NFHS Rules Changes

[jaybird]

The previous rule directed officials to remove an athlete from play if “unconscious or apparently unconscious.” The previous rule also allowed for return to play based on written authorization by a medical doctor.

"Unconscious or apparently unconscious" was direct and more easily identifiable and the requirement to return was more restrictive.

Now, officials are charged with removing any player who shows signs, symptoms or behaviors consistent with a concussion, such as loss of consciousness, headache, dizziness, confusion or balance problems, and shall not return to play until cleared by an appropriate health-care professional.

Now, we must be capable of diagnosing the symptoms while the clearance to return has been "watered down" from a written authorization by a medical doctor to a clearance by "an appropriate health care professional", whatever that means.

[Rob63]

Anytime a player gets hit and goes the wrong way on a pattern we might need to go up to the coach and say he's out of the game until he gets a note from a doctor because he was hit and seemed "confused" afterwards.

[Larry0405]

It would be nice if they were serious about helmet contact (Tebow v Kentucky) and who has ever seen "helping the runner called"?

[Welpe]

Helmet contact has been a POE before.

I've actually called helping the runner but it was during a scrimmage. It was also a case of a big lineman picking up his tiny running back and throwing him into the endzone. Hard to ignore that one.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Larry0405

It would be nice if they were serious about helmet contact (Tebow v Kentucky) and who has ever seen "helping the runner called"?

I called it in 2008. I cannot speak for the play you are referencing, but there is a difference in "helping the runner" and "pushing the pile." Not the same things.

Peace

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by jaybird

"Unconscious or apparently unconscious" was direct and more easily identifiable and the requirement to return was more restrictive. Now, we must be capable of diagnosing the symptoms while the clearance to return has been "watered down" from a written authorization by a medical doctor to a clearance by "an appropriate health care professional", whatever that means.

The specific wordage of the final rule is certainly critical, but the announcement relates to the same type general observations currently included in NF: 3-5-10, with special attention paid to obvious symptomes of a possible concussion. There are no "diagnosis requirements" included in this revision, at least as currently presented.

I presume most officials have, for years, considered a player that was visibly dizzy, incoherent, unable to balance himself or was complaining of headache as removeable or other observations pertaining to a possible concussion, cause for removing a player under provisions of 3-5-10-a. At times, some Coaches have questioned such decisions, but to absolutely no avail as the matter is totally beyond their control or authority.

This revision clearly places the responsibility of having an "appropriate health care professional" squarely on the team, not on the officials, to determine if, and when, a player is fit to re-enter the contest.

This revision simply calls attention to the reality that we are participants in a competitive, school-sponsored physical activity exercise and not a matter of such importance that would justify risking potential long term health threats to the student athlete participants.

It deems significance of a players impact on potential score, potential outcome of the contest, potential record breaking or scholarship offers are simply not of equal concern to potential long term health risk.

[tjthresh]

So a player gets his bell rung and sent out of the game one week, how does the crew for that team's game the following week know not to allow that player to participate if the coach doesn't have the written clearence from a health care perso?

[mikesears]

Originally Posted by tjthresh

So a player gets his bell rung and sent out of the game one week, how does the crew for that team's game the following week know not to allow that player to participate if the coach doesn't have the written clearence from a health care perso?

Unless I am mistaken, the rule address a single contest, just the same as before the rule change. We won't know the official wording until the editors get done with them.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by tjthresh

So a player gets his bell rung and sent out of the game one week, how does the crew for that team's game the following week know not to allow that player to participate if the coach doesn't have the written clearence from a health care perso?

There has to be some inherent presumption that the player's school has a legitimate interest in that player's health and well being, and will act accordingly. Confidence that had medical personnel come to a conclusion that the player should not suit up for that subsequent game, the appropriate school authorities would live up to their responsibilities and see that the medical interests of the player are considered most important.

It is way beyond the jurisdiction or authority of game officials to determine who is eligible to play in ANY contest. I doubt anyone has any interest in going there.

[Reffing Rev.]

All varsity football official crews will be required to have 1 each of the following professions

1. Doctor to diagnose possible concussions
2. Lawyers to handle potential liability litigations
3. Publicist to explain everything to the media
4. Policeman for crowd control
5. Fashion Designer to tell us the difference between penalty flag colored gloves and/or hand pads
6. and of course a priest to excise a few demons etc.

[jaybird]

Originally Posted by Reffing Rev.

All varsity football official crews will be required to have 1 each of the following professions

1. Doctor to diagnose possible concussions
2. Lawyers to handle potential liability litigations
3. Publicist to explain everything to the media
4. Policeman for crowd control
5. Fashion Designer to tell us the difference between penalty flag colored gloves and/or hand pads
6. and of course a priest to excise a few demons etc.

What? No Umpire!!

[kdf5]

http://www.nfhs.org/Workarea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=3702

[bigjohn]

Maybe officials should be invited to this as well.

http://www.ohsaa.org/medicine/Sports...y%20Course.pdf

[umpirebob71]

Question...Let's say a kid gets really rocked in the 1st quarter, and goes off. The only "appropriate health-care professional" there is an EMT that says he's fine after a few minutes. The kid comes back in, and it's clear he's not "fine." What's to prevent us telling the coach he's not coming back no matter what the EMT says. If it's going to be our butts flapping in the breeze if and when a lawsuit comes, why can't we protect ourselves that way? Just a thought.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by umpirebob71

Question...Let's say a kid gets really rocked in the 1st quarter, and goes off. The only "appropriate health-care professional" there is an EMT that says he's fine after a few minutes. The kid comes back in, and it's clear he's not "fine." What's to prevent us telling the coach he's not coming back no matter what the EMT says. If it's going to be our butts flapping in the breeze if and when a lawsuit comes, why can't we protect ourselves that way? Just a thought.

I appreciate your concern, Bob, but it's just not your job. The responsibility for determining who is a an "appropriate health care professional" doesn't seem like it's going to be assigned to the game officials. Do you really anticipate a player being so obviously incapable of returning, after being examined by the medical personnel, that you would be that concerned?

However, if you do, I don't see anything stopping you frrom sending him right back out for evaluation again, and again, and again, but you'd be doing so anticipating a lot of heat.