|
|||
Quote:
fatigue thirst dry lips and tongue, lack of energy painful cramps dizziness nausea vomiting headaches weakness muscle pain unconsciousness seizures disorientation or delirium lack of sweating shortness of breath unconsciousness coma
__________________
I got a fever! And the only prescription.. is more cowbell! |
|
|||
Quote:
Anyone assuming you are somehow automatically qualified to render accurate diagnosis is a complete fool, including any attorney who wants to hold you responsible for being something you have never claimed to be, or there is no reasonable expectation that you automatically are. As previously suggested, the irrational fear of what some bogeyman attorney "might" do, creates little but unnecessary paralisys. Forgive me, but it shouldn't take you longer than 30 seconds to, "be cognizant of the signs of concussion", which is a whole lot different from diagnosing potential concussion. You are not a doctor, stop trying to convince yourself anyone will ever presume you are an "appropriate health-care professional". With all due respect to, and appreciation for, Mayoclinic.com, their list of concussion symptoms, in situations, where they are being displayed at an obviously problematic level, are and have long been, worthy of sending a player off for evaluation, regardless of what might actually prove to be causing them. The point being missed may simply be that you are getting way, way ahead of yourself conjuring up all sorts of exaggerations that that will likely never, ever be part of any (actual) expectation or rule. If some of your wildest concerns do make it to the final rule wording, they will have to be addressed and dealth with, but as of now, based on a news release, there's little chance the sky is in any serious danger of falling. |
|
|||
Quote:
To the point and I would like to see your answer, in short form please. A player vomits. You send him off for evaluation. Do you restrict him from competition because he displayed a sign of concussion? |
|
|||
Quote:
I'm under the impression a whole raft of things can cause a player to vomit, and none of them are good. I'm also absolutely convinced I'm nowhere near competent to diagnose what might specifically be causing that reaction and trust the resources, normally available, are in a far better position to determine cause and decide if that player is fit to continue. Just for the record, if he were to comeback in a play later and barf again (before, during or after) the next play, I'm going to send him back out for additional assessment. |
|
|||
Quote:
Let me restate and add some clarity. Player vomits. This is one of the signs of a concussion. It is a lower level game with no medical personnel immediately available. Do you sit him? |
|
|||
What kind of a stupid question is this? Has the number, location, or skill of the training staff ever had anything to do with sending someone out of the game?
|
|
|||
Quote:
Later than evening he is rushed to the ER and diagnosed with a severe concussion. Now tell me that question is stupid! It is reality! |
|
|||
Quote:
If you'd like to take your question even further, allow me to provide the answer you appear to be searching for. If I'm dealing with, what might be considered inappropriate or inadequate health-care professionals, whose decisions I was not comfortable with, I'm confident I could bring sufficient interpersonal skills into play so as to persuade, those whose decision I may be uncomfortable with, to accept my point of view which would ALWAYS favor the side of player safety and caution. If you require written authorization before feeling comfortable enough to respond to your own common sense, you might find solace in the second sentence of NF: 1-1-6, "The referee's decisions are final in all matters pertaining to the game.". Of course that requires you be comfortable with and ready to accept any consequences related to your decisions. You seem to be laboring under the illusion this is some kind of vote, it is not. The field official has the unilateral authority to decide when and if a player's condition merits further evaluation, and turns him over to sideline administrative personnel to conduct appropriate evaluation. The sideline has unilateral authority to determine, as well as the unilateral responsibility to provide, an appropriate evaluator who will conduct an appropriate evaluation and determine, without any input or consultation from field officials, whether that player is medically fit to resume play. Other than really extreme and rare circumstances, such as addresed above, the decisions, of the sideline personnel responsible for making that determination, hold sway. Last edited by ajmc; Thu Mar 04, 2010 at 01:52pm. |
|
|||
Quote:
You may think you have all the answers but as expressed earlier in this thread others see problems and anyone who seeks to stifle honest thought really needs to seek life in a republic where dissenters are quieted at the muzzle end of a gun. Luckily we live where thought is valuable. Where thought produces progress and resolves problems. Thanks Comrade. |
|
|||
Quote:
Your concern seems to be about a level of responsibilities that current rules nor the suggested revisions suggest. |
|
|||
Quote:
I am sorry, there is nothing you are going to say here that is going to change my mind. As of right now, the issues that this raises has me concerned as well as others. You can say that we know how to diagnose these things, I clearly feel I cannot. And Ed raised a very good issue. I have seen players vomit in games and I never once thought it was a possibility of a concussion. Now since that is a possibility, you will have inconsistent applications as most people that officiate football will not read this thread and will not know that is even a sign or symptom. At best that is a visible sign where the other things listed are subjective at best from a far. At the end of the day, I do not have to work with you or others. So this is really not necessary to keep debating this issue. I will wait until my state comes out with clearer information and ask questions when I am not sure what the policy is. Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010) |
|
|||
Quote:
I have seen any number of players vomit during games, and the issue of concussion has never entered my mind, but I have always sent those players to their sideline to be assessed as to why they threw up, because I do believe throwing up is an obvious sign that something is wrong. The same has been true if I saw a player who a appeared dizzy, out of balance, incoherent or non-responsive. I've never had a player complain of headaches, and would have no way of otherwise knowing if he didn't complain, but if a player does complain of headache, I would send him out for assessment. None of that has anything to do with my diagnosing anything, I'm not a doctor and nobody has any logical reason to think, or even imagine, that I'm qualified to diagnose anything. Since I make no claim to be competent to make a medical diagnosis, have never suggested I am competent to do so and there has never been any indication made that I am, or should be expected to be competent in making a diagnosis of concussion, how can I be held responsible for failing to make such a diagnosis? |
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
No one is saying we are concerned that we will not send off a player. We are concerned that we might think a players is hurt for another reason and then found out they had a concussion. Or even better, we send a player off for what we believe to be a concussion, then it clearly is not after a thorough examination and we somehow get blamed for it being the wrong player and something affecting the outcome. Sorry, I see a lot of problems with this language. It is one thing to send a player off for a play or two, it is quite another to diagnose an injury that may or may not be present. Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010) |
|
|||
Quote:
Specifically why you sent him off doesn't matter. THAT you sent him off is what counts, from that point on it's the sole responsibility of the team's designated, "appropriate health-care professional" to determine if there's a problem, what that problem might actually be and to evaluate his fitness to continue participating and determine whether or not he reenters the game. If they determine there's no problem, wonderful, he comes back in one play later and life goes on. Clearly and appropriately, the Gods of football have decreed this is an area we should err on the side of caution, which when you consider the grand scheme of things that matter, makes a lot of sense. How we may respond to, or even care about, comments regarding whether the outcome of the game might have been affected by your choosing to verify a players personal safety, is entirely up to the individual. Personally, I don't recommend spending a lot of time on it. Some fool, actually any fool, can say anything fools are inclined to say. Whatever they choose to say really doesn't matter, unless and until YOU choose to pay attention to them. If we choose to fixate on the possibilities of what fools might conjure up as possible problems, we can find all sorts of "problems" in any rule language seeking verbiage that will cover the full imagination of fools, and never reach total protection. As long as we acknowledge we're not doctors, make no claim to being an "appropriate health-care professional (as associated with our function on the field during a game) or claim or offer medical expertise or attempt to project a diagnosis, we bear no responsibility for medical judgments made, or not made, based on our job performance as game officials. If you want to get yourself all worked up about, what at this point is absolute and pure speculation and imagination, that's up to you and on you. I'm comfortable waiting until the written rule is published, which I anticipate will include a rational caution to be attentive to the issue of concussion, which has been identified as a problem area. |
|
|||
Al,
There are people literally on the National Federation Forum that have been discussing this rule. You are the only person that seems to think that there is not a problem. And there are people that have identified themselves as people in the medical profession (several have) and they feel uncomfortable with the way this rule is written because they realize you need more examination and training to determine a real concussion. Now if you do not want to accept that, this is fine with me. I have concerns and will continue to until they change the rules or the language to not have me concerned. Life will go on. Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010) |
Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NFHS Rules Interpreters versus IAABO Rules Interpreters | dpicard | Basketball | 7 | Mon Dec 07, 2009 01:13pm |
rules changes NFHS | RILAX | Lacrosse | 0 | Thu Aug 12, 2004 02:17pm |
NFHS Bat Rules | WestMichBlue | Softball | 24 | Fri Apr 16, 2004 09:40pm |
New rules for NFHS | RILAX | Lacrosse | 4 | Mon Nov 17, 2003 11:48am |
NEW - 2003 NFHS Football Rule Changes (as written by the NFHS Rules Committee) | KWH | Football | 27 | Tue Jan 21, 2003 11:30am |