Tattoos?

[armymanjones]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

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

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

[HawkeyeCubP]

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"vulgar" if you were to do so in talking with the player/coach, per 4-19-4, as it would directly contradict the NFHS repealed rule JRut mentioned, assuming the word "offensive" was the language used in the rule.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

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