This is correct. The score is confirmed before the PGHS and we as officials do not have any jurisdiction over the PGHS. Its up to the site admin and coaches. My understanding is that fighting will be penalized by the state. The score confirmation has also been an issue with our insurance policy which apparently doesn't include the PGHS since the score has been confirmed.

That makes no sense. If you don't have any jurisdiction to deal with misbehavior, then why do they want you there?

I know that it is an MIAA thing, but the NFHS books directly contradict this policy.

To participate in the warm glow of good sportsmanship. We are literally part of the celebration; no longer officiating, but joining with the rest of the participants to express our mutual respect and admiration for the work the others have done that night. Hold on, I'm tearing up. . .

Sadly, this policy comes directly from Mary Struckoff who issued this ruling at the request of the MIAA.

Or perhaps all the kids and parents will get used to having the officials around following the game and learn that they aren't to say anything negative during this time. Maybe the players and coaches will even start to come over and shake hands with the officials. And just maybe this exercise will end up having a positive effect on sportsmanship during HS athletic contests in the state.

For the record, my opinion is that if the MIAA wants this experiment to work, and I have to believe that the goal is to have an environment of greater sportsmanship for the games, then they must correct two serious errors made by the drafters of the policy. Namely, the officials must have penalty jurisdiction during the entire time that they are on the court, including the PGHS, and the officials must be participants and not just observers in the PGHS. Otherwise, the structure still makes them outsiders while everyone else is saying nice things to each other and shaking hands, and the kids, coaches, and parents will continue to see them as such. As long as that is the case, then the entire mission is certain to fail.

Officials do have authority after the score is approved, but only under MIAA rules. Any punishment would not affect the final score.

MIAA Sportsmanship Rule 49.8 states- “Fighting and unsportsmanlike conduct penalties will be within the authority of the official at all times at the contest site. The official’s authority extends to pre and post game oversight.” Implementation of this rule could have future consequences on the offender, but does not affect the final score.

From the MIAA rationale:

The MIAA has a mission “to promote a culture of fairness, respect, responsibility, and civility in sports and to foster initiatives which encourage positive attitudes and behaviors in athletes, coaches, officials, parents, and spectators of all ages in Massachusetts.”

This strategy is an opportunity to utilize the partnership of coach and official as teachers for the expected and programmed outcome of respect for opponent. It adds to providing a positive environment, which has a modeling impact on fans.

See my post immediately above this one for my thoughts on that point.

:confused: Huh? Are you saying that Mary drafted the MIAA policy or that she had the NFHS issue something regarding the jurisdiction of NFHS officials over postgame handshakes?

I'm confused here.

So the MIAA has, in fact, altered the NFHS rule on this, to which I stated it was contradictory. The official can write some report and the offenders can be sanctioned at a future time, but nothing can be done which will impact that particular game. That is taking away much of the bite from power granted to the officials under NFHS rules. I don't like it.

In other words, they have partially defanged the watch dog, but expect it to still be just as effective. :(

This is starting to occur. I have had players in every game this year come up to me after the handshake to shake my hand and says "thanks." This has been from both the winners and losers.

Scrapper's original post on this is right on the mark, though. If the AD and school administrators do not do their job, they have no right to expect us to do it alone. So far this year, I have noticed a significant change in attitude among the ADs. Last year, when this was a "recommended" procedure, it was the exception to be greeted by a site manager, who knew the protocol. So far this year, the AD (or someone else) has done their job...before, during and after the games I have worked.

I'm assuming then, that the JV officials did not stick around for the PGHS...did the AD give them a hard time as well? Did he make them fill out the paperwork?

Massachusetts has its own rules for several things that fall outside of the NFHS. It uses the shot clock. Until last year, games were played in halves, not quarters. It has given teams waivers from the "home team must wear white" rule.

It received a specific ruling from the NFHS and added a rule as follows:

NF Basketball Rule 2, Section 5, Article 7 has been adopted, “When the referee either signs the scorebook following the game, or when a non-verbal confirmation is exchanged between the referee and the official scorer, the score is then final and considered approved.”

The sanction for fighting (as well as spitting at someone or punching or kicking an opponent) is a two-game suspension. As I understand the MIAA rule, this does not require any "hearing" after the fact. As an official, if I observe this conduct while I have jurisdiction under MIAA rules (which includes post-game activity), I can penalize it.

Further, a student or coach who physically assaults an official is banned from all sports for one year.

And maybe Santa will fill my daughter's stocking tomorrow night. :rolleyes:

Honestly, if they want to do foster this, they should start without the officials being there. The officials are the lightning rod after any emotional contest. Get the culture changed without the targets being there. Then, when you feel that the culture really has changed, include the officials.

And frankly, I'd have absolutely NO problem whatsoever with this whole thing if they'd just do it BEFORE the game, instead of after when everyone's emotions are running high. Nobody actually means it after the game, anyway. They're doing it because they have to. But before the game, they really are wishing each other well.

They did not, and he did not.

Ms. Struckoff issued the official ruling that states the game is over when the officials verify the score, which is done by visually checking with the scorer or signing the book. Once that visual check is done, no changes to the score may be made.

So she issued a ruling ONLY for the state of MA? :confused: I find that odd because MA does not have a seat on the NFHS committee or rules submission rights due to its employment of the shot clock. What is the state office trying to gain by having someone from the NFHS provide them with a rule? I can't understand why they didn't just write and publish it on their own.

Well, it seems that according to another official in your state there really is a Santa Claus.
I'm not sure that this process can be begun without the officials and have the culture change. One of the central features of what is trying to be changed is the attitude displayed towards the game officials. It's hard to alter that if they are there and the kids don't get to have this personal contact with them. They simply have to come to view the officials as participants in the game and not their adversaries. This is a human activity done for recreation. It is played by people, run by people, taught by people, officiated by people, and scoring and stats are done by people. During games each and every one of those people will make mistakes. The human factor is part of the game. This message must get across.

It has occurred to me that this AD might have been so upset for either of two reasons (most people on here have assumed the first):
1. He doesn't want to get into trouble for not conducting the PGHS and he was venting his frustration over the impending answering that he will soon be doing, and was mad and pointing the finger at the officials in order to cover his own @ss.

2. Perhaps he really wants to conduct the PGHS and do it right. He may have been offended that it didn't take place on his court under his watch.
(Let's also consider the 2nd.)