The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Tattoos? (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/30639-tattoos.html)

budjones05 Fri Jan 05, 2007 01:45pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by LarryS
True...but do you wear a tatoo or do you have a tatoo? :rolleyes:

I have 3 tats, and as a player, our state association made me wear a sleve because i had "Pirate Pride" on my left arm. I'm just saying that there are some rules that may protain to tattoos

Adam Fri Jan 05, 2007 01:46pm

A tattoo is not equipment, nor is it apparel. This rule does not apply.

armymanjones Fri Jan 05, 2007 01:47pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by budjones05
NFHS Rule 3-5 Art 1 says: "The referee shall not permit any team member to waer equipment or apparel which, in his/her judgement, is dangerous or confusing to other players or is not appropriate"

Is a tatoo equipment or apparel which is dangerous or confusing to other players or is not appropriate?

HawkeyeCubP Fri Jan 05, 2007 01:50pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by LarryS
True...but do you wear a tatoo or do you have a tatoo? :rolleyes:

I "have" tatoos, and they are not "worn" - they are "displayed." (And not when officiating.):D

Theoretically here (reaching - reach with me), could a vulgar tattoo not possibly be construed/judged to be an offense punishable by a flagrant technical foul? For instance, one that includes the bad word? (-I've seen one in university intramurals.) - Although, I suppose it would go directly against the previously mentioned repeal of the pertinent NFHS rule.

Not that I'm wanting to do this, just stirring things.:)

budjones05 Fri Jan 05, 2007 01:52pm

Thats the best rule I could find, but who really cares about players wearing tattoos anyways

armymanjones Fri Jan 05, 2007 01:57pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP
I "have" tatoos, and they are not "worn" - they are "displayed." (And not when officiating.):D

Theoretically here (reaching - reach with me), could a vulgar tattoo not possibly be construed/judged to be an offense punishable by a flagrant technical foul? For instance, one that includes the bad word? (-I've seen one in university intramurals.) - Although, I suppose it would go directly against the previously mentioned repeal of the pertinent NFHS rule.

Not that I'm wanting to do this, just stirring things.:)

If a tatoo was vulgar or offensive I would require it to be covered up and would use the rule as being inappropriate

j51969 Fri Jan 05, 2007 02:00pm

Didn't Lebron play for a catholic school? My guess is it's a school or conference thing.

HawkeyeCubP Fri Jan 05, 2007 02:02pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by armymanjones
If a tatoo was vulgar or offensive I would require it to be covered up and would use the rule as being inappropriate

AMJ -

I think you would have to avoid using the word "offensive," and use only the word "vulgar" if you were to do so in talking with the player/coach, per 4-19-4, as it would directly contradict the NFHS repealed rule JRut mentioned, assuming the word "offensive" was the language used in the rule.
Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge
There was a NF rule about 8 years ago that outlawed tattoos that would be considered offensive or profane.


Jurassic Referee Fri Jan 05, 2007 02:45pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge
There was a NF rule about 8 years ago that outlawed tattoos that would be considered offensive or profane. Then the next year the rule was repealed. Considering what is offensive is a very slippery slope and is not going to have agreement across the board, I think it is safe to assume why this rule was repealed. Now there are some states and other jurisdictions that have their own rules about tattoos. Lebron James from what I understand had to cover up his tattoos because of the school rules (private school) not based on the state organization. I am sure someone from Ohio might clear that up, but that is what I remember being discussed here.

Bingo!

Correct all the way through iirc.

JRutledge Fri Jan 05, 2007 02:53pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by budjones05
NFHS Rule 3-5 Art 1 says: "The referee shall not permit any team member to waer equipment or apparel which, in his/her judgement, is dangerous or confusing to other players or is not appropriate"

Equipment and apparel are not tattoos. You cannot just put them on or take them off as you wish (at least the permanent kind). If that is the case then hairstyles would be subject to this rule.

Peace

armymanjones Fri Jan 05, 2007 02:55pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge
Equipment and apparel are not tattoos. You cannot just put them on or take them off as you wish (at least the permanent kind). If that is the case then hairstyles would be subject to this rule.

Peace

How about NFHS rule 2-3??

Raymond Fri Jan 05, 2007 02:57pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by armymanjones
How about NFHS rule 2-3??

I'm thinking about have that tattoo'd to my forehead. :D

JRutledge Fri Jan 05, 2007 03:04pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by armymanjones
How about NFHS rule 2-3??

You can do whatever you like, but that would make you a plumber in my opinion and there is a reason the NF got rid of this rule and a reason the NCAA has not produced one at all from my recollection. And if you are working with me and that is something you are going to make a big deal with, you will be doing it by yourself.

Peace

armymanjones Fri Jan 05, 2007 03:10pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge
You can do whatever you like, but that would make you a plumber in my opinion and there is a reason the NF got rid of this rule and a reason the NCAA has not produced one at all from my recollection. And if you are working with me and that is something you are going to make a big deal with, you will be doing it by yourself.

Peace

Come on JR lighten up. I work within the rules. In absent of a rule you tell me what you would do?

JRutledge Fri Jan 05, 2007 03:18pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by armymanjones
Come on JR lighten up. I work within the rules. In absent of a rule you tell me what you would do?

I think you are the person that needs to lighten up. You did not tell a joke and nothing you said was funny. I am telling you that your logic is a stretch. I already know what the NF felt, because they got rid of the rule because it was impossible to enforce without causing a lot of problems. This was a rule that was tried in football and baseball as well and all sports got rid of this rule (I would not be surprised if soccer and volleyball as an example had similar rules). If you did not understand what I would do by previous posts, I would do nothing just like I did when the rule was in place. I am not looking for tattoos and I am not looking to see what is on them. If something is offensive in any way, it better be brought to my attention and even then what is the remedy? You cannot make them take their skin off. I do not have a laser gun in the bag. I am definitely not going to stop a kid from playing. This is an issue for the schools and their parents. Let the school get sued for this, I am staying out of it. And if I worked with a partner like you that wanted this called, you would be the only one going out of their way to enforce it.

Peace


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:49am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1