Chewing Gum

[scottk_61]

You haven't been had, the emphasis has been there.
In the past Texas, Louisiana, Kentucky and Ohio said "no" to gum. I haven't been in any of those state in at least 2 years, so maybe things have changed.
Florida last week said to tell them to get rid of it in the rules clinic. I don't remember who brought it up but it was said.
I don't remember what Alabama had to say about it, but the local association did say "no" to gum back in the 80's.
No association that I have worked with over the last 20 years has gone head hunting over it.
Some of you seem to think that this becomes a T fest or a way to stir up trouble.
I have never T'd anyone for it, and rarely have I sent a player off the floor for gum. I have T'd a player for the fake injury thing without any hesitation.
This summer, I worked approximately 70 varsity level games at camps run by two colleges designed for HS programs. Gum was a "no no" there as was candy.

I really must suppose that some of you guys have never worked outside of your local area much if any at all. Thus you don't see the different focus on certain things.
If you are my R and you refuse to allow me send a player off of the court for what I feel is a safety hazard, then you are in violation of Rule 2.
That would make you a very dangerous partner to work with.
Like I said, you call your game and I will call mine.
Different things are emphasized by different state and local associations.
I am having trouble getting used to the difference between the former Texas association and here with regards to hand checking. Here, you practically have to grab the opposing player and hold them before it is called....not so in the former Texas association nor like Louisiana..hell, Alabama could've cared less back when I was there in the 80's. So things change.
Just like the line up on the lane. Florida no longer allows a player into the lower block much like the NCAA mechanic. This is not so according to one of the mavens of this board back in the summer. Amazingly, that whiz kid found out just how wrong he was when I contacted him personally by email and called his assoc. president. I guess that whiz kid will attend the state field clinic to come up to speed.
Get outside of your area, outside of your comfort zone and you will indeed find that things are different.

Dealing with the unpopular calls will tell you how good your people skills are, ejections are rare as are Ts.
Hell, some of you are worried about lists of words that get you tossed......? I have never had a coach curse me directly that didn't remove himself. I didn't have to toss them, they knew that they had crossed the line and left on their own. Not bad for 20 years.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by scottk_61


I really must suppose that some of you guys have never worked outside of your local area much if any at all. Thus you don't see the different focus on certain things.

....
Hell, some of you are worried about lists of words that get you tossed......? I have never had a coach curse me directly that didn't remove himself. I didn't have to toss them, they knew that they had crossed the line and left on their own. Not bad for 20 years.

We are not worthy of your presence, forgive us for doubting your words, o wise and powerful one.

[mick]

This stick is chewed.
mick

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by scottk_61
In the past Texas, Louisiana, Kentucky and Ohio said "no" to gum.

Uh-oh. Now you've done it. I'm quite sure we'll get a 20 paragraph response on the history (or lack thereof) of gum-chewing in Ohio. Bring it on, Mark!!

I have never T'd anyone for it, and rarely have I sent a player off the floor for gum. I have T'd a player for the fake injury thing without any hesitation.

I know I'm not going to change your mind on this, Scott, but isn't T'ing the kid for faking enough of a resolution to the problem? Why worry about whether kids have gum? Why not just worry about whether they're being unsportsmanlike? Penalize the kid for actually doing something wrong; not for having something that he MIGHT use to try to trick you.

If you are my R and you refuse to allow me send a player off of the court for what I feel is a safety hazard, then you are in violation of Rule 2.

I disagree. If I'm the R and you think sweatbands are a safety hazard, I will not allow you to remove the player. If we disagree on something not covered specifically by the rules, then the R makes the decision. Does that violate Rule 2? I could be wrong, but I don't think it does.

Dealing with the unpopular calls will tell you how good your people skills are

Absolutely true. The problem, of course, is that there is no "call" to be made regarding chewing gum. It is neither illegal by rule, nor discussed in the casebook. You're not making a tough call, you're making up a rule. Hey, if everybody in your area (officials, coaches, ADs, parents) all agree that a no-gum policy will be implemented, then that's absolutely fine. But if you're just doing it by fiat, then I think it's not appropriate.

I have never had a coach curse me directly that didn't remove himself. I didn't have to toss them, they knew that they had crossed the line and left on their own.

Hey, sign me up for your local board. Of course, I'm not sure I'm willing to move to Neverland. That sounds a little too good to be true, although I'm not doubting your word, Scott. I just think it's highly unusual. Most coaches don't even know there is a line, let alone when they've crossed it.

As I said, I'm not going to change anybody's mind. Just throwing in my $.02

Chuck

[rockyroad]

I can NOT believe that this thread has gone on for 4 pages!!! This ranks right up there with the "presence" vs "rules knowledge" debate...btw: does it matter if the gum is sugarless or not? "Cause my dentist tells me that the sugarless gum is better for my teeth...

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by rockyroad
I can NOT believe that this thread has gone on for 4 pages!!! This ranks right up there with the "presence" vs "rules knowledge" debate...btw: does it matter if the gum is sugarless or not? "Cause my dentist tells me that the sugarless gum is better for my teeth...

Wait! We were talking about sugarless gum??? Well, now that's a completely different story....

[ChuckElias]

Trident or that horrible sugar-free Bubblicious?

[rockyroad]

If anybody steps onto my court chewing that Bubbelicious crap - I will T their a## so fast their heads will spin!!

[zebraman]

Bubbleicious will not be chewed in my game. Any other gum sure, but not Bubbleicious. Our interpreter specifically outlawed that kind of gum. Oh, and any cinnamon gum is also not allowed.

Z

[Oz Referee]

Originally posted by zebraman
Bubbleicious will not be chewed in my game. Any other gum sure, but not Bubbleicious. Our interpreter specifically outlawed that kind of gum. Oh, and any cinnamon gum is also not allowed.

Z

Why no cinnamon gum?? - I love that stuff and it is absolutely impossible to buy in Australia

[zebraman]

Becuase of it's additional acidity, our interpreter considers it more of a safety risk than other flavors. :-)

Z

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Scottk_61, I do not know where you live because you have not answered that question yet, but I can tell you in no uncertain terms, that the OhioHSAA has never banned the chewing of gum.

[scottk_61]

To Mark,
In 1980 and 81, I called games in Ohio and gum as well as hard candy was banned.
Looking back through some old stuff, even back then Ohio emphasized the girls fingernails...which was years ahead of most states.
Maybe you weren't aruond then, I was in Southern Ohio then being a crossover official from another state.
There was also an emphasis back then on making the players keep their jerseys tucked in.

I don't know where you were in 80 and 81 but I know where I was.
The issue really stood out to me then, because I was relatively new to HS officiating and I didn't understand the rationale behind some of the rules at the time.
That is when I learned the phrase, "purpose and intent" in regard to rule development.

[BktBallRef]

I kinda like Bubbleicious.



It's...well...BUBBLEICIOUS!!!

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
I kinda like Bubbleicious.

I liked the flavors, but the sugar-free variety was horrible