concussion headband
 

Had a player with a 'concussion headband' on. Color was black (no problem), but it had multiple markings on it. (ie couple manufactures logos & a symbol of some kind.
1. Is it legal?
2. Is this something the coach should inform us of before the game?
3. Is a 'doctors note' required?

Thanks

Not legal in Missouri without a wavier from the state.

Concussion Headband ...
 

Legal in Connecticut. No medical clearance needed. No color restrictions.

https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.6080...6&pid=15.1&P=0

Unless your state says otherwise, I'd suggest considering this the same as a knee brace.

I'd go with this. In fact, the "knee brace" thing was exactly what I thought of when I first read the OP.

Also agree ... although the potential liability involved with suggesting that a player remove such a device was the first thing I thought of. Without explicit guidance otherwise, I'm not telling the player to remove that.

I've seen these worn and allowed too here in VA. Just curious cuz I don't know, but are these to help prevent an initial head injury, or are they being worn by kids who have already suffered a concussion, been cleared to play again, and are just being cautious to protect against another such blow to the head?

"Sorry, but you can't play with that on." - you're not telling them to take off something that may be medically necessary to keep on, but you're enforcing the rule too.

NEVER tell them they have to take something off.

In this case, though, I'm saying nothing and ignoring the thing.

Had this.
 

EXCEPTION: State associations may on an individual basis permit a player to participate while wearing a head covering if it meets the following criteria:
a. For medical or cosmetic reasons – In the event a participant is required by a licensed medical physician to cover his/her head with a covering or wrap, the physician's statement is required before the state association can approve a covering or wrap which is not abrasive, hard or dangerous to any other player and which is attached in such a way it is highly unlikely that it will come off during play.
b. For religious reasons – In the event there is documented evidence provided to the state association that a participant may not expose his/her uncovered head, the state association may approve a covering or wrap which is not abrasive, hard or dangerous to any other player and which is attached in such a way it is highly unlikely it will come off during play.

Semantics.

I use the same phrasing with earrings. While I'm probably going to be even more careful with something like this, let's not pretend they don't mean the same thing.

If you tell somebody that they have to take something off, and that player suffers because of it, a court will definitely care about "semantics". It's happened before.

I'm still waiting to see any research that says those things actually reduce concussions . . . last time I saw research (which I think was from soccer), there was no evidence that they did anything to reduce concussions. (Which makes sense if you are paying attention to what a concussion really is [movement of the brain within the skull] rather than trying to make a buck off mommy's fears for little Johnny. That pad is going to do very little to change the rate of acceleration/decleration of the skull, which is what causes the brain to slosh inside.)

Until my state or association tells me differently, I'm not acting like a doctor or medical professional.

Not suggesting refs should do anything. I do think those headbands are a fraud that is taking advantage of fear and that may be increasing risks of actual concussions (likely more so in soccer than basketball) becuase players falsely think they have some measure of protection.

You have a citation?

I'm at work, but I'm sure you can Google it.

And while it didn't get to court, there was an issue here a couple years ago when a parent was mad because her daughter told to remove an earring and it caused an infection.

Legal in Ontario. I can't see any reason why they would prohibited.

Much of law is not black and white, but people (whether judge or jury) parsing through the gray.

If some yahoo were to claim that you created danger by forcing his child to take off something, which do you think is going to play better to a jury?

"I told her to take it off."

or

"I told her it was her decision whether to take it off or not, but that under the rules I couldn't let her play with it on."

But forget about the very low risk of ever being in court over something like this -- which is easier for you to manage? I'd submit that the second one is. You explain and put the ball in the player's court -- it is now up to the player to make a decision on whether to play or not.

Specifically NOT allowed in NCAA (based on a recommendation from the Sports Medicine Group (or something like that).

I think the rationale is along the lines of: If you have a concussion, you shouldn't be playing, with or without a headband. If you don't have one, these won't prevent one based on the types of collisions typically seen in basketball (head-to-head or head-to-floor). They are allowed in sports such as soccer where they can/might reduce the cumulative effects of low-impact collisions such as head to ball.

It's the "it's happened before" that I was questioning. Has it really?

For all the fear of lawsuits, precious few actually happen. And if I get sued, I'll make a call to NASO.

Bad advice. Better to just follow the rule for headwear.

This is me backtracking and apologizing.

Frankly, I'd forgotten the rule for headware.