada yada. Is there proof of this approval post on the Feds web site?

If your cat had kittens in the oven you wouldn't call them biscuits. Don't think I would want to try to differentiate between wrist bands above and 'bicep' bands. Since we are the fashion police of sorts, it seems that this 'loophole' approaches being a travesty. Of sorts.

Bicep bands tend to be a little thinner than a wrist band. Many companies make these bands and their intent it to be worn on the bicep and not the wrist. The rules only deal with wrist bands right now. They do not specifically address these bands that go above the elbow.

I am just passing along the information. I have no idea how the NF relates to this ruling. The football ruling came from someone on the NF Football Committee. I am going to assume that there was a similar discussion through the Basketball Committee. These kinds of rules tend to cross from one sport to another since all committee chairpersons meet with each other to apply rules consistently in various sports.

Peace

Rut,
Which rules meeting did you go to?

The very first one listed at St. Ignatius.

Peace

If what you call a "bicep band" is a form of a sweatband, then I would have to disagree with the Illinois interpreter.

Page 26 of the 2006-07 NFHS Rules Book
3-5-3c
"Sweatbands must be worn below the elbow and may be a maximum of 4 inches (except for logo, see 3-6)."

That is what we will be following in Nevada.

I am just passing along what we were told. Whether you (me or anyone for that matter) disagree or not is not the issue. The point is we were told specifically bicep bands were legal and the football ruling was also referenced. So there must have been a conversation with someone somewhere that would give this ruling. No one asked the question about this issue. This was apart of the comments from the Rules Interpreter.

Peace

This is the specific ruling that the Illinois governing body issued for football. Nothing has been posted on the official web site for this in basketball in writing yet. The football ruling appeared a couple of weeks into the season.

"Since sweatbands (wristbands) are not to be in excess of three inches in length above the wrist, what about the forearm bands the players are wearing with their pads? Is this type of band considered legal?
Ruling The new forearm bands are made to be worn below the bicep and above the elbow and would be legal. It would not be acceptable to have a wristband above the elbow as they are made to be worn at the wrist. (September 11, 2006)"

BTW, you can't mix the two items up. It's pretty obvious when you see them that a sweatband for the wrist is not the same as a bicep band. Bicep bands tend to only be 1/2 inch wide, if that.

http://images.sportsline.com/u/photo...img9723496.jpg

With any luck, this will come out and you can view the picture.

Very true, Rut, and you have to do what the people in charge of this in your state tell you to do.

As for the picture that falsecut provided:
http://images.sportsline.com/u/photo...img9723496.jpg

In the opinion of this referee those are sweatbands and are not legal to be worn in that location (in MY state :) ).

How anybody could rule that bicep bands are anything <b>but</b> sweat bands, I'll never figure out.

http://loadedbases.stores.yahoo.net/nikebicepband.html

These meet all of the criteria of sweatbands in rule 3-5-3(a)-- i.e. soft, moisture-absorbing and non-abrasive. You also sureasheck couldn't legalize them imo by calling them some kinda brace or guard either- not unless they actually gave some kind of support or protection.

But.....if an individual state says that they're OK to wear, then that's the end of the story. Locally, same as Nevada, no way we're gonna allow 'em until somebody tells us that they're OK.

Is Illinois also gonna allow a piece of cloth to be tied around the bicep <i>a la</i> Rambo too? :)

If you go back to this link and select the various wristbands, head bands and bicep bands, they all vary in the width. The Bicep band is 3/4 of inch wide, where as the wrist and forearm bands are 2 1/2 inches and wider. That would be my distinction.. IMO,
P.S. I have my state meeting Monday night and will get a clarification and will let everyone know on Tuesday.

I've gotta tell ya...I've NEVER heard that one before. :D

No disrespect intended, but really? That's a scary thought.

I always thought the forearm was the part between the elbow and the wrist.

As promised I asked the question about the Bicep bands,? the answer was not allowed anything above the elbow, no questioned asked. I asked this question of the Virginia High school commissioner.

As for Dwayne Wade tights, Not allowed anything below the knee would not be allowed.

Again this came right out of the Virginia commissioner's mouth..

This is the interpretation in writing from the IHSA Rulings listed on each official's personal web page (not available to the public).

2) Are bicep bands legal equipment?

As was discussed at this year’s basketball rules interpretation meetings, wristbands can not be worn above the elbow. Officials should not allow players to wear a wristband above the elbow. Officials should also not allow players to wear bicep bands that are similar in nature to wristbands. ‘Bicep bands’ that are made of the same moisture-absorbing, nonabrasive material as wristbands are not allowed. Only those ‘bicep bands’ that are of a rubbery, ‘neoprene’ material are allowed.

Peace

That is a sensible ruling. Thanks for sharing Rut.

I don't have the same thoughts on this issue, but I'm not in charge.

FWIW, (nearly zilch) I would have ruled that bicep bands are only legal for a medical reason with a written note from the doctor available at the game site.

Otherwise, we have to worry about the same issues with the bicep bands that the NFHS is trying to stamp out with the new regulations on the sweatbands. For example, do bicep bands have any color restrictions?

As stated before...in WA, if a player wants to wear a bicep band...he/she must tape it.

We were told that anything with the neoprene material should be considered "medical" and a note was not necessary. Kind of like the Allen Iverson sleeves that were shown in the PowerPoint or the S & I Rulebook.

We were also told that the bicep bands did not fit the regulations of the sweatbands because they were not sweatbands. So they could be any color.

I wish they had put those two rulings in the interpretations, but they did not. But it was discussed at the IHSA Rules Meetings so many could hear. But I see these as what was said at one meeting might not have been said at another meeting.

Peace

That's for the post JRut. I didn't know they released a ruling already, so I'm sure not many people are aware. I'll be taking this to our meeting tonight.

Be sure to point the attendees to the "rulings" page on the IHSA website / official's center.

There are a few more things there than the biceps band, and more is likely to be added later.

____________________________________

Have they changed this, because out our rules interp meeting they said the same thing. Are the cloth ones illegal now? I made a kid move his up over his elbow last week.

My rule book does not list biceps bands as being authorized equipment or apparel. Not on the list equals illegal to wear at any time.

If you now argue that it is a sweatband then it must be worn BELOW the elbow per 3-5-3c.

That said, the rules committee need to be less worried about being fashion police and more worried that UNNANNOUNCED RULES changes are being made under guise of editorial changes rather than going through the rules change process.

So, if NIKE packages a 2" wide band made of moisture absorbing non-abrasive material with Biceps Bands printed plainly on the package you are going to tell the player it's not and NIKE doesn't know what is talking about?

And who said biceps bands could only be made of neoprene?

Why are you asking me? :D I am just passing along the literature that backs up the ruling we were given a month ago. I have no idea why this is even an issue in the first place. I wish the NF never made these things an issue at all. But they did and this was the ruling (why I have no idea either) was made. I am passing along the information because it is possible that other places may have a similar ruling.

Peace

Sneakers are illegal now, too?!?!?! :eek:

We just had our rules interpretation meeting last night in Portland, OR. We were told for our association, we will allow the players to wear nothing on the arm above the elbow, unless it's for a specific medical purpose. The described bicep bands in this thread are illegal for our area. I was happy to hear that.

Why???????

Because it makes it more black and white for me...less gray. I don't have to worry about what a bicep band is. If anything is worn above the elbow, I tell the kid to move it down below the elbow or don't play. Makes my job much easier.

I apreciate the humor. Wish I knew how to use smilies.

when I said not on list equal illegal I was being sarcastic. In the past NF has made interpretaions and their rationale was that the item in question was not part of the approved list of legal apparrel ar actions allowable.

Yet in the casebook 3.5 Sistuation A ruling they state: "It will be noted that the listing of equipment which is always illegal is not inclusive." That means there are more illegal items than on the list.

They try to have it both ways (Allowed because not specifically prohibited vs prohibited because not specifially allowed). Which one to apply to a specific item is totally to their person whims.

The ironic thing is I can have a cast from my shoulder down to top of my elbow and cover it with pading and be legal yet a 2" wide cloth non abrasive band worn above my elbow to prevent sweat from getting in the elbow crease which bothers my shot is illegal. If fact it is of such a major concern that it is a point of emphasis.

Its black and white but as for logic: go figure.

I'm pretty sure it's not about function or safety - it's about the uniformity, if you will, of the uniform. They appear to not want any individual player to dress in a certain way that is showy or "bigger than the game". I would argue that the vast majority of kids who wear sweatbands on their upper arm do so as a fashion statement, not as a functional piece of equipment.

Of course my comments were rhetorical and not specifically aimed at you to answer. Only to show the folly of an innapropriate and unnecessary rule.

Ditto on the fact that I wish the NF never made an issue of it. Neither players, coaches, or officials have made an issue of it in the past so I can only conclude it is only an issue because of a personal whim by someone on the rules committee or our esteemed Secretary-Editor. Who knows...maybe it became a rule because UnderArmor (they seem to be the only manufacturer making bicps bands so popular in football) refused to pay NF some sort of "sponser fee" so NF wouldn't make a rule to prohibit them.


PS. If all the states got together and decide to ignore the fashion police then maybe we can get it reversed.

Given that statement the baggy shorts popularized by the Fab 5 at Michigan should have been declared illegal. Most teams who adopted that style (fashion) if that is the word you prefer did so out of how it looked, not functionality. Why not illegal? Because it met the 3 criteria a referee must use to determine legal/ilegal equipment. This is NF criteria, not mine.

1. Nothing in their nature was inherantly dangerous
2. Not unnatural or designed to create an advantage.
3. Appropriate to basketball and not confusing.

Which of those 3 causes a sweatband on the upper arm to be deemed illegal?

I can't answer that question, and I'm not trying to defend the rule about the sweatbands, either. I was merely trying to explain why I thought the rule was put in place. I honestly don't get the analogy you're trying to make. I would equate the issue more to the rule about shorts being pulled up around the waist and not allowing players to have their shorts down around the middle of their a$$. But the baggy shorts - I don't get what you're trying to say there.

for some reason the NF rules committee is confusing "required uniforms" with Legal/illegal equipment or apparel.

Required uniform is shirt, pants, and shoes (BTW: latter two are only mentioned in passing but never defined as the shirt is.)

Equipment/apparel is anything else. The ref is sole judge of legality but NF does provide some guidelines.

The issue with sweatbands has to do with the rules committee being concerned these items were being worn as part of the UNIFORM. If they are worn below the elbow they are just legal apparel BUT heaven forbid I wear the sweatband above my elbow to prevent sweat from accumlating in the crease of elbow because it affects my shot because the NF has said it is illegal because the trend was affecting team uniformity.

Every player on the team can wear the same color wristband on the wrist and no one complains.

Every team member wears the same color sweatband just above the elbow and all of a suddenly it is a threat to team uniformity and just used to draw attention to themselves.

The team members are dressed alike in every way wearing apparel that in reality meets the NF 3 pronged test for legality but only becomes illegal because of location. Absolutely ludicrous.

BTW: I can wear one blue sock and one white sock. i can wear a sock on my left foot and none on my right foot. I can wear one striped sock and one plaid sock. I can wear one sock up over the calf and let the other sock dangle around my ankles.

What? No outrage over this?

Your arguments are certainly valid. When you look at it like that it really does seem absurd. I sometimes think the people making up these rules are very old and very out of touch with the modern game of basketball. But this is what we signed up to do - uphold these rules that they come up with.

I'm still very happy that I don't have to deal with a gray area of figuring out what a bicep band is, as opposed to a sweatband. We don't allow either above the elbow. Until they change the rule, that's what I'm going to do.

The funny thing about this comment is the NF did once try to regulate what kinds of socks players were allowed to wear. They used to say that you could not have more than one manufacture's logo on the socks. So at the time if you wore some Nike socks with a logo on both sides of the socks, the socks had to be taken off or turned inside out (which you could still see the back part of the logo). The NF then got rid of the rule and said in so many words, "Socks are not a part of the uniform that schools supply anymore, so we cannot enforce a rule properly with a piece of equipment that each person purchases on their own." Or something like that was said. Now we have a rule that is based on something that is not normally influenced directly by teams or schools like socks to regulate. I just do not understand why this is a priority but socks are not?

Peace