"Tuck your hair in your shirt!"

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

If you think its a safety concern 3-6-7 applies.

Do you mean 3-7?

If that is the case I'm not sure what hair has to do with safety?

Peace

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Do you mean 3-7?

If that is the case I'm not sure what hair has to do with safety?

Peace

Okay, this will really show my age ... Years ago, it might have been a Points of Emphasis entry, in the interest of safety, the officials could direct a player to restrain his/her long hair, particularly a long braided ponytail. I don't have the particular year for specific reference. One of the reccomended methods to restrain the hair was by tucking it into the back of the jersey.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Rut got the NFHS Rules reference correct and Rob1968 is correct about a Points of Emphasis from years gone by. As I stated in a post in a different thread last night, my knees are not going up in the attic this morning but it seems to me that the POE addressed long hair. I am sure that NevadaRef will soon post the POE of which Rob spoke.

MTD, Sr.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

Okay, this will really show my age ... Years ago, it might have been a Points of Emphasis entry, in the interest of safety, the officials could direct a player to restrain his/her long hair, particularly a long braided ponytail. I don't have the particular year for specific reference. One of the reccomended methods to restrain the hair was by tucking it into the back of the jersey.

I remember a similar ruling at one time, but I do not remember it was simply for long hair, it was more for heave braids. It appears here they wanted to just remove someone because they had long hair covering up the jersey. That was a little before you see a lot of men wearing long hair in football games and I would not feel that interpretation is still valid or it is a stretch to apply now.

Peace

[Adam]

I'm pretty sure this would result in an uncomfortable conversation with any one of my assigners.

[bainsey]

I finally got my eyes in front of a rule book. Indeed, there is no such rule.

(Thanks for the heads up, JAR.)

I don't know where I heard it. It just went off like an alarm in my head when I saw the hair. Now, the coach's line is memorable for another reason. I have that team again next month; I'll own up to it then.

And BTW, I wouldn't have invoked 3-7 in this case. The hair was merely plentiful, not dangerous.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bainsey

I finally got my eyes in front of a rule book. Indeed, there is no such rule.

(Thanks for the heads up, JAR.)

I don't know where I heard it. It just went off like an alarm in my head when I saw the hair. Now, the coach's line is memorable for another reason. I have that team again next month; I'll own up to it then.

And BTW, I wouldn't have invoked 3-7 in this case. The hair was merely plentiful, not dangerous.

Wait, you're supposed to dig in your heels and insist it should be illegal, stretching the rules to fit.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I remember a similar ruling at one time, but I do not remember it was simply for long hair, it was more for heave braids. It appears here they wanted to just remove someone because they had long hair covering up the jersey. That was a little before you see a lot of men wearing long hair in football games and I would not feel that interpretation is still valid or it is a stretch to apply now.

Peace

That's how I remember it, also. And in training discussions, at the time, large afros, and long hair that was not a safetey concern, were to be ignored.

[26 Year Gap]

Even though it might take longer to get the info to report, it is not one of the DOG warnings. What would REALLY have been funny, is if the coach had hollered to you at the half to remember to tuck in your whistle.

[SNIPERBBB]

Yeah its 3-7...had a ugly game last night.

I don't see hair that long being a problem but somewhere some OOO probably would think it is a hazard.