The Official Forum
Page 4 of 4 « First 23 4
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Fashion Police -- Only watch above the Socks (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/51044-fashion-police-only-watch-above-socks.html)

JugglingReferee Wed Jan 21, 2009 07:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 570703)
It's only irrelevant in a girls game. NFHS 11-3-2-b states that in a boys game, the brassiere straps must be the white, black, beige or a single solid color similar to the torso of the jersey.
Aren't those called manssieres? :D

Zoochy Wed Jan 21, 2009 07:58am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JugglingReferee (Post 570704)
Aren't those called manssieres? :D
No... they are called 'Bros'!:D

jdw3018 Wed Jan 21, 2009 08:08am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scratch85 (Post 570645)
OK, I have tried twice to get an answer to this. This makes three times and my last. If we are taking this thread to the "bra" stage surely we can take it to the tights stage. Can a player wear tights only (for religous reasons) as the pants to his uniform? They are not worn below the uniform shorts.

3.5.6 sitB

I know that Nevada, Bob and BBRef have opinions (all of which I value) on this. Help me out, is it legal?
A player doesn't need religious reasons to wear pants. Any player can wear pants for any reason.

And I think Nevada is wrong that tights aren't pants (for purposes of legality in this situation). I have no doubt they qualify - at least until the NFHS gets into the business of defining pants material and fit - as pants for the purposes of this rule.

mbyron Wed Jan 21, 2009 08:17am
Tights are always illegal. If players wish to participate without exposing their legs, the rules provide a means: they may wear trousers (provided that the trousers are otherwise legal).

jdw3018 Wed Jan 21, 2009 08:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron (Post 570712)
Tights are always illegal. If players wish to participate without exposing their legs, the rules provide a means: they may wear trousers (provided that the trousers are otherwise legal).
mbyron...explain how tights don't meet the definition in the book of 'trousers'.

mbyron Wed Jan 21, 2009 08:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdw3018 (Post 570714)
mbyron...explain how tights don't meet the definition in the book of 'trousers'.
They would if 'trousers' were defined in the book. They're one kind. But they're specifically prohibited by 3-5-6. That prohibition does not extend to every kind (the book uses the term 'pants/skirt' not trousers).

jdw3018 Wed Jan 21, 2009 08:48am
I don't think 3-5-6 prohibits wearing tights as pants...just wearing tights that extend below pants/skirt.

I don't see any way to distinguish tights from other types of pants.

bball_lurker Wed Jan 21, 2009 12:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 570511)
Without trying to be too critical, I'd say that it's better to post a question thant to claim that the officials made a "mistake", say it was good that they ignored a rule, then show that you don't know the rule in the first place.
I was wrong, my bad! The rule has been enforced a little haphazardly and I made a assumption. As I said, in a VG game last week, a home player was made to remove a black headband, in the middle of a game.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:39pm.
Page 4 of 4 « First 23 4
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1