Did they miss any plays?

That's not important. These rampant sleeves need to be dealt with.

Even if the officials did ignore the rule, who cares? If I recall it did not change the outcome or give a team a decided advantage. The only one that should care is the people that hired these officials or the NCAA Coordinator. And we have no idea if they care.

Peace

We each have our shortcomings. :p

Saw long sleeves again tonight in the MU/OU game. What's up with that?

What did the refs say? :cool:

Nevada, I disagree with your reasoning. There are only three times I can justify disallowing something that is not specifically forbidden by the rules:

1. Safety is an issue.
2. An advantage is gained that is not intended by the rules.
3. It is unsporting.

None of these apply to long sleeves.

So without casebook play 3.5.6 Sit B you would obviously allow a player to wear tights.
It certainly seems inconsistent to me to ban tights, but allow a long-sleeve undershirt.

There's no point in us wasting our time debating this. I've posed it to the NFHS rules committee. We'll let them decide. ;)

PS If you are referring to the historical aspect as "my reasoning," then I should point out that that came straight from an NFHS interp, not me.

I noticed something similar in the Oklahoma/Oklahoma State game back in January: http://forum.officiating.com/basketb...tate-game.html

Long sleeved undershirt with a logo on the bicep. How hard is it to notice this when the guy comes on the court?

Are you saying that the minute a player comes out onto the court, you are checking for every little issue that might make their uniform illegal?

I do not know about you, I do not do that. And certainly I am not looking for logos on their shirts or undershirts. Now if I see it I will address it, but it is not the first thing I am worried about. I do not think most officials are doing this either.

Peace

No, but long sleeves should be obvious to everyone. Hard to miss when he comes out for the tap.

I don't know that I disagree with so much as think mine trumps yours. :)
My understanding is that if it's not forbidden specifically, there needs to be a safety issue or an unfair advantage in order to justify banning it.

Therefore, in my opinion, unless the NFHS specifically adds a rule or case play on it, I'm letting it go.

Any more inconsistent than to regulate the color of headbands but allow any color for a hair control device?

Hot Women Love It When I Talk Legal Latin To Them ...
 

How about this loophole? A player, with blue shorts, can, by rule, wear blue tights down to just above his knees. He can also wear the longest blue socks that the can find in a store, or even have long blue socks specially made by his grandmother, from the same material as the tights, above the level of his knees. The rules, other than a single reference to black socks worn by the officials, don't address socks. Ipso facto, legal full length tights.

3-5-6: Tights shall be a single solid color similar to the predominant color of the pants; the length shall be above the knee.

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)