Disqualification over shorts?

This is a very stupid rule and it really isn't clear in the rule book. It is considered "altering" the uniform. The official shouls have looked the other way. There is no valid reason for not allowing it.

It is like the even more stupid logo rules: The logo has to be a cetain size and if you wear a sirt with two logos (like underarmour tops) one of them has to be covered- yes, those high school stars are making way too much form the manufacturers these day.

The National Federation has to lighten up.

Uniforms rules have nothing to do with advantages. They are old fart rules for old man who want their sport held to high esteem. Most HS don't have budgets for fancy uni's because they aren't cheap and track and xc teams are large. Maybe the shorts were ill fitting and she did it because of that. This is just another arcane rule that has no place and a DQ that was out of poor judgment. Typical old men league. Nothing to do but pick out crappy rule violations. Meanwhile how many kids cut the course on poorly marked turns or pushed people malisiously? Stuff that actually matters........Get you heads out of your asses NFHS and Uta Officials.

But in HS football players are allowed to wear different colored gloves (same in baseball), different colored wristbands, different face shields, etc. How stupid.

Maybe you should be directing you comments here

http://www.nfhs.org

Not at the official who was just doing his job. I am sure no one feels any worst about it than the official who made the call.

sounds crazy, in Australia we really dont bother with this uniform nonsense just get out there and compete. enforcing silly rules such a matching sports bras and not rolling down shorts isnt going to attract high school kids to the sport. Measures ones ability on how fast they run not how they look.

NFHS Rule 9 Cross Country, Section 1 Course, Article 1(9.1.1).

"The cross country run shall be a course 2500 to 5000 meters (1 1/2 to 3 miles) in length as determined by the meet director or games committee."

Nice conversion by the NFHS writters...it's been that way for years and maybe the reason for so many "fast" H.S. courses...

9.1.2 - 9.1.3 "The course shall be clearly marked. This may be by a wide line marked with a material which is not injurious to the eyes or skin, or by signposts with large directional arrows wherever the course turns, or by flags about 1 foot square and mounted on stakes which hold them 6 feet or more above the ground."

I wish I had a dollar for every meet I have gone to that have 4 foot or smaller flags that the kids can't see once the races starts and there are runners by these "illegal" flags. This has much more bearing on a cc race then how the kids wear their shorts but you don't see the officials ever enforcing this...

Then in the NFHS "Case Book" - under 9.1.2 Situation A:

"A cross country course is marked with a white line identifying the race course as well as by flag designations. Due to an error in laying out the course, the white directional line passes on the right side of a yellow flag and A1 funs on the marking line instead of passing on the left side of the yellow flag."

RULING: A1 will be disqualified. COMMENT: While it is unfortunate that the misplaced course marking line may have caused some confusion, the rule clearly states that in case of a discrepancy such as this, the "directional flag markings take precedence over any other course marking."

It's this type of bs that makes me disappointed with all cc officials and those in charge at the state associations. ANYONE who has actually read the NFHS rules book should quickly see that much of it needs to be rewritten.

ptboss wrote:

Maybe you should be directing you comments here

http://www.nfhs.org

Not at the official who was just doing his job. I am sure no one feels any worst about it than the official who made the call.

Good Luck with that...but it couldn't hurt - last technical writter I spoke with at the NFHS had know idea about what was wrong with conversions printed in the Rules book...

Hard to get your point across when the one you are dealing with doesn't know the difference between a meter and a mile-

You and the official should be smacked between the lips for that stupid comment.

Another Coach wrote:

Good Luck with that...but it couldn't hurt - last technical writter I spoke with at the NFHS had know idea about what was wrong with conversions printed in the Rules book...

Hard to get your point across when the one you are dealing with doesn't know the difference between a meter and a mile-

It's equally hard to get your point across when you cannot spell correctly.

Grammer and Spelling wrote:

Another Coach wrote:

Good Luck with that...but it couldn't hurt - last technical writter I spoke with at the NFHS had know idea about what was wrong with conversions printed in the Rules book...

Hard to get your point across when the one you are dealing with doesn't know the difference between a meter and a mile-

It's equally hard to get your point across when you cannot spell correctly.

Thanks for the advice GrammEr and Spelling. I would hate to continue to make mistakes that make it hard for someone as perfect as you to follow.

Please post your e-mail address so I can forward my posts for you to proof read in the future. What would this site ever do without quality posters like you?

This was from runnerspace.com. The culprit was #755 and here are teammates 753, 754. I couldn't find 755.

link:

http://www.runnerspace.com/eprofile.php?do=photos&pg=4&event_id=413&folder_id=253&photo_id=17553&offset=3#photo

Another Coach wrote:

Thanks for the advice GrammEr and Spelling. I would hate to continue to make mistakes that make it hard for someone as perfect as you to follow.

Please post your e-mail address so I can forward my posts for you to proof read in the future. What would this site ever do without quality posters like you?

You're obviously new here. Welcome to letsrun.

I do agree that the rules are silly. But coaches bear the responsibility to know the rules. Sort of like reading a contract before you sign it. Just because you didn't read it, and signed, and then have a problem with it doesn't get you out of the contract.

This is not the officials fault, he was doing what he was supposed to.

And girls roll their waistband down/up because if they don't, the shorts ride way up and are very uncomfortable. Get the girls new shorts....

I would think that officials bear the same responsibility to know all the rules, not just those relating to uniforms.

So as a prior poster mentioned - why all of the meets with flags that aren't legal height? What has more bearing on the outcome of a race, a properly marked and flagged course or the number of times little Suzy rolls the waistabnd of

her ill-fitting shorts? Unbelievable!

But shouldnt rules be set in place to help keep things fair? how is rolling your shorts giving you an advantage?If that is a rule, then why isnt there a rule that say you have to double knot your shoes or where socks that are all the same. Secondly, she had to run the whole race just to be told she is dq'd. how is that fair? If i was the meet official i would have let it go.

High School Swim Official wrote:

I officiate swimming and while half the rule book isn't spent on jewelry and "uniform", half of the discussions are. I can assure you that the majority of officials don't like these rules but there are enough difficult officials that are looking over our shoulders that we need to follow the rulebook. It is not really our job to decide if the rules are fair, just whether they are being followed. I'm sure track is no different. Blame the national federation, the coaches (you'd be surprised how many don't read the rulebook) who didn't tell the competitors or the competitors themselves. It's easy to blame the officials but they are put into a tight spot. Sure, some people enjoy making those calls but most don't. Nobody wins in these circumstances.

reediculous wrote:

Unfortunately not... Ohio is the worst. I believe they disqualified a girls' state champ a few years back because her logo was too large.

No, it was Rachel Sauder of Archbold in 1990. Details are here:

The basics are that her tights were not single-color but the clerk of the course said they were OK.

raabeisaprick wrote:Third, this isn't new. In the late 90s, a relay team in Iowa was disqualified for having different colored sports-bras.

It was a 4x400 team from Dayton, Ohio. Can't recall the year or the specific school (Meadowdale? Dunbar?) but it made Chuck Shepherd's "News of the Weird" column.

Dayton was also the site of a similarly stupid rule in football. Dunbar had a legless kid that played defensive line and the officials wouldn't let him on the field because he wasn't wearing shoes...no feet, but they expected shoes.

The bottom line is that the rule is in place, the coach and athlete should know the rule, and at a championship meet, it will probably be called. The same rules exist in every sport. Football, soccer, baseball players all have uniform rules. Why do we feel that the existing rules should not apply in our sport? These rules aren't just made up by a bunch of old people with limited experience. They are usually made by a group of people who have a lifetime of experience in the sport, and are trying to keep our sport consistent and respected. I have spent 35 years in Cross Country and Track, as an athlete, a coach in high school and college, and as an official. In our sport, we get upset when we're not treated like the other "major" sports, but then we can't understand why people don't allow us to act different than the other sports. In every sport, if you break a rule, you are penalized. It's easy to avoid the penalty. Follow the rules.

I coach HS girls. In general, no matter how comfortable the shorts are or how well they fit, the girls will almost always roll their waistbands down. It just somehow looks "cooler" that way (it may be more comfortable, too, but looks silly). I agree that most uniforms are ill-fitting and perhaps rolling the waistband makes them fit better, but it's been my experience that the girls do it anyway. (fwiw, we actually have shorts that fit really well and are flattering, but they still like to roll them down).

I think it's a silly rule and it's only purpose is for "modesty." We've been skirting trouble all year because our uniform tops are too short for the taller girls and they ride up and expose the midriff. I'm shopping for new ones for next year with little success.

I don't know that the bra rule is still around. At least that rule hasn't been reiterated at any meets I've attended. I think it's a bit insane to insist that the girls all wear the same underwear or to DQ one for an errant bra strap. That's completely ridiculous. What about the guys with boxers under their running shorts??

Can someone post the full name and maybe a picture of the officials who are alleged to have done these things.

Appreciated.