NFHS Part I Question

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Nevada, the easiest way to remember is:
- the technical fouls are covered under R3-4
- the "take 'em off or sit downs- your choice" are covered under R3-5.

Headbands and wristbands are listed under R3-5.

JR,
I'm not sure why you addressed that to me instead of David, but what you wrote makes sense. I never grouped it by article before. I have always just remembered that the only items for which a player could receive a T were the jersey and shorts. Everything else is take it off or don't play.

[drinkeii]

Ok - that makes more sense now. Thanks for the clarification. Ilike the grouping method of separating them.

I have to say - I like the fact that in soccer, for the last 2-3 years, they changed the uniform policy. If you are inappropriately attired (jewelry, untucked shirt, etc), we would not allow the player to enter the field as a sub. However, if they are discovered on the field (as often happens with girls and earrings), they are asked to leave, and NO SUB is permitted until the next sub opportunity. They play shorthanded for however long it takes for a sub to be allowed. Since subs are only allowed on their own throw-ins, or the other team's throw-ins if they have a sub themselves, this often produces a significant penalty for forgotten earrings, etc. The first time you do this, the team makes sure that they didn't "forget" anything else.

Of course, this isn't soccer. But it was getting old constantly having people sub out with no penalty at all because they couldn't follow the simple rules to remove jewelry before entering the field. Do you think basketball will ever get some kind of penalty like this? I don't see them asking a team to play short, but maybe some other kind of penalty short of a technical?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by drinkeii

But it was getting old constantly having people sub out with no penalty at all because they couldn't follow the simple rules to remove jewelry before entering the field. Do you think basketball will ever get some kind of penalty like this? I don't see them asking a team to play short, but maybe some other kind of penalty short of a technical?

I honestly don't find that. Once a coach has one of his players either sent out or not allowed in, they usually take care of their bidness in my experience. I have never run into a "constantly" situation that I can remember.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by drinkeii

I have to say - I like the fact that in soccer, for the last 2-3 years, they changed the uniform policy. If you are inappropriately attired (jewelry, untucked shirt, etc), we would not allow the player to enter the field as a sub. However, if they are discovered on the field (as often happens with girls and earrings), they are asked to leave, and NO SUB is permitted until the next sub opportunity. They play shorthanded for however long it takes for a sub to be allowed. Since subs are only allowed on their own throw-ins, or the other team's throw-ins if they have a sub themselves, this often produces a significant penalty for forgotten earrings, etc. The first time you do this, the team makes sure that they didn't "forget" anything else.

What you wrote in green is correct. However what appears in red is not accurate.

From the 2006-07 rules book:
"There shall be no replacement until the next opportunity to substitute. However, the removed player may re-enter during a dead ball after reporting to an official who shall be satisfied the player's equipment and uniform is in order."

In other words the same player may come back in on the very next stoppage (any foul, if the ball goes OOB, etc.), if the offending item is removed or the uniform is fixed. It seems that you may be overpenalizing.

[drinkeii]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

What you wrote in green is correct. However what appears in red is not accurate.

From the 2006-07 rules book:
"There shall be no replacement until the next opportunity to substitute. However, the removed player may re-enter during a dead ball after reporting to an official who shall be satisfied the player's equipment and uniform is in order."

In other words the same player may come back in on the very next stoppage (any foul, if the ball goes OOB, etc.), if the offending item is removed or the uniform is fixed. It seems that you may be overpenalizing.

Ok - point taken - but the player cannot return for some period of time, and the team plays short for some period of time, which reinforces that they need to come out on the field with their uniform correct and no illegal jewelry, etc... as opposed to the cases where I would have 4-5 girls I would send off at various times during a game for "forgotten" earrings, with no penalty, and just delaying the playing of the game. Now that there is some form of penalty, it has cleaned it up immensely, in my experience.

Except for this year - I have to say I had all but 3 games this season (probably 20+) where I had at least one player with forgotten earrings or jewelry of some kind that was sent off... and this was after the PIAA speech at the beginning to the captains and coaches, reminding them to check for forgotten jewelry, and often checking the teams beforehand as well. But in most cases, the first was the last in that game...

[Nevadaref]

Personally, I wish that the NFHS would make wearing jewelry or other illegal equipment on the field during the game an automatic caution. That would fix it for sure.

[Raymond]

S.O.S.

Nevada and DRinke have taken over 2 separate threads with soccer. What's next, NASCAR talk????

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

S.O.S.

Nevada and DRinke have taken over 2 separate threads with soccer. What's next, NASCAR talk????

Whoops, make that 3 threads.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

S.O.S.

Nevada and DRinke have taken over 2 separate threads with soccer. What's next, NASCAR talk????

So sorry, I'll let you get back to discussing the dominant color of a sweatband or was this thread about the distinction between the words similar and same?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

JR,
I'm not sure why you addressed that to me instead of David, but what you wrote makes sense.

I addressed it to you because I was simply reinforcing your previous post, is all.