Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 82
  1. Collapse Details
     
    #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Everybody knows this is nowhere
    Posts
    6,278
    Quote Originally Posted by Atticus View Post
    I apologize - you are correct. But so am I in saying that I, as Meet Referee, COULD have told him to turn it inside out and run. That is within my scope of interpretation of what 'adorned' means.
    Bad officiating.
    And your interpretation would've set a stupid precedent. But some Meet Referees need their egos plumped.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    on task
    Posts
    12,112
    Quote Originally Posted by booond View Post
    And your interpretation would've set a stupid precedent. But some Meet Referees need their egos plumped.
    Meet Referees who DQ through the strictest interpretation of a rule, are the ones with egos. Since when is it a 'stupid precedent' to want the athletes to compete fairly - as long as no advantage is gained and no offense is given (clearly neither happened here!), there need not have been a DQ. If it's such a good rule, why doesn't the NCAA, or USATF or the IAAF have such a rule?
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Indian Territory
    Posts
    13,830
    I share Atticus opinion in the Officials Hippocratic Oath, "First, do no harm."
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Everybody knows this is nowhere
    Posts
    6,278
    Quote Originally Posted by Atticus View Post
    Meet Referees who DQ through the strictest interpretation of a rule, are the ones with egos. Since when is it a 'stupid precedent' to want the athletes to compete fairly - as long as no advantage is gained and no offense is given (clearly neither happened here!), there need not have been a DQ. If it's such a good rule, why doesn't the NCAA, or USATF or the IAAF have such a rule?
    What other organizations do has nothing to do with Georgia. If you don't follow the rule then the Meet Official is determining what language on a headband is correct and what isn't. Easier to ban all headbands then become the word police.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Everybody knows this is nowhere
    Posts
    6,278
    Quote Originally Posted by lonewolf View Post
    I share Atticus opinion in the Officials Hippocratic Oath, "First, do no harm."
    And what harm is the official doing by following a rule that everyone is aware of?
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Right next to a Gator filled pond
    Posts
    4,823
    It comes across as the kid and/or coach spent too much time looking for an answer they could go with rather than simply not following what the officials first told him/they.

    I'm not a hardliner on rules as they are sometimes applied in HS sports but this one seems to make a lot of sense. What the previous poster mentions regarding interpretations of what is written....or whatever....on the clothing article leaves too much interpretation to officials which is why the rule is in place in the first place.
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    on task
    Posts
    12,112
    Quote Originally Posted by booond View Post
    Easier to ban all headbands then become the word police.
    Why on earth would one ban headbands??!! If there's something that community standards would deem OFFENSIVE on the headband sure, but just summarily banning headbands has no logic.

    Quote Originally Posted by booond View Post
    And what harm is the official doing by following a rule that everyone is aware of?
    By misinterpreting it. There's a rule against 'excessive celebration', but you don't DQ the winner because he's really happy. If he taunts an opponent, then yes.

    Quote Originally Posted by NotDutra5 View Post
    leaves too much interpretation to officials which is why the rule is in place in the first place.
    ??!! The rule WAS the problem.
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Everybody knows this is nowhere
    Posts
    6,278
    Quote Originally Posted by Atticus View Post
    If there's something that community standards would deem OFFENSIVE on the headband sure,
    Community standards are to interpretation. What I'd think is fine is not what others would think is fine and that is why it is easy to disallow all headbands with writing on them.
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    on task
    Posts
    12,112
    Quote Originally Posted by booond View Post
    Community standards are to interpretation. What I'd think is fine is not what others would think is fine and that is why it is easy to disallow all headbands with writing on them.
    So, I'll ask again - why hasn't the NCAA banned them?
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Everybody knows this is nowhere
    Posts
    6,278
    Quote Originally Posted by Atticus View Post
    So, I'll ask again - why hasn't the NCAA banned them?
    Who cares? The NCAA doesn't have jurisdiction. Try again.
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •