NFHS Rules Changes

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ajmc

I don't think I suggested anyone is crazy, but the extent of some of the concerns raised are simply not supported by the information that's been released and seem somewhat exaggerated. I DO NOT think game officials are competent to "diagnose concussions" and have suggested that anyone who thinks they are, is absolutely wrong.

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.

Having a concussion as opposed to having heat stroke or being dehydrated or two complete different situations and set of circumstances and require different documentation now. And if you do not understand that distinction and why that is a concern, well I really do not know what to tell you.

Originally Posted by ajmc

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.

I can see dizzy and out of balance a little, but again those could be for other medical issues. Those are not just automatically because of a concussion.

Originally Posted by ajmc

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?

Easily, if you think one is for dehydration and it is really a concussion. You let the player come back in thinking they had an issue that was not related to a concussion and someone puts them back into the game. Someone just might say "you" were negligent and did not do your job. Or if you allowed a player to come back in the game because a trainer told you they were OK (if the rule is not specifically defined). Someone can and will say you were not doing your job and when they find out that the concussion helped result in something serious (and they can lead to death); you might be one of the many people they come looking for to pay for someone's loss. That in my opinion should not be the role of an official, especially those that are not doctors or nurses or even athletic trainers by trade.

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