Observing the Handshake

[Adam]

Originally Posted by biz

I am an official and a hs coach in MA. (I don't ref hs anymore because of my coaching schedule) I've been following this fairly closely.

Here is a notice that was e-mailed to MIAA member schools. I apologize in advance for the length, but this e-mail clears up possible 2-5-7 issues in relation to the ceremonial handshake...

No, it doesn't clear up the 2-5-7 issues. It's an attempt to obfuscate them.
Let's use this email to interpret a situation:

After the final horn, the officials glance at the scorer to see if all is well. They get the thumbs up and start for the door. The winning coach decides to take this opportunity to release some profanities directed towards the officials. The coach's team is ahead by 1 point at this juncture.

According to this email, there's nothing the officials can do, yet that goes directly against an NFHS case play.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

No, it doesn't clear up the 2-5-7 issues. It's an attempt to obfuscate them.
Let's use this email to interpret a situation:

After the final horn, the officials glance at the scorer to see if all is well. They get the thumbs up and start for the door. The winning coach decides to take this opportunity to release some profanities directed towards the officials. The coach's team is ahead by 1 point at this juncture.

According to this email, there's nothing the officials can do, yet that goes directly against an NFHS case play.

What it appears this policy would require is for the R to actually go to the scorer and "officially approve" the final results.

This would then allow coaches and players to unleash on the officials w/o fear of game ramifications.

Perfect.

[inigo montoya]

It doesn't sound like the officials are shying away from "increased liability" on their part, but rather they [basically] want to retain the right to get the heck off the court. I wouldn't trust the head coaches or game management to provide safety, either.

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by inigo montoya

It doesn't sound like the officials are shying away from "increased liability" on their part, but rather they [basically] want to retain the right to get the heck off the court. I wouldn't trust the head coaches or game management to provide safety, either.

The officials did raise the liability issue in a letter to the MIAA -- specifically liability insurance. It said the insurance policy that IAABO has to cover Massachusetts officials is based on NFHS rules and mechanics. The insurance covers liability, medical fees and reimbursement for game fees assigned, but which cannot be worked because of an injury during a game. Since the MIAA is imposing a requirement not approved or sanctioned by the NFHS -- and one in which officials believe increases the risk of injury -- it is asking officials to take on a duty for which they have no coverage.

Now...I think that is a pile of manure...but I am not a liability lawyer or insurance underwriter. If I am injured as a direct consequence of working a game...I sure would expect the insurance to kick in. If I trip on the stairs going to the locker room...or slip on the shower floor...I certainly would file for a claim under this policy. Now, the insurance experts might say they have factored those risks into the policy and the premiums...but not this new added high-risk handshake watch...is possible.

As usual, the bureaucrats in the MIAA want us to clean up their act. They have the resources -- the teachers, coaches, ADs, administrators, etc. I am just a humble high school official, trained to deal with what happens on the basketball court. That's all I signed on to do. When the final horn sounds, I am looking for my partner and the shortest route to the locker room.

[inigo montoya]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

The officials did raise the liability issue in a letter to the MIAA -- specifically liability insurance. It said the insurance policy that IAABO has to cover Massachusetts officials is based on NFHS rules and mechanics. The insurance covers liability, medical fees and reimbursement for game fees assigned, but which cannot be worked because of an injury during a game. Since the MIAA is imposing a requirement not approved or sanctioned by the NFHS -- and one in which officials believe increases the risk of injury -- it is asking officials to take on a duty for which they have no coverage.

Now...I think that is a pile of manure...but I am not a liability lawyer or insurance underwriter. If I am injured as a direct consequence of working a game...I sure would expect the insurance to kick in. If I trip on the stairs going to the locker room...or slip on the shower floor...I certainly would file for a claim under this policy. Now, the insurance experts might say they have factored those risks into the policy and the premiums...but not this new added high-risk handshake watch...is possible.

As usual, the bureaucrats in the MIAA want us to clean up their act. They have the resources -- the teachers, coaches, ADs, administrators, etc. I am just a humble high school official, trained to deal with what happens on the basketball court. That's all I signed on to do. When the final horn sounds, I am looking for my partner and the shortest route to the locker room.

I understand that. I meant that the MIAA letter seems to say that the officials shouldn't be concerned over taking on liability for the post-game handshake and what may occur. To me, that wasn't the officials' concern to begin with. They are worried about who is liable for them.

[biz]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

No, it doesn't clear up the 2-5-7 issues. It's an attempt to obfuscate them.
Let's use this email to interpret a situation:

After the final horn, the officials glance at the scorer to see if all is well. They get the thumbs up and start for the door. The winning coach decides to take this opportunity to release some profanities directed towards the officials. The coach's team is ahead by 1 point at this juncture.

According to this email, there's nothing the officials can do, yet that goes directly against an NFHS case play.

You're correct Snaq...what I should have said is that the email is attempting to clear up 2-5-7 issues.

The situation that you describe is definitely the crux of this issue, but I don't agree that the officials are powerless in this sitch, they just have no recourse as it pertains to that particular game. IOW the coach's profanities would be handled in the same manner as a coach yelling profanities at an official outside a dressing room.

BTW don't get me wrong I HATE this rule!!!! The MIAA likes to believe that they can govern every sport in the same exact way. Asking the officials to stay until after the handshake in soccer has been somewhat successful and they are trying to carry this over to all sports. Soccer is a different beast...officials are better served to stay on the sidelines until the crowd on the other side of the field (60 + yards away) has begun to disperse, much different then a small crowded gym where irate fans only need to go 30 ft.

[Mark Padgett]

At the end of games, when the teams pass each other slapping hands and saying "good game, good game, good game, etc", my son and his buddies would always say, "you suck, you suck, you suck". Strangely enough, they never got a reaction from the other guys other than laughter.

Of course, this was rec league.

[Mark Dexter]

Well, my neighbors to the north have certainly found themselves in an interesting situation.

I think the "policy" is BS for basketball. Frankly, the e-mail just makes it worse - misinterpreting NFHS rules and claiming that liability doesn't apply. Unfortunately, it's the courts that decide whether or not a ref is liable, not some staffer in the MIAA.

Finally, if a PDF titled "Sportsmanship Handshake Report Form" isn't a sign of the apocalypse, I don't know what is.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

Finally, if a PDF titled "Sportsmanship Handshake Report Form" isn't a sign of the apocalypse, I don't know what is.

How about coaches getting to "call" timeouts?