Thoughts on this release.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Apologies, Maven, perhaps I was being too subtle. Personally, I would never diagnose an injury, mainly because I don't have to. "Apparently injured" seems to cover everything.

I anticipate normally being very comfortable relying on the assessment of a medical professional and would bow to his/her assessment. In circumstances where I did not agree with an assessment that a player is fit to re-enter a game, I would exercise my responsibility under NFHS 3-5-10 and send him back out for additional assessment. If my doubts persisted, I would repeat the process until either my concerns were relieved, or they stopped sending the player back in.

I suspect such a chain of events would be exceptionally rare, and would require some extremely blatant and obvious difference of perceptions. The bottom line is if the Referee does not believe the player is fit to play, he doesn't play. That includes being willing to likely have to defend your assessment at some subsequent point.

You seem to be missing that in Ohio, the referees have a legal obligation regarding apparent concussions. We don't diagnosis in the technical sense of the word, but we basically required to do so by law in practical terms and that assessment is legally superior to an actual diagnosis by a medical professional. Once the referees has identified an apparent sign of a concussion, it is illegal, not against the rules but actually against the law, for the player to return that day at all and he may not return after that day without being cleared by a doctor.

I understand the impulse for coaches to say, "We have actual medical professionals. Please don't look at my injured players." However, a referee in Ohio turning a blind eye to apparent symptoms of a concussion is going to land in real legal trouble given the new law.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

You seem to be missing that in Ohio, the referees have a legal obligation regarding apparent concussions. We don't diagnosis in the technical sense of the word, but we basically required to do so by law in practical terms and that assessment is legally superior to an actual diagnosis by a medical professional. Once the referees has identified an apparent sign of a concussion, it is illegal, not against the rules but actually against the law, for the player to return that day at all and he may not return after that day without being cleared by a doctor.

I understand the impulse for coaches to say, "We have actual medical professionals. Please don't look at my injured players." However, a referee in Ohio turning a blind eye to apparent symptoms of a concussion is going to land in real legal trouble given the new law.

On top of this, my concern has more to do with a situation where we just don't recognize any signs, and the player ends up in a bad state because he got hit after a concussion occurred. I know the law offers immunity if you're doing your job, but I don't think that'll be enough: at some point.

[maven]

Originally Posted by Adam

On top of this, my concern has more to do with a situation where we just don't recognize any signs, and the player ends up in a bad state because he got hit after a concussion occurred. I know the law offers immunity if you're doing your job, but I don't think that'll be enough: at some point.

That is a legitimate concern. OHSAA requires officials in all sports to take the NFHS concussion training course as a condition of renewing their permits this summer. An official who now fails to recognize symptoms of a concussion could be held negligent for doing so.

[KWH]

If OHIO did not want officials to make concussion determinations as per the NFHS Rules Book, I would think they would have written the new law to indicate such direction. Since they did not write the law that way, officials shall follow the written directions within the Rules Book. Otherwise, officials would not be performing the job they are hired to do.

That fact that some people have their panties in a Wadd because they feel "This law gives game officials some type of superpower" need contact there state legislature and get the law changed or they could go howl at the moon, or they could go pound sand.
It really doesn't matter what they do because the people doing the whining have no authority to do anything but whine...

Restated:
Attention All Whiners - Until the law is changed, Sit Down and Shut up!

[Adam]

So in your mind, we can't express our frustrations?

[HLin NC]

Simple, don't say the word "concussion" when you send him off, say "Have him checked out"

[maven]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

Simple, don't say the word "concussion" when you send him off, say "Have him checked out"

[Altor]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

Simple, don't say the word "concussion" when you send him off, say "Have him checked out"

And when the coach sends him back in and he gets seriously injured, you just became a defendant in a law suit that everybody will likely lose. But, at least you have insurance, right?

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by KWH

If OHIO did not want officials to make concussion determinations as per the NFHS Rules Book, I would think they would have written the new law to indicate such direction. Since they did not write the law that way, officials shall follow the written directions within the Rules Book. Otherwise, officials would not be performing the job they are hired to do.

That fact that some people have their panties in a Wadd because they feel "This law gives game officials some type of superpower" need contact there state legislature and get the law changed or they could go howl at the moon, or they could go pound sand.
It really doesn't matter what they do because the people doing the whining have no authority to do anything but whine...

Restated:
Attention All Whiners - Until the law is changed, Sit Down and Shut up!

What an odd post. I'm not familiar with the specifics of the football concussion rule, but assuming it's nearly identical to the soccer one, it's my opinion that the Ohio law requires, at minimum, that the referees comply with the concussion rule. Failure to do so may in fact cause you to lose your liability shield.

The dumb part of the law is making my few second determination of a possible concussion more important than a considered evaluation by a medical professional.

[scrounge]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

What an odd post. I'm not familiar with the specifics of the football concussion rule, but assuming it's nearly identical to the soccer one, it's my opinion that the Ohio law requires, at minimum, that the referees comply with the concussion rule. Failure to do so may in fact cause you to lose your liability shield.

The dumb part of the law is making my few second determination of a possible concussion more important than a considered evaluation by a medical professional.

I don't think the law does that in any way whatsoever...quite the contrary, it requires us to be vigilant and, if we see signs or symptoms, to make sure the young man/woman gets to that medical professional for a full, medical evaluation. No one is asking or implying that officials make a diagnosis. And the law offers a pretty strong liability shield - it's not just a reasonable effort standard, it's protection except for wanton or willful violation of the law, a pretty high standard.

The only thing I would change about the law is to allow same-day return if written clearance is obtained by a physician (not just a trainer but an actual MD). I just don't think we're talking about very many cases where that would apply, though.

[Altor]

Originally Posted by scrounge

No one is asking or implying that officials make a diagnosis.

No, that's the problem. Coaches and officials are told that any suspicion requires removal from the contest AND a even a full diagnosis by a doctor cannot legally remove this suspicion.

[Altor]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

The dumb part of the law is making my few second determination of a possible concussion more important than a considered evaluation by a medical professional.

Many time, legislatures are knee-jerk reactors, and don't think about the consequences of their laws. They take a good idea and go way to far with it.

There are a couple of good ideas in this law:
1) Everybody on the field is responsible for the safety of our young athletes.
2) Every adult on the field should be able to recognize concussion symptoms.
3) When in doubt, remove the athlete from competition.

I can't disagree with these. Coaches and officials should be able to identify symptoms and remove the athlete.

The problem comes with the General Assembly's next idea that once there is doubt, NOBODY can legally remove that doubt for the remainder of the day.
Couple this with the NFHS and CDC web courses (required by the same law) that tell us that any symptom like "shaking it off" after laying out for a ground ball at short stop should be taken seriously and is appropriate for removal from the contest and you have a bad law.

No doctor can tell the official and coach that it wasn't a concussion and he should be allowed to play. He had dust in his eyes from reaching for the ground ball. Or he was looking for his mouth-guard and that's why he appeared to be off-balance and didn't respond to your questions. Or he was dizzy because he has a cold and blew his nose too hard. Nope, the initial layman's "diagnosis" from 5 seconds of observation trumps any medically-trained person, including a doctor with years of experience with head trauma and the appropriate amount of time to observe the athlete.

That's what makes it a bad law.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Altor

That's what makes it a bad law.

It certainly sounds like it. We have to take players out here if we see signs of a concussion, but the schools by law have to have certain people to approve those players for reentry. We just have to be told they did and then report that information to our state to tell them that is what happened.

Also signs of concussions are also signs of other conditions. I just think we should not over react to these things without someone that actually has a baseline for the kid's behavior or medical situation for us to make a decision that no one can evaluate. Very silly and might cause lawsuits the other way.

Peace

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

You seem to be missing that in Ohio, the referees have a legal obligation regarding apparent concussions. We don't diagnosis in the technical sense of the word, but we basically required to do so by law in practical terms and that assessment is legally superior to an actual diagnosis by a medical professional.

a referee in Ohio turning a blind eye to apparent symptoms of a concussion is going to land in real legal trouble given the new law.

I have no idea what you are trying to suggest by, "the referees have a legal obligation regarding apparent concussions. We don't diagnosis in the technical sense of the word, but we basically required to do so by law in practical terms and that assessment is legally superior to an actual diagnosis by a medical professional.".

I would also suggest that ANY Referee ANYWHERE accepts the same risk, "a referee in Ohio turning a blind eye to apparent symptoms of a concussion is going to land in real legal trouble given the new law".

[Adam]

Originally Posted by ajmc

I have no idea what you are trying to suggest by, "the referees have a legal obligation regarding apparent concussions. We don't diagnosis in the technical sense of the word, but we basically required to do so by law in practical terms and that assessment is legally superior to an actual diagnosis by a medical professional.".

I would also suggest that ANY Referee ANYWHERE accepts the same risk, "a referee in Ohio turning a blind eye to apparent symptoms of a concussion is going to land in real legal trouble given the new law".

I agree, but the apparent added burden of the force of law is the issue. In Ohio, the problem is the finality of a decision made by people with no medical training and zero information on patient history. That finality is going to lead to some hesitation.

Let us send the kids off with the possibility of someone with an actual medical degree determining we were being just a bit jumpy. I'd rather be able to err on the side of caution.