Nicely done, jearef.

Being honest, I had a little sympathy with the TD in the story up until the point they opened their mouth. They are trying to keep people happy and fair enough. I would ask if they would be happy when the blood starts flowing?

Simple point: earrings in = no play over here. Clear risk to the player, I am not too worried about a law suit (and I am a lawyer) but I am worried about the safety of a player.

England Basketball and FIBA are clear - no jewellery. Easy to enforce, players know the rules and don't even try to break them any more. Even at local scrimage games; they know the ref will say 'take it out if you want to play...'

Connecticut NFHS IAABO Basketball ...
 

Billy, please tell me how the two statements differ beyond semantics?

"You can't play while wearing earrings."

"You'll have to take your earrings out if you want to play."

There is absolutely no difference in those two statements. You haven't told him/her that have to take their earrings out. you've simply said no earrings, no PT. Nothing wrong with either statement.

2+3=5
3+2=5

I see that you took your anal pill today.

Is that a suppository? :eek:

I suppose.

Top Three Reasons ...
 

NFHS 3-5-7: Jewelry shall not be worn.

1) The rule doesn't say anything about players removing jewelry, it just says that they can't play with jewelry. Why make the rule, especially one involving safety, more complicated than it really is?

2) If I tell them they have to take earrings off to play, and they're new to this procedure, and somehow hurt themselves, they can't say to their coach, or parent, "He (pointing to me) told me to take them out".

3) Most importantly. This is what we've been taught in my part of the woods, my evaluators know this, and when in Rome, or in my case, my part of the Constitution State ...

If, in theory, an official can be sued for failure to make the child remove the earrings, resulting in injury, doesn't it follow that an injury produced by an excessive amount of contact because the officials were "letting them play" could also result in a lawsuit? Let us continue to follow the rules and do our best to keep the game safe, not for fear of litigation, but because it is our job and the right thing to do. If you're scared, stay home. It is much more likely that you would commit a traffic violation on the way to the game and cause damage in excess of your insurance coverage.

No, not necessarily. The rule on jewelry is absolute and the exceptions are clearly spelled out in the rulebook. Conversely, the amount of contact allowed is subjective and sometimes unpredictable. I've had games in which contact was called very tight and then, all of a sudden, one of the players tries to take another player's head off (figuratively). You could have a series of games called "loosely" with no incidents at all. As you all know, IANAL (that means "I Am Not A Lawyer", not "I'm Anal" - OK, maybe I am), but I think you're OK unless you continuously allow egregious and/or outrageous behavior.

This is true and easy enough to understand, but having never seen the specific wording of a law which would make an official liable under any circumstance, it is difficult to say what would or would not be included.

I sent an email to the tournament director today and included your email. I asked her to specifically add "No Jewelry" to the tournament rules for next year. Regardless of her response, I know what I will do when this comes up again. Thanks for the thoughtful response.

Remember - the NF does have some exceptions, specifically medical alert and religious. You can find instructions for how these items can be worn. Perhaps she should state something along the lines of "the official High School rule regarding the wearing of jewelry will be strictly enforced." I would add, "Coaches who tell players to ignore this rule will have their kneecaps broken." She could then show a diagram of how medical alert and religious jewelry can be worn and also a diagram of what a broken kneecap looks like. I have one of those if she (k)needs it. :p