Track rule and chicken***** coach

[JohnStOnge]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/highschool/05/11/track.controversy/index.html

[NHwildEcat]

What a douche of a person that coach is...I am sure he is one of those little people who always invoke the rules when it is in his favor, and only then. If he saw that bracelet before her attempt he should have shown some character and asked her to remove it as to not ruin the competition. What a jacka**

[ngineer]

I agree. A sportsman would have informed Laird's coach before she jumped. A guy with Knowles experience had to have been aware prior to the vault. Knowles is a coniving weasel to want to win so badly...Actually, he lost a lot by what he did.

[jonmac]

But what if he really didn't see it until after she vaulted? It's a tough situation but rules are rules. I have had to remind many players to take jewelry off. Why didn't her coach notice before hand? She is a senior, why didn't she know the rule and realize she had it on?

[MplsBison]

I agree. A sportsman would have informed Laird's coach before she jumped. A guy with Knowles experience had to have been aware prior to the vault. Knowles is a coniving weasel to want to win so badly...Actually, he lost a lot by what he did.

He said he didn't see it until she jumped.

[tribe_pride]

Welcome to the world of high school track. The uniform rules are overly harsh and officials (and in this case a coach) enforce them rarely and usually only in the harshest of circumstances.

I have heard of a handful of cases where they have been enforced to DQ someone. Usually it's not jewelry but the short spandex which has a nike swoosh (or other logo) or a headband that is not a solid color.

I bet she wore that bracelet all season with the same officials around. Only with the league title on the line was it enforced.

The uniform rule is enforced so rarely that most competitors don't even know they exist. When they are enforced, it's usually because a 75 year old official who has seen the same competitor violate the rule all season decides to get on his high horse and show that he has power over a high schooler.

[MplsBison]

It seems like for field events, there is a pretty easy way around this: amend the rule so that it states that the jump or throw does not count if the person is wearing jewelry, but that the athlete can get a do-over.

Won't work in track events, obviously.

[MorgantonAPPAlum]

What's the point of a rule that has no bearing on the outcome of the competition in any event? I can't see how the bracelet gave that young lady any advantage over her competition, so what's the point. An official can tell an athlete to tuck in a shirt tail to maintain order in a game (that's OK with me), but they won't usually disallow a basket made in hoops because a shirt tail is out (at least I've never seen it). This is just petty and dumb.

[JohnStOnge]

I don't buy the claim that he didn't notice until after she jumped. In any case, I wonder if the opposing coach could've made the argument that a friendship bracelet made out of string isn't jewelry. Here's the definition of "jewelry" from Merriam Webster on line:

": jewels; especially : objects of precious metal often set with gems and worn for personal adornment."

You can find some other definitions of the word that might fit a bracelet made out of string but I think whether or not it's "jewelry" is debatable. I wonder if the track rule book that jerk used has a definition of "jewelry" in it and, if so, if it unambiguously identifies a bunch of string around a person's risk as such. If not, I think the officials' ruling is open to legitimate debate.

It is a stupid rule regardless. I see another post on this thread on the stupid rules in high school track and I saw some more details on that on another message board. Looks to me like they need to throw the current rule book out and re write it with an eye towards getting rid of all that ridiculous stuff.

[jonmac]

I agree the rule needs updating but it's the rule, a pretty simple one really and the offending athlete and her coach should have realized it, as that is part of a coach's job. It's a little upsetting to me that we, as a society, seem to be developing a tendancy to blame the rules and their enforcers instead of simply following the rules until they can be changed, if necessary. And just because a rule is not enforced every time doesn't make it any less a rule, i.e. holding in football.

[Big Al]

I think the problem, regardless of what you think of the quality of the rule, is not that it was enforced. Rather, it's how it was enforced. A track official should be the one making the decision on whether the violation should DQ the athlete, not a coach. Further, the official should be making that determination before the athlete competes, not after.

If a ref doesn't call a foul in football, the coach doesn't have the ability to complain after the game is over and get the foul applied retroactively.

In the end, though, this is why we have judges and officials -- they need to know the rules and apply them in the field because not every situation is simply black and white. It would have been reasonable for the track official to agree with the coach's complaint but also rule that her score stands because a)the track official erred in not flagging the violation before the attempt and b)catching the violation would not have changed the outcome of the athlete's high jump.

Rhetorical question: Would that coach have objected if his team had already sewn up the championship and the results of the girl's jump had been irrelevant?

[Big Al]

Also, if a kid has diabetes and wears a medic-alert bracelet, is that considered jewelery?

[tribe_pride]

I agree the rule needs updating but it's the rule, a pretty simple one really and the offending athlete and her coach should have realized it, as that is part of a coach's job. It's a little upsetting to me that we, as a society, seem to be developing a tendancy to blame the rules and their enforcers instead of simply following the rules until they can be changed, if necessary. And just because a rule is not enforced every time doesn't make it any less a rule, i.e. holding in football.

Usually I would agree with you but I have run competitively in HS before and know how it's been enforced. In this case, this rule gets enforced much less than 1% of the time and I have never heard of it being enforced at a duel meet (this was a duel meet). The comparison to holding in football is not comparable in this case.

I am assuming that frosh-soph is not scored in the varsity meet but look at this from a different article regarding the same meet


Ironically, there was a jewelry incident in the equally hotly contested frosh-soph 400 meters event earlier in the day. After that race, the starter told the South Pasadena athlete to please remove his jewelry.

http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/news/ci_15073633

[andy7171]

The jewlery rule is so girls don't have their earlobes ripped by a earring getting snagged or a necklace choking or cutting them. This is a rope braclet that wasn't going to hurt her.
This coach is a douche and all the world sees him as one.

[Big Al]

Exactly. That's why you have impartial officials who review an item in question and make sure the penalty is in line with the infraction.

It seems to me that the rule should be, rather than jewelery causing an automatic DQ, you are disqualified if it's found your jewelery unfairly disadvantaged your competitors or gave you an unfair advantage. Regardless, someone (not the coach) should be responsible for calling out a violation before the athlete competes in their event, not after.

[ngineer]

What's the point of a rule that has no bearing on the outcome of the competition in any event? I can't see how the bracelet gave that young lady any advantage over her competition, so what's the point. An official can tell an athlete to tuck in a shirt tail to maintain order in a game (that's OK with me), but they won't usually disallow a basket made in hoops because a shirt tail is out (at least I've never seen it). This is just petty and dumb.

I agree. If a uniform violation can cause the athlete to have an advantage, like aeodynamics, then certainly he/she should be DQ'd. But how a small bracelet on a girl's wrist could assist her is beyond me. If anything, jewelry would hinder the athlete.

[tribe_pride]

Exactly. That's why you have impartial officials who review an item in question and make sure the penalty is in line with the infraction.

It seems to me that the rule should be, rather than jewelery causing an automatic DQ, you are disqualified if it's found your jewelery unfairly disadvantaged your competitors or gave you an unfair advantage. Regardless, someone (not the coach) should be responsible for calling out a violation before the athlete competes in their event, not after.

The rule unfortunately is black and white. If you are caught wearing jewelry you are dq'd. There is no black and white so having an impartial official who makes sure that the penalty is in line with the infraction is not possible. You can arge that the rule is a poor rule but there is no discretion given to the person enforcing the rule.

My big problem is that the rule gets enforced less than 1% of the time. You shouldn't go through a whole season not enforcing a rule and then enforce it at the end of the season.

[jonmac]

My concern is still that a lot of folks try to blame the rules and their enforcers. If we know the rules and still break them then we are taking a chance that it will not be enforced. If it is we have to suck it up and deal with the punishment. Maybe a better comparison is the speed limit. Very seldom is it enforced at the actual limit but it could be and when we push limit we must be ready to accept the punishment not complain that this is one of the few times it is ever enforced. I would also venture to say that a rope bracelet could injure just as much, if not more, than a metal bracelet or earrings, though I think the real intent of the rule has to do with the uniform and jewelry not being part of it or necessary for protection or comfort. Bottom line is if the coach and the competitors knew the rule then they are to blame for not adhering. I also think the protesting coach could have handled it differently and shouldn't feel too proud about this championship. It was a bush league move on his part but had the offending team adhered to the rules then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[OhioHen]

The string bracelet is grounds for disqualification under the rules, but a distance runner can wear a watch for pacing purposes (providing a potential advantage).

[jonmac]

The string bracelet is grounds for disqualification under the rules, but a distance runner can wear a watch for pacing purposes (providing a potential advantage).

At least the watch could be considered athletic equipment, especially for distance runners. A bracelet is simply for adornment purposes and not part of the uniform. I don't think a watch provides an advantage if it's available to all runners. How many tracks have a clock at the start/finish line? If there is one then that negates the need for a watch. I'm really not sure how many HS tracks would have a clock though.

[Reign of Terrier]

Dorman High School in the Spartanburg area does this all the time @ track meets, the 4x800 boys and girls teams were defeated at the Spartanburg relays (they got second place in both I think); the coaches, however, pointed out that one runner on the boys team that defeated them was wearing an Under Armor shirt that had a logo on it and the girls team that beat them had an ankle bracelet that was under her sock

these are BS rules and a lot of track coaches don't enforce them...