NFHS Rules Changes

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Ed, I’m not quite sure what you’ve been reading. Where did you read, “we as football officials with no training be held responsible for determining something outside our domain”? The Press Release, that I read, merely suggested that officials will be “asked” to pay close attention to “obvious” signs and behaviors associated with symptoms of concussions, and when such are detected, to direct the afflicted player to “appropriate health-care professionals” for evaluation. Do you have access to additional detail?

I’m not at all surprised that you can say, “I have had the pleasure of working in multiple geographies and found officials in all of them to consider the welfare of the players important”, which is exactly what I suggested in referencing that most officials have been dealing with these type situations, all across this nation, for generations. Did you understand I suggested something different?

What part of, “I'm sorry, it may be a geographical difference, but most officials I've worked with routinely observe players to make sure they at least appear fit to compete. If not, a closer look, a question or two can identify when all the lights aren't lit, and if that's the case the player needs to be sent out, and officials have been doing that for years.” , are you having trouble understanding?

I also have enjoyed the opportunity to officiate in several States, and areas within NY State, and have been fortunate in working with officials, in all those locations, that took player safety very seriously and wouldn’t hesitate in sending a player, who they may have felt for whatever reason including those listed in this rule revision might be physically hampered in further participation, to his sideline for appropriate evaluation, as authorized by NF: 3-5-10.

Al, you are missing the point Rut, myself and others are stressing. Officials becoming the primary examiner of player condition, is something we are ill prepared. I would ask if you know the obvious signs of concussion but since you are omnipotent I know that answer. For the remainder of us to ask that we pay close attention to something we have limited to no knowledge is unfair and places us in a delicate position.

I have sent players off the field when it is most obvious they have a problem, the best example is the blood rule, but to ask a football official to be cognizant of the signs of concussion is beyond my pay grade especially considering medical professionals with years of training cannot agree on what to look for. Concussion symptoms are not like blood, compound fractures, dislocated fingers, shoulder separation, etc. that are clearly visible, or, even like a torn ACL where the player openly feels pain. Concussion symptoms are silent, a player may appear to be fine, he may return to the huddle and participate in the next play because concussion involves cognitive functions that may not be apparent.

The point you make about sending a player off because of obvious signs and behavior has no merit when discussing concussions.

If a player sustains a concussion and continues to play only to later express signs lets say after the game would officials be liable because the signs were not recognized. I believe that is the frustration most of us are expressing.

[Mike L]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

Al, you are missing the point Rut, myself and others are stressing. Officials becoming the primary examiner of player condition, is something we are ill prepared. I would ask if you know the obvious signs of concussion but since you are omnipotent I know that answer. For the remainder of us to ask that we pay close attention to something we have limited to no knowledge is unfair and places us in a delicate position.

Per MayoClinic.com, the signs of concussion are

■Confusion
■Amnesia
■Headache
■Dizziness
■Ringing in the ears
■Nausea or vomiting
■Slurred speech
■Fatigue

I see a couple in there that would be "obvious" but also somewhat inherent to the game itself without a concussive act.

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by Mike L

Per MayoClinic.com, the signs of concussion are

■Confusion
■Amnesia
■Headache
■Dizziness
■Ringing in the ears
■Nausea or vomiting
■Slurred speech
■Fatigue

I see a couple in there that would be "obvious" but also somewhat inherent to the game itself without a concussive act.

Good find. A player vomits, is it a concussion, or, did he eat too much, or, could be heat related. You would have no idea that 2 pound burger he ate upset his stomach but it could be a concussion symptom.

Or, confusion. How many times have you seen some player appear confused? Is it natural?

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

Good find. A player vomits, is it a concussion, or, did he eat too much, or, could be heat related. You would have no idea that 2 pound burger he ate upset his stomach but it could be a concussion symptom.

Or, confusion. How many times have you seen some player appear confused? Is it natural?

Early signs of dehydration, heat cramps and heat stroke include the following. See anything in common?

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

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

Al, you are missing the point Rut, myself and others are stressing. Officials becoming the primary examiner of player condition, is something we are ill prepared. I would ask if you know the obvious signs of concussion but since you are omnipotent I know that answer. For the remainder of us to ask that we pay close attention to something we have limited to no knowledge is unfair and places us in a delicate position.

I have sent players off the field when it is most obvious they have a problem, the best example is the blood rule, but to ask a football official to be cognizant of the signs of concussion is beyond my pay grade especially considering medical professionals with years of training cannot agree on what to look for. Concussion symptoms are not like blood, compound fractures, dislocated fingers, shoulder separation, etc. that are clearly visible, or, even like a torn ACL where the player openly feels pain. Concussion symptoms are silent, a player may appear to be fine, he may return to the huddle and participate in the next play because concussion involves cognitive functions that may not be apparent.

The point you make about sending a player off because of obvious signs and behavior has no merit when discussing concussions.

If a player sustains a concussion and continues to play only to later express signs lets say after the game would officials be liable because the signs were not recognized. I believe that is the frustration most of us are expressing.

Ed, from where do you get the notion that anyone has a rational expectation of, "Officials becoming the primary examiner of player condition". Sorry, but even if you stay at a Holiday Inn Express, you have to finish medical school and/or be certified at some clinical level to assume those responsibilities.

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.

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Ed, from where do you get the notion that anyone has a rational expectation of, "Officials becoming the primary examiner of player condition". Sorry, but even if you stay at a Holiday Inn Express, you have to finish medical school and/or be certified at some clinical level to assume those responsibilities.

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.

Al, understand you read the dictionary, however, look up the second definition of "primary" that means the first in a series. By that I mean the official becomes the first to note the symptoms as opposed to "primary" meaning the highest rank which would be the doctor only after suspected identifcation by the official. And, I hate Holiday Inn Express.

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?

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

Al, understand you read the dictionary, however, look up the second definition of "primary" that means the first in a series. By that I mean the official becomes the first to note the symptoms as opposed to "primary" meaning the highest rank which would be the doctor only after suspected identifcation by the official. And, I hate Holiday Inn Express.

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?

As briefly as possible Ed, for years I've assessed that a player vomiting on the field, had some sort of medical issue that common sense guided me to invoke NF: 3-5-10-a (in it's current format) and turn him over to someone in a better position to evaluate and determine if what caused him to vomit was a threat to his ability to continue playing.

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.

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by ajmc

As briefly as possible Ed, for years I've assessed that a player vomiting on the field, had some sort of medical issue that common sense guided me to invoke NF: 3-5-10-a (in it's current format) and turn him over to someone in a better position to evaluate and determine if what caused him to vomit was a threat to his ability to continue playing.

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.

You did not answer the question posed?

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?

[Cobra]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

You did not answer the question posed?

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?

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by Cobra

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?

You may think it is stupid but take ajmc's answer. You don't have medical personnel to rely on a many lower level games, in fact, sending a player out in circumstances where medical personnel are absent relies on a coach's evaluation and he may be more ignorant of concussion symptoms than the officials. Now NFHS shifts the onus for concussion evaluation upon officials. Coach goes he's ok, putting him back in the game.

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!

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Ed Hickland

You did not answer the question posed?

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?

Of course I answered your question. You didn't like the answer so you added additional qualifications to try and frame am answer the way you want the answer to look. If you want to answer your question, go ahead and answer it, don't waste my time with really stupid "yea, but" nonsense to try and get a different answer from me.

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.

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Of course I answered your question. You didn't like the answer so you added additional qualifications to try and frame am answer the way you want the answer to look. If you want to answer your question, go ahead and answer it, don't waste my time with really stupid "yea, but" nonsense to try and get a different answer from me.

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.

Al, I'm not looking for a set answer, I am asking for consideration of various circumstances we may encounter. The rule is there, we must deal with it the same as officials in all the other sports. There were obvious assumptions made at the NFHS and Rules Committee levels and many have expressed concern over implemenation for good reason. I'm intelligent and objective enough to listen to others without judgment as I would expect the same consideration. Just like when I'm in the classroom and tell the students who happen to be adult there is no such thing as a stupid question because you have enough knowledge to know this might happen. And, from experience we all know the Rules Committees seek feedback and often act upon the feedback they consider appropriate.

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.