2009-2010 rule changes

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This is not completely correct. All colors of pre-wrap are legal, they just have to match or fit the subscribed colors listed by the rulebook. But I have seen black, red, blue and tan pre-wrap.

Peace

JRut,
My point is that cream (black, white and primary uniform color) is singled out while a purple prewrap (worn by the home team -- even though their secondary color is purple) is illegal. Cream (and black and white) get a unique preferential treatment. The other colors must match a uniform.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

JRut,
My point is that cream (black, white and primary uniform color) is singled out while a purple prewrap (worn by the home team -- even though their secondary color is purple) is illegal. Cream (and black and white) get a unique preferential treatment. The other colors must match a uniform.

Beige was chosen because it is (or at least was) the most common color sold. This color was chosen so teams didn't have to buy special pre-wrap to be properly equipped. I'm sure the committee was looking out for the not well funded school districts in making this determination. It's really not a huge deal as long as all officials apply the rule correctly.

-Josh

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by jdmara

Beige was chosen because it is (or at least was) the most common color sold. This color was chosen so teams didn't have to buy special pre-wrap to be properly equipped. I'm sure the committee was looking out for the not well funded school districts in making this determination. It's really not a huge deal as long as all officials apply the rule correctly.

-Josh

Josh,
This issue was BY FAR THE biggest issue we had in pre-game of girls varsity games during the course of the season. MANY (decently-funded) schools had ONE COLOR of pre-wrap (the primary color of their ROAD uniform). It was an incredible hassle to make these girls take the head bands (that were really hair restraints, BUT went all the way around the head) off before the game. As the season went on, it got better, BUT, we still had teams during the last quarter of the season with wrong-colored pre-wrap. My point is that if the NFHS is concerned about costs when allowing "the most common color", why not just frickin allow the team's secondary color of pre-wrap?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Josh,
This issue was BY FAR THE biggest issue we had in pre-game of girls varsity games during the course of the season. MANY (decently-funded) schools had ONE COLOR of pre-wrap (the primary color of their ROAD uniform). It was an incredible hassle to make these girls take the head bands (that were really hair restraints, BUT went all the way around the head) off before the game. As the season went on, it got better, BUT, we still had teams during the last quarter of the season with wrong-colored pre-wrap. My point is that if the NFHS is concerned about costs when allowing "the most common color", why not just frickin allow the team's secondary color of pre-wrap?

Not a hassle for me. "Coach, those headbands are illegal." How hard was that?

Not even a hassle to explain the rule: "White, black, beige, or the primary uniform color; everyone must match."

People get their shorts knotted over all this, and I just don't get it. Do you whine so much about moving the players in the lane above the blocks? It's just a rule to enforce, and it's easier than it used to be. Sheesh.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Not a hassle for me. "Coach, those headbands are illegal." How hard was that?

Not even a hassle to explain the rule: "White, black, beige, or the primary uniform color; everyone must match."

People get their shorts knotted over all this, and I just don't get it. Do you whine so much about moving the players in the lane above the blocks? It's just a rule to enforce, and it's easier than it used to be. Sheesh.

Hassle is perhaps not the proper term. I would guess that 50 - 80% of the girls games I did this year, we had to go to the head coach (or the player) and have them remove the headband. State situation: easy; explain rule: easy; having to force girls to remove the items/scramble to find the proper headbands put coaches in a foul mood to start the game.

Moving players up a position: easy. It is a rule. It is enforced equally for each game. This situation varies significantly from the headband/hair restraint rule.

Purpose of headband: Stop sweat from getting into eyes -- secondarily, it looks "cool".

Purpose of pre-wrap going around head: keep hair out of face and under control (in reality it SHOULD fit under the category of hair control device, BUT since it goes around the head, it doesn't). Secondarily, it does NOT look "cool" -- it serves a purpose. Since many officials apparently did NOT enforce the rule -- why else would we have the issue in the 18th, 19th and 20th games of the season? -- it creates unnecessary stress between players, coaches and officials before the game starts.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Hassle is perhaps not the proper term. I would guess that 50 - 80% of the girls games I did this year, we had to go to the head coach (or the player) and have them remove the headband. State situation: easy; explain rule: easy; having to force girls to remove the items/scramble to find the proper headbands put coaches in a foul mood to start the game.

Still don't get it. I don't force them to do anything. I tell them that they can't play until they comply with the rule.

And I don't care what mood they're in.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Still don't get it. I don't force them to do anything. I tell them that they can't play until they comply with the rule.

And I don't care what mood they're in.

We will simply have to agree to disagree on this one. We get into semantics about "force" -- truth is, the girls are there to PLAY, if they want to PLAY, they are FORCED to take off the off-colored shrinkwrap.

To each his own, but I much prefer to enjoy my night of officiating as opposed to making it a 90 minute meeting with an enemy.

[BayStateRef]

It is no big deal. Enforce the rule. Watch how fast a roll of beige or black pre-wrap is found. It is a rule and the coaches should know it. If other officials do not enforce the rule, what other rules are they setting aside? I have partners who don't like this rule and want to ignore it, but my assignors have told me to enforce it and I do.

If the NFHS wants to allow the secondary color or any color (as long as they all match) to be legal...fine. But I don't care if the rule is changed or not. BTW...I also have seen "illegal" colors in 80% or more of my games (all varsity) this year. I had one team who wore the "alternate" color during warmups and when I told the captains they were illegal, they said they knew that and would change to white before the game started. They did.

[Joel Poli]

Make "grasping" the ring legal, but "hanging" on the ring a T.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Hassle is perhaps not the proper term. I would guess that 50 - 80% of the girls games I did this year, we had to go to the head coach (or the player) and have them remove the headband. State situation: easy; explain rule: easy; having to force girls to remove the items/scramble to find the proper headbands put coaches in a foul mood to start the game.

Moving players up a position: easy. It is a rule. It is enforced equally for each game. This situation varies significantly from the headband/hair restraint rule.

Purpose of headband: Stop sweat from getting into eyes -- secondarily, it looks "cool".

Purpose of pre-wrap going around head: keep hair out of face and under control (in reality it SHOULD fit under the category of hair control device, BUT since it goes around the head, it doesn't). Secondarily, it does NOT look "cool" -- it serves a purpose. Since many officials apparently did NOT enforce the rule -- why else would we have the issue in the 18th, 19th and 20th games of the season? -- it creates unnecessary stress between players, coaches and officials before the game starts.

As late as the last week of the season, the JV officials did not enforce the rule. One of the first things we check when we go on the floor is headbands, pre-wrap, etc. If the colors are not legal, we inform the coach right off. Some protest [usually "We were told if it matches the trim..."] and usually, but not always, it is the home team that has the problem. I keep it simple. On the road you have 4 choices. At home you have only 3. If it is not taken care of in the first game, it sets a bad example for the 2nd game. And if you wait till there is 2 minutes to go, then it becomes more of a distraction to the coach and last minute instructions for the team before tipoff.

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

pre-wrap...does NOT look "cool" -- it serves a purpose.

If it doesn't look cool then why are teams coordinating the color of the wrap with their uniforms? If the way it looked wasn't important then this team which you speak of wouldn't have gone out and bought a bunch of pre-wrap in the secondary color of their uniforms, rather they would have got the standard, and legal, beige color.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Josh,
This issue was BY FAR THE biggest issue we had in pre-game of girls varsity games during the course of the season. MANY (decently-funded) schools had ONE COLOR of pre-wrap (the primary color of their ROAD uniform). It was an incredible hassle to make these girls take the head bands (that were really hair restraints, BUT went all the way around the head) off before the game. As the season went on, it got better, BUT, we still had teams during the last quarter of the season with wrong-colored pre-wrap. My point is that if the NFHS is concerned about costs when allowing "the most common color", why not just frickin allow the team's secondary color of pre-wrap?

Then is sounds like everyone in the area is not applying the rules consistently. There were a few schools around here that had trouble figuring out the headband rule but once it was a few weeks into the season, it wasn't an issue any longer..."Coach, you are not complaint with the headband rule. Please address that with your team".

-Josh

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

My point is that if the NFHS is concerned about costs when allowing "the most common color", why not just frickin allow the team's secondary color of pre-wrap?

How about the teams just get the correct color? Seems pretty simple.

What do you plan on doing when a team is wearing white uniforms with red and yellow trim...is red the secondary color or is it yellow?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by LDUB

How about the teams just get the correct color? Seems pretty simple.

Agree, wholeheartedly. Why can't high school coaches instruct their players how to properly wear their uniforms when the uniforms are distributed at the beginning of the season? This ain't rocket science, or brain surgery:

Headbands and wristbands must be white, black, beige, or a single solid color similar to the torso of the jersey. All players must wear the same color headbands and wristbands. Undershirts must be similar in color to the jersey.

I may have mentioned this before, but it's worth repeating. I work Catholic middle school games on the weekends. The assigner told us at the beginning of the season that if he walks into the gym during one of our games, and if he sees an illegal undershirt, sweatband, or headband, that we would not get paid for that game. Guess what? No "fashion police" problems for the entire season, and these are twelve year old kids, coached by volunteer coaches.