Long-sleeve undershirt #21 Auburn

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

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 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.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

It certainly seems inconsistent to me to ban tights, but allow a long-sleeve undershirt.

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

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

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.

Originally Posted by just another ref

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

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)

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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.

Even worse, a player from the HOME team can do that!

Shorts are not required to be any particular color under NFHS rules.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Shorts are not required to be any particular color under NFHS rules.

They are if the player wants to wear mid length tights, in a vice-versa kind of way:
3-5-6: Tights shall be a single solid color similar to the predominant color of the pants.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

They are if the player wants to wear mid length tights, in a vice-versa kind of way:
3-5-6: Tights shall be a single solid color similar to the predominant color of the pants.

Billy,
There is no rule about what color the shorts must be. You have only pointed out that if an undergarment is worn below the shorts that extends down the leg so as to be visible, then that undergarment must match the color of the shorts. It's not the other way around.

My point is that a home player can wear a white jersey, blue shorts, blue compression shorts down to just about the knee, and blue socks that extend up high. Unless a referee believes that to be confusing, this apparel is legal.

I don't like it.

[Nevadaref]

I posted that undershirts were a POE just two seasons ago and that officials should be diligent about enforcing this rule.

Someone deleted it.

I don't understand why. That was valuable information, which contributed in a meaningful way to the discussion topic.