![]() |
|
|
|
|||
|
Boys Varsity the other night...
Had a home player with white tights (coach actually had medical slip) and this player was wearing two white sweatbands, with nike logo, on each ankle...I guess so it would look like the tops of socks. Looked kinda funky...but, we let it go.
__________________
Dan Ivey Tri-City Sports Officials Asso. (TCSOA) Member since 1989 Richland, WA |
|
|||
|
This is that one that I'd get rid of immediately. Why are tights illegal? Especially since long pants are perfectly legal. What's the difference between pants (which don't even have to match the jersey!) and tights worn under the shorts?
I'm not ranting, I just truly don't understand. Make them legal, and subject to the same logo and color restrictions as handbands/sweatbands. |
|
|||
|
Quote:
A doctor's note does not legalize tights.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott "You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith |
|
|||
|
Quote:
3.5.6 SITUATION B: A player, for religious reasons, may not wear shorts. Would he/she be able to wear tights under the basketball uniform shorts, warmups or a skirt instead of shorts? RULING: NFHS basketball uniform rules do not require that the uniform pants be "shorts." However, undergarments or tights may not be worn which extend below the pants, therefore wearing tights “below the uniform shorts” would be illegal. The player could wear long pants or a skirt as the uniform "bottom" and be in compliance. (3-4) |
|
|||
|
No, but he could take his uniform shorts off and wear the tights as his uniform pants. Unless they had more than one visible manufacturer's logo/trademark/reference. Or the logo/t/r exceeded size requirements.
Last edited by Scratch85; Mon Jan 19, 2009 at 09:44pm. |
|
|||
|
Sorry, tights are not pants.
|
|
|||
|
The material and fit of "pants" is defined? I don't think so.
If a girls team played in volleyball style shorts, that would be legal. Why wouldn't the same thing full-length be legal? |
|
|||
|
Reference, please.
and, FWIW, I agree the rule shuld be changed. Hmmm -- girls / women sometimes wear "skorts" or "cullottes" (or something like that) -- basically "shorts" with a "skirt" overlay, but all sewn into one article of clothing. So, what if someone make "shants" or "shights"-- a similar article with shorts and pants / tights sewn together. Would that meet the definition of "pants?" I'm not sure why it wouldn't -- and since it would look the same as shorts over tights, the latter should also be allowed. |
|
|||
|
Completely unrelated to socks, but on the note of fashion police, take a look at this picture.
http://mickwhite.org/kvs/2009-photos.../target36.html This is a fairly big time HS game played yesterday in WA state. Seems to be a few violations here, but they seem to have let it go, which I think is good. |
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners. |
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Fashion Police | Zoochy | Basketball | 50 | Tue Jan 09, 2007 08:12pm |
| Have you had to be the fashion police? | LarryS | Basketball | 32 | Thu Nov 30, 2006 01:22am |
| fashion police? | Junker | Basketball | 39 | Tue Nov 07, 2006 12:16pm |
| Question for the Fashion Police | emaxos | Softball | 16 | Thu Jul 07, 2005 06:10am |
| Socks? We don't need no stinkin socks!!!!!! | sm_bbcoach | Football | 6 | Mon Aug 30, 2004 03:54pm |