Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

This week's BS High School rule

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • This week's BS High School rule

    From a home-page-linked article:

    The use of electronic communication devices is permitted during meets in unrestricted areas and coaches’ boxes; however, they may not be used for any review of a referee’s decision or to communicate with an athlete during a race or trial.
    So naturally some kid has gotten DQed because other coaches saw a way to get rid of him. I use my iPad all the time at meets to show my hurdlers and jumpers what they did wrong and how to correct it. I did it at the State Meet. The trick is that you can't show it DURING a race a trial. Well, DUH, how would you even do that . . . walk out on the runway or track? The 'spririt' of the rule, as I understand (sic) it, is that a coach should not delay an atlete's participation, so 'do it on your own time', which I do - right AFTER they complete a trial or race.

    This kid did not hold up the proceedings, but violated the 'unrestricted area' stipulation, which . . . Catch-22 . . . there wasn't one. A simple referee's decision to ignore the protest would have sufficed, but apparently THIS official doesn't understand what his/her REAL job is, so the kid gets DQed. :roll:

  • #2
    Re: This week's BS High School rule

    Pure BS... I mentioned this in the HS thread a few days ago and it's still bugging me. I was so looking forward to one of the greatest high school LJ competitions in recent memory, with three 25 footers going at it in great June SoCal conditions - but not to be now. And this meet where he was DQ'ed was just sectional division prelims - he could have qualified with his hands tied behind his back... Very, very unfortunate...

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: This week's BS High School rule

      I'm not going to claim that it is a good rule, but I have always been under the impression that an athlete reviewing video during a competition was against the rules.

      Maybe due to the fact that camera are much easier to come by these days (I have two on my phone, two on my ipad, and one on my laptop and none of those devides were purchased with the intent to use them as a camera!) and technology is changing and becoming more accessable, the rule should be reexamined

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: This week's BS High School rule

        Originally posted by Marlow
        The use of electronic communication devices is permitted during meets in unrestricted areas and coaches’ boxes; however, they may not be used for any review of a referee’s decision or to communicate with an athlete during a race or trial.
        So naturally some kid has gotten DQed because other coaches saw a way to get rid of him.
        I don't understand how this statement can encourage a coach do get another athlete disqualified. Please explain!
        I don't know that communication devices have ever been allow to be viewed by a ref in a disputed decision. Doesn't happen in this state.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: This week's BS High School rule

          I looked up the rule (could only find the 2013 rule book for NFHS)

          Looks like Rule 4 - Section 6 - Article 7 is prettly clear:

          ART. 7 . . . It is an unfair act when a competitor receives any assistance.
          Assistance includes:
          a. Interference with another competitor.
          b. Pacing by a teammate not in the race or persons not participating in the
          event.
          c. Competitors joining or grasping hands with each other during a race.
          d. Competitor using an aid during the race.
          e. Communicating with a competitor through the use of any device.
          f. Coaching a competitor from a restricted area.
          g. A competitor views a videotape or any other visual reproduction of the
          competitor’s performances prior to the completion of the competition
          .
          NCAA rule book appears to have a similarly clear rule. USATF & IAAF aren't as precise in simply saying viewing video is bad, those specify that the athlete can't watch or use video in the competition area (this sounds like what Marlow does, but depending on what rules FL observes, might want to be careful around more petty coaches).

          do CA rules differ from NFHS? I'm a bit curious why the article was hung up on "communications device" when "viewing a videotape" seems like a more clear technicality to call (a total dick move, I hope it goes without saying).


          Edit: couldn't find the NFHS book for 2014 online, but i guess they did make a change for this year... Does anyone have the current rule?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: This week's BS High School rule

            Originally posted by runforlife
            Originally posted by Marlow
            The use of electronic communication devices is permitted during meets in unrestricted areas and coaches’ boxes; however, they may not be used for any review of a referee’s decision or to communicate with an athlete during a race or trial.
            So naturally some kid has gotten DQed because other coaches saw a way to get rid of him.
            I don't understand how this statement can encourage a coach do get another athlete disqualified. Please explain! I don't know that communication devices have ever been allow to be viewed by a ref in a disputed decision. Doesn't happen in this state.
            ??!!
            Since time immemorial poor coaches have looked for reasons to DQ other team's athletes, so they themselves can win. If it's not the anklet forgotten under a girl's socks, then it's the multi-color stitching on under-garments (gasp! :shock: ) or the two AND A HALF inch head band. The national rule THIS year is that electronic devices ARE allowed, but, as the rule above states, them must be in (completely undefined) 'unrestricted' areas and not DURING a race or trial. Oh, no room for misinterpretation there! As I have said, I have used my iPad all year without fear because I KNOW THE RULE and can't be bullied by others. I have been questioned many times, but just pop out my rule book and read it, and then ask them to show me where it says the area I am in is 'restricted' (they can't, of course). I feel bad for athletes who can't do that to officials. As I am state (and nationally) certified, good luck arguing with me, unless you're an official at this meet, which would mean you would have to accede to what the the rule book actually says.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: This week's BS High School rule

              Anywhere coaches are not allowed is a restricted area. That's not rocket science. If coaches are prohibited from being on the field and track, that by definition is a restricted area. The NFHS rule stipulates video of current competition may be viewed in a designated coaching box or unrestricted area. It also stipulates that State Associations may also have policies in place to further address the use of electronic devices.

              The Games Committee (Meet Management) has the authority to determine and publish in advance those areas that are restricted and unrestricted.

              The rule is not quite as simple as was stated in a previous post.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: This week's BS High School rule

                This poorly written/ambigious rule has been much discussed/argued by officials at every meet I have worked this year and there are, inevitably, different interpretations.
                I simplify compliance by banning leaving the competition area or any viewing of videos/etc by competitors during competition.
                Yes, right or wrong, there are leigions of coaches who will pounce on any chance to DQ a competitor.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: This week's BS High School rule

                  So here is a view close to the scene of the controversy.
                  Although I was among the missing last Saturday, I have helped to officiate this exact meet several times in the past and I am well-acquainted with the meet management and the venue.

                  Reading opinions on this board and others I see a lot poorly founded criticism in several areas:

                  1) Lots of people think the rule is dumb.
                  It may well be, or maybe not. Me, I can see both sides of that argument. Like all sports (and life in general) T&F rules and ethics have not kept pace with technological advances. Makes sense to me that every kid ought to have a smart phone link to video and audio input from coaches. But in the moment, the rules exist as they are and the job of officials is to interpret and enforce them. Also, IMHO, any attempt to waive the specifics of a rule in deference to some perceived “spirit of the rule” is not in the purview of officials.

                  2) Some maintain that it was an error not to have a designated unrestricted area.
                  Based on my considerable experience in this venue (and I certainly do NOT speak for the meet management) there was no reasonable place for an unrestricted area that would not have caused problems with competitors crossing lanes and standing on the track. Like most meet sites the warm up area is outside the stadium and removed from the stands, thus competitors would have had to leave the track, find coaches, confer and then re-enter during the course of the competition – not practical and not standard practice anywhere. Since no area was designated then, by default, every area was restricted.

                  3) Posters imply the meet was poorly run by officials who were ill-informed and/or had no regard for athletes.
                  The competition took place at a small public school but it was not some Podunk event run by a bunch of rubes. The facilities are excellent. The people running the meet are very experienced and very successful as both coaches and meet administrators. They are fair minded, high character people with accomplishments and reputations that would impress any poster on this board.

                  4) Critics have attacked coaches because they protested a rules violation.
                  The important element here is that other coaches were well aware that a violation of a specific rule was taking place. The fault here does not lie with coaches who saw their athletes placed at a disadvantage and acted to correct the situation. The coaches who failed were the ones who were oblivious to the rules and put their own athlete in jeopardy.

                  It is tough to see how any other decision could have been taken. Can an official say, well, the rule is stupid so let’s ignore it? Or, a rule was broken but since the athlete was way better than anyone else we should let it slide? Or a DQ here will spoil the state meet three weeks from now? Or enforcing a rule is a mean thing to do to a kid?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: This week's BS High School rule

                    Originally posted by jhc68
                    ... The people running the meet are very experienced and very successful as both coaches and meet administrators. They are fair minded, high character people with accomplishments and reputations that would impress any poster on this board...
                    Thier behavior indicates otherwise.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: This week's BS High School rule

                      jhc68 and I are on the same page. .If you don't like a rule, (try to) get it changed. I can be done.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: This week's BS High School rule

                        I put some of the blame on the Long Jump Coach,why do you need to reveiw on video at a prelim qualifying meet where all he had to do was take one jump and qualify ?Was there a little bit of ego involved where the coach had to show everyone "look at me!"that he is the coach of this talented 25 foot jumper ? Why ? Practice,and after the competition is the place to review the video.Why ? :shock:
                        "Sprintin' ain't easy,baby !

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: This week's BS High School rule

                          jhc,
                          If i had been the Meet Referee, which I was for our District and Region meet, how do you think this would have turned out? There's your answer to whether the officials were looking out for the athletes. Unless you show a real fit of unsportsmanship, there's always a way to keep you in the meet through preventative officiating or rules interpretation.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: This week's BS High School rule

                            More than a few years ago the state where I coach at had a totally different set of rules for qualifying for state. You could meet a wind legal predetermined qualifying mark which would guarantee that you would compete at state or you could be top 3 at the regional meet. One of the girls I coached who was also one of the top competitors in the 100 meter dash had not met the pre-qualifying time and had to wait till the 100 meter dash finals to determine her fate. In that final she probably caught the biggest flyer I have ever seen but the recall official failed to notice it and didn't shoot his pistol. The starter tried to shoot his pistol but it was empty. Everyone in the stands felt my athlete should have been disqualified and I agreed with them but the rule said that if the event was more then 30% complete you could not recall the race so my athlete had a ridiculously fast qualifying time which she never got even close to repeating although she went on to win 3 state championships that year.

                            The moral to this story is that I have learned to have compassion for officials, they are sometimes placed in some impossible situations by coaches and athletes and maybe even other officials and they try to do the best they can to interpret the rules to the best of their ability. Adoree is an amazing athlete who if everything goes right will be playing on Sunday's in the not to distant future. Lets hope that everyone he relies on for perspective can put this situation in its proper place.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: This week's BS High School rule

                              Originally posted by eman
                              they [officials] try to do the best they can to interpret the rules to the best of their ability.
                              I wish I shared your idealism. I have seen too many officials who are just in love with their power and love wielding it to disastrous effect. They seem to be more interested in upping their 'gotcha' totals than helping kids. If a kid raises both arms and whoops as he crosses the finish line, is he displaying 'excessive celebration', as about 8 coaches told me in one of our meets, as they demanded his disqualification. Since the kid had been out most of the season with injury, I found his celebration to be 'appropriate'. No DQ. Had he taunted an opponent or thrown a baton in disgust at losing? DQ.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X