Fashion Police -- Only watch above the Socks
 

I have never been a real fan of being the fashion police, but there are several things in this area that make no sense. The NFHS was concerned about players drawing attention to themselves, therefore they put a number of rules in place.

1. They attempted to eliminate the Shooting Sleeve -- Unless it is for medical purposes, which basically has permitted the shooting sleeve if a player really wants one.
2. They determined that "anything that goes completely around the head is a head band and, therefore, must be the same color as all teammates AND must be one of the four permitted colors of headbands: white, primary uniform color, black or beige (so that the "typical" pre-wrap color could be used).
3. Undershirts, if worn, must be similar in color to the jersey and the sleeves are to be the same length.
4. Memorial patches must be be no more than 4 square inches and CANNOT be a number.
etc., etc., etc.

Apparently, the NFHS Fashion Police Committee must all have stiff necks as they apparently cannot see below the bottom of the shorts. While I will be the first to admit, I dislike a number of these items -- ESPECIALLY item #2 when doing a girls varsity game (or any girls game for that matter) -- I can't help but wonder what they are really thinking.

Exhibit A: Varsity Girls game on Saturday night. One team had 12 players. Four players had one black shoe and one white shoe (three black right shoes and one black left shoe). Most other players wore black shoes, while one wore white shoes. A couple wore one black sock and one white sock pulled up high. One wore a pair of black socks with three wide white stripes. A couple others wore plain high black socks. A few others did not wear visible socks at all.

If the NFHS is going to require me to tell a player who has black hair and has a black rubberband to hold her hair in place that she has to remove it because her teammates are all wearing that ugly beige pre-wrap in their hair; or require me to tell a team that their uniforms are illegal because they have a 1.5" high #12 in the inset of their jerseys to honor a teammate who has lost a battle with cancer; or require me to tell a player that they have to take a black underarmour shirt off because their uniform is blue, WHY does it allow the area below the knee to look anything BUT uniform?

I understand shoes not matching. But, if they are going to make us go to the nth degree to observe all of these other aspects of the uniform, why not at least the color of the socks -- if they are visible?

First, the NFHS takes seriously the meaning of the word 'uniform'.

Second, if you're complaining about inconsistency concerning socks, wait for it...

JV game the other night, I had a reserve player come out with "the sleeve" on. I asked him if it was for medical reasons and when he looked at me with the "dear in the headlights" look, I made him take it off. His coaches reply, "Thanks Ref."

My partner had an issue with one boys socks that game - bright orange with a gold uniform? Yuk! I told him he has no right to mess with socks.

I agree though.....wait for it.

I have had a few players wear socks that are above the knee. I just confirm that they are not under garments that extend below the knee.

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.

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.

I Don't Want To Know How Far They Go Up ..
 

I don't even ask.

Somewhere Over The Rainbow ...
 

The NFHS is not telling you that she has to remove it. The NFHS differentiated hair control devices from headbands this year, and hair control devices, like the black rubberband holding a player's hair in place can be any color of the rainbow.

2008-09 NFHS Basketball Rules Changes
3-5-3 Any item that goes around the entire head (elastic strips/bands, pre-wrap, headbands, etc.) shall meet the rule requirements regarding color, maximum size, logo restrictions and team uniformity. Black and beige have also been added. Rationale: This change makes the rule more consistent in application and enforcement. The additional colors will provide student-athletes with the same low-cost options, while maintaining team uniformity.

COMMENTS ON THE 2008-09 RULES REVISIONS
HEADBANDS DEFINED AND COLORS ADDED (3-5-3): Any item that goes around the entire head (elastic strips/bands, pre-wrap, headbands, etc.) shall meet the rule requirements regarding color, maximum size, logo restrictions and team uniformity. The colors of black and beige were also added to the list of permissible colors a team may wear. This change makes the rule more consistent in application and enforcement. The additional colors will provide student-athletes with the same low-cost options previously available, while maintaining team uniformity.

SITUATION 5: A1 is wearing a red headband and one red wristband on each wrist below the elbow. Red is the torso color of the team jersey. A1 is also wearing a multicolored "scrunchie" to secure the hair in a ponytail. RULING: Legal; devices used to control the hair and that do not go around the entire head, are not considered headbands and, therefore, are not required to meet the same restrictions. (3-5-3d)

I let some minor things go but sometimes I tell the players hey that may be illegal and another ref might ask you to remove it. Don't think I've seen a player wear a wristband this year or I haven't really been watching. A few headbands but on the girls side not the boys.

A doctor's note does not legalize tights.

Yep, you may not care, but you failed to properly enforce the rule on that one.

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.

Girls wear an elastic band that goes around the entire head. Therefore, the NFHS is indeed telling me that they must meet the color requirements.

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.

Are pants addressed anywhere other than 3-4-5?

It has nothing to do with the game of basketball. Black or white head band, neither will distract from the game. The rule makers, I believe, are out of their minds. Next will they decide to dictate nail polish and hair style? It's a waste of everyones time worrying about that sort of thing.

I don't see any, except the officials' gray shirts. A girl has a white jersey and black headband, but that's legal. None of her teammates is wearing anything different. There's one girl with white on her wrist and a black headband, but it looks to me like tape. Again, no violation. What am I missing?

I'm with scrapper. I don't see any violations.

Oh, I thought away had to wear black headbands and home white. Is that not true? Looks like they're all wearing black.
Edit: The last varsity home game I watched, one girl had to remove a black headband in the middle of a game.

Choices for either team are; black, white, beige or a single solid color similar to the torso of the jersey. A teams headbands must be uniform in color.

I am not seeing a violation. 4 Home players in picture 2 with "black" head bands, legal, two with "hair control devises", legal. 3 Visiting players in picture 2 with "black" head bands, legal, 1 with "hair control devise", legal. Everything I see in this picture is legal, no need to ignore anything.

As I reviewed the series of photos I saw the white team with both gray AND black headbands/hair restraints.

I would be willing to bet the "gray" you see is actually black prewrap that's stretched out. I've seen that quite a bit, and no one that I know has ever diferentiated between shades of a color.

These are two different items by rule. "Headbands" have color requirements. "Hair Control devises" do not.

The challenge with black/gray is that in many cases, when they are compressed, they are black, but when they are stretched out, they fade to gray.

As an expert in the field of headbandology, I believe that these head bands are legal.

Are you sure tights can't be worn as pants? I agree it would look "way wrong", but I can't find a rule prohibiting it.

I remember a thread (NFHS) about this exact situation. I believe they allowed it.

Could be. I gots to get me a better monitor - although others have told me I need a new set of eyes.

Without commenting on the actual play in question, I disagree. If the rules makers want us to take care of this, it's our job. Not our job to disregard rules we think are stupid.

Funny, many coaches give me that same suggestion.:D

One way to get around this......I'm color blind :cool:

One reason I decided it was a good thing to enforce the uniform rules is that a lot of teams from my area make it to regional and state play-offs in the post season. At that level, you can bet the officials are going to pay attention to the little stuff. Better to iron out the uniform/headband/hair control things before post-season play.

My wife who coaches basketball, track, and X-country told me about a runner (not hers) who was disqualified at the state level after placing in a race while wearing a small bracelet that she had been permitted to wear at lower levels of competition.

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.

Runner Disqualified In Connecticut ...
 

We had a first place runner disqualified in a state open track sprint final last year for an illegal uniform. I mostly blame the coach, who should have known the rules, maybe the runner, if he knew, and chose to ignore the rules, and some blame must go to any officials who may have "passed" on this during the regular track season, and sectional meets.

Recently heard this story:

Girls V game. In warm-ups one referee sees that a girl's sportsbra does not match the uniform color and insists the girl not be allowed to wear it as it is an undershirt.

He was overruled.

And, it was said, the offending garment was described to be barely visible. [Don't even want to go there.] A future member of the NF fashion police, no doubt. :p

My understanding is that the color of the bras is irrelevant, even if some is visible. The committee DOESN'T WANT you to go there!!!

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?

I just really don't want to start having to inspect codpieces...

oh what is the rule on a girl wearing a bow- I guess it was a bow. But just the back of her hair like a strungy or whatever the heck they are called. Doesn't go around her whole head.

Cracking up!:D

If it is a hair control device, it is legal. If it is a head decoration, it is illegal. Determine which one it it is and rule accordingly.

And Boys Can't Use A 28.5 Ball Either ...
 

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

No... they are called 'Bros'!:D

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.

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'.

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).

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.

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.