More Fashion Police- (Rolling Waistband on Shorts)

[Adam]

Unless my state tells me to deal with it, I'm not going to look for this.

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Yes.

Generally allowed unless it's a safety issue (strings) or violates logo issues.

That's basically what our local interpreter said and I was good with that.

Originally Posted by Adam

Unless my state tells me to deal with it, I'm not going to look for this.

I felt the same way. I had a game earlier this year where one of my partners had girls unroll their pants and delayed subs coming in to have them unroll. At halftime I said that we should just leave it alone. But now the state has ruled otherwise.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

That's basically what our local interpreter said and I was good with that.



I felt the same way. I had a game earlier this year where one of my partners had girls unroll their pants and delayed subs coming in to have them unroll. At halftime I said that we should just leave it alone. But now the state has ruled otherwise.

Because someone, somewhere, took it upon himself to ask the teacher for homework.

[maroonx]

Our association just sent an email out to everyone citing rule 3-5-5 which requires the equipment and apparel be worn an intended by the manufacturer.

[so cal lurker]

For some reason this was never an issue back in the 80s . . .

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by maroonx

Our association just sent an email out to everyone citing rule 3-5-5 which requires the equipment and apparel be worn an intended by the manufacturer.

I would prefer to lean on this rule vs the logo rule if this was ever an issue.

[Valley Man]

Originally Posted by maroonx

Our association just sent an email out to everyone citing rule 3-5-5 which requires the equipment and apparel be worn an intended by the manufacturer.

Under Armour is not stupid. When you roll down the waistband it reads Under Armour all the way around over and over and over. "Intended by the manufacturer" is poor wording IMHO.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Adam

Because someone, somewhere, took it upon himself to ask the teacher for homework.

Bingo.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

Unless my state tells me to deal with it, I'm not going to look for this.

Agree. I'm not touching this with a thirty-nine and a half foot pole.

[Rob1968]

Our interpreter/assignor has stated that we must not allow the logos to show. So, the players either roll the shorts inward, or they roll the shorts a second turn. Thus, one rule is met, by ignoring another - fashion poicing at its finest!?!

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

Our interpreter/assignor has stated that we must not allow the logos to show. So, the players either roll the shorts inward, or they roll the shorts a second turn. Thus, one rule is met, by ignoring another - fashion policing at its finest!?!

These are not Fashion Police rules, these are Fashion Gestapo rules.

[Blindolbat]

Originally Posted by Adam

Unless my state tells me to deal with it, I'm not going to look for this.

You don't have to look very hard because when they do it then it is blatantly obvious. And your rule book tells you to deal with it.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Blindolbat

You don't have to look very hard because when they do it then it is blatantly obvious. And your rule book tells you to deal with it.

No, it doesn't. Some interpret the book so that they have to deal with it, but I don't. If my state tells me to deal with it, I will. I'm not going to be the kid in the back of the class asking for homework over Christmas break, though.

[Rich1]

A veteran ref who is both an assignor and NFHS rules interpretor once told my group "you can't go wrong if you enforce the rules as written".

There is a level of protection when we do what the book says to do. Yes, many of the fashion police rules are annoying. Yes, I would be lying if I said that I've never let something slide in a game. But if you do decide to let a player who is violating the uniform rule and the other coach complains to your board or there is an evaluator watching it may affect you down the road.

I have had several coaches (mostly at the behest of aggravated parents) complain when I have disallowed a leg sleeve or insisted players change mismatched under-shirts and have always been backed by my board because I was applying the rule written in the book. Its a lot easier than having to explain why you didn't do what it says in the book.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Rich1

A veteran ref who is both an assignor and NFHS rules interpretor once told my group "you can't go wrong if you enforce the rules as written".

There is a level of protection when we do what the book says to do. Yes, many of the fashion police rules are annoying. Yes, I would be lying if I said that I've never let something slide in a game. But if you do decide to let a player who is violating the uniform rule and the other coach complains to your board or there is an evaluator watching it may affect you down the road.

I have had several coaches (mostly at the behest of aggravated parents) complain when I have disallowed a leg sleeve or insisted players change mismatched under-shirts and have always been backed by my board because I was applying the rule written in the book. Its a lot easier than having to explain why you didn't do what it says in the book.

I have no problem enforcing the fashion rules. I'm just not going to go looking for things to enforce. The undershirt rule is pretty clear, with no room for interpretation.

This, however, is based on an interpretation of how the manufacturer intended the clothing to be worn. I'll follow the lead of my state, but I'm not going to go scuba diving on this one.

And your assigner/interpreter was wrong. Officials can get themselves into trouble by strictly interpreting a few of the rules. They may be backed by the rule and their board, on the surface, but they'll also be working JV in perpetuity.

Examples:
1. Coach is two inches outside the box.
2. 3 seconds.
3. 10 seconds on a FT.
4. throw-in plane violations

I could go on.