New helmet rule

[BktBallRef]

You guys have been around long enough to know that it's difficult to write new rules without some ambiguity. Sit him if you like but our state conducted the study last year that led to this rule and our state rep was deeply involved in getting the rule added. It is not the intent of the rule to sit players who lose their helmet because they were fouled.

Do what you're told to do in your area.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

You guys have been around long enough to know that it's difficult to write new rules without some ambiguity. Sit him if you like but our state conducted the study last year that led to this rule and our state rep was deeply involved in getting the rule added. It is not the intent of the rule to sit players who lose their helmet because they were fouled.

Do what you're told to do in your area.

That may all be true, but the language we were giving is the foul had to be the result of the helmet coming off. If that was not how they worded the rule than shame on them. I would not consider a holding foul where no helmet contact is involved or a take down as a result of a hold applies. I will ask around but that is what we were told I am almost positive and what we were told for college for sure.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

You guys have been around long enough to know that it's difficult to write new rules without some ambiguity. Sit him if you like but our state conducted the study last year that led to this rule and our state rep was deeply involved in getting the rule added. It is not the intent of the rule to sit players who lose their helmet because they were fouled.

Do what you're told to do in your area.

I appreciate what you're saying, but the rule says that the helmet coming off must be "directly attributable" to a foul. It's the same rule as NCAA football and (1) my HS state office and (2) my NCAA group has said it must be a foul that directly removes the helmet -- pretty much either a face mask foul or illegal helmet contact only. An example given was roughing the passer -- if it's just a late hit where the timing was the reason for the foul (and wasn't a blow to the head), why would we let the player stay when if the hit was a second earlier, we'd make him leave?

As you said, do what you're told to do, but I think your state is in the minority.