RefStripes.com
Football Officiating => National Federation Discussion => Topic started by: mostripes on August 13, 2017, 08:59:58 PM
-
Start of another season, Friday night is Week 1. Our crew has worked a couple different scrimmages this pre-season and so far we've seen a LOT of mirrored eyeshields. It's amazing how as soon as you mention to the players that they aren't legal equipment, the first words out of their mouths.. "I've got a prescription for it". I'd be curious to see how many of them still attempted to wear them this Friday. Even more curious to see if any of them actually get away with it.
Everyone have fun out there this year.
-
Even more curious to see if any of them actually get away with it.
That's going to depend on the crew working the game. While clear eye shields have been in the rule book for several years (no exceptions), it sounds like those using the "prescription" excuse have been allowed to wear them by one or more crews exhibiting willful blindness.
-
Coach, the prescription most certainly allows your substitute to purchase and wear that mirrored shield;
Unfortunately, the darned Rules Book, specifically 1-5-4c(4)b, prohibits your substitute from participating unless he/she removes the illegal equipment!
-
Start of another season, Friday night is Week 1. Our crew has worked a couple different scrimmages this pre-season and so far we've seen a LOT of mirrored eyeshields. It's amazing how as soon as you mention to the players that they aren't legal equipment, the first words out of their mouths.. "I've got a prescription for it". I'd be curious to see how many of them still attempted to wear them this Friday. Even more curious to see if any of them actually get away with it.
Everyone have fun out there this year.
Personally, I'm going to tell them that medical exceptions must be dealt with directly by the state office as it is an administrative issue. Officials are not medical professionals (well, most of them) and aren't qualified to interpret medical prescriptions. If the state office hasn't approved the player to wear it, it can't be worn. If they can show proof of the state's approval, then I would allow it. Otherwise, we're going by the book. And if they provided proof of the state's approval, there should be a note in the R's game report for the association to confirm this with the state office prior to the team's next game so that the next crew is aware of it before they arrive at their field.
-
In our association, we require a signed letter from the state granting the exception.
-
IMO, states that allow tinted shields for "medical" reasons potentially open themselves to a legal liability. This is not one of the rules permitted to be adjusted by State Adoption. I get the part about making "reasonable accommodations", but to me, this is a stretch... at a minimum.
-
PA requires approval from the state office, who then publishes the names/schools of the players who are exempt. Otherwise, eye shield has to be clear.
-
It is my understanding we had one approved by our state office a few years ago. They went through the proper channels with the state and it was approved . Approval supposedly had something to do with "reasonable accommodations" under the Americans With Disabilities Act. This is the only one I am aware of.
-
I'm too slow on the draw...
-
The whole reason for the rule is so a medical professional can observe a players eyes without removing the helmet. We tell them to wear sunglasses that fit their prescriptions because they are legal and easily removed without moving a player's neck. No exceptions.