Bellevue Girls outa control...hair pulling video

StSebastian

Active member
Been there, done that associated with an internal injury of a child of mine.

We decided, with advice from doctors that our child was at a greater risk riding in the car to their follow-up medical appointments than they were walking onto the floor, being handed the ball, hoisting that ball into the basket (took three tries), and walking off the floor.

The Rule/Law is in place to protect the kids, that we all can agree on...... However, this Rule/Law was written because players were returning to full participation before they were medically ready. Nobody with a lick of true common sense would associate what happened here with full participation.....

.....that is unless they can provide credible research that has ties further catastrophic injury associated with acts such as these.

Sheesh....
Right... I agree to an extent and I am assuming that this "internal injury" was NOT a concussion in your example (correct me if I am wrong)... but what IF something would have happened while participating in this "not so much full participation?" I believe you are an official (or former?) so would you consider the game to have officially started in this instance? And with that, would it hold in a court of law that according to the rules of the game, she did not participate in an official competition, regardless of the level of activity and events surrounding it?

No one is saying it wasn't a kind and wonderful gesture. I think MANY, including myself, like to see the positive outcome and hope for humanity in situations like these. But that doesn't change the inherent risk and potential fallout IF it had gone sideways.

I also don't think by any means that anything should be done about it after the fact. We are simply discussing the potentiality of risk and the fact that it did technically break state law. IF something had happened during this seemingly harmless and innocuous gesture, there would be a lot of people that would need to be held accountable.
 
Last edited:

AllSports12

Moderator
and I am assuming that this "internal injury" was NOT a concussion in your example (correct me if I am wrong)...
Lacerated liver...... pretty serious

but what IF something would have happened while participating in this "not so much full participation?"
Why are we stuck on "what if's" here? In my situation, we consulted with the experts and those in charge and determined that the risk in chucking the ball into the basket was far less than the risk that we took taking my kid to the event, the doctor, or even home from the hospital after discharge. I trust that those parties involved weighed those same risks leading up to this event.

Furthermore, nothing happened. For the life of me, I cannot fathom why the parents are getting the flack that they are here.


I believe you are an official (or former?) so would you consider the game to have officially started in this instance? And with that, would it hold in a court of law that according to the rules of the game, she did not participate in an official competition, regardless of the level of activity and events surrounding it?
As far as the officials and their culpability in this non-event.....

They have none.

Nothing happened at this event that would cause them to act on an injury that occurred while they had jurisdiction. They can't be held responsible for knowing what happened in prior contests.


But that doesn't change the inherent risk and potential fallout IF it had gone sideways.
If I has to guess, (which is what we all are doing here) the risk factors were most certainly considered

Again, nothing happened..... Yet people will still rip the parents on here for something that didn't happen, having all but forgotten the original act and the stunning decision by the coach (father) and school (with a nod of the head by the OHSAA) to only suspend the player for a game....
 
Last edited:

StSebastian

Active member
Lacerated liver...... pretty serious
So not a concussion. Got it.

I trust that those parties involved weighed those same risks leading up to this event. Furthermore, nothing happened. For the life of me, I cannot fathom why the parents are getting the flack that they are here.
And I have granted they had the freedom to make such a choice... at their own peril. I personally never gave the parents any flack in this situation (though others here have) but have only stated they have the right to have a say in the matter. I am simply speaking to the risk and liability that the SCHOOL (admin / coaches) took on who KNOW what the potential outcome of a situation like this could be from a legal liability standpoint.

As far as the officials and their culpability in this non-event.....

They have none.
Not what I asked nor insinuated. I was inquiring to the official ruling in regard to starting the game based on your experience and knowledge as an OHSAA official.

It was stated that there was no tip prior to the event taking place... is that allowable in the context of starting a contest rather than the traditional tip? If so, and the game had officially started, which seems to have been the case since the points counted... She technically returned to competition which the law clearly states is not allowed until a medical doctor clears her.

If I has to guess, (which is what we all are doing here) the risk factors were most certainly considered...
Doesn't make the decision inherently correct. Just the appearance of correctness because nothing happened...

One detail that is unknown is her "clearance" to return to play. There is no suggestion either way. However, given the context, it seems that she was still in concussion protocol... but I could be wrong. IF it is the case that she was still in concussion protocol and also taking into account to your response to the above game status as being a legal start, it was objectively the wrong decision by the administration and coach. Subjectively, I fully understand WHY they did it and agree on that level wholeheartedly... just not at the risk of the potentiality and the objective nature of the rules that lead to liability and openness to litigation in the event that... you get my drift. It is sound logic... but often our hearts speak louder than our heads.

Again, nothing happened..... Yet people will still rip the parents on here for something that didn't happen, having all but forgotten the original act and the stunning decision by the coach (father) and school (with a nod of the head by the OHSAA) to only suspend the player for a game....
We ALL agree that this is the most damning and egregious aspect of all of this.
 

USA70PP

Well-known member
OK - read the article, the only thing it disproves is that the AD was involved. Nothing else I said was disproved by that article. According to FOX 8s coverage and coaches interview, the head coach for Norwalk didn't know she was in the protocol and that was straight from his own mouth. It also said nothing about consulting OHSAA or her doctor. L
Again, I think it was a great act of kindness and sportsmanship - something that certainly should be applauded. But it still doesn't mean they did the correct or most intelligent thing....
Think this will be resolved by next season?
 

StSebastian

Active member
Think this will be resolved by next season?
I don't think it should be revisited or needs any resolution. As many have stated, it is over, nothing happened. Kind gesture, well received. Thankfully everything turned out as well as it could have and everyone will move on, most importantly, the young lady recovering and moving on to the next chapter of her life!

The only thing that I could potentially see happening that none of us will ever hear about is an internal review and revisiting of the rules with a possibility of further education / PD for the coach and AD. I HIGHLY doubt that there is any formal reprimand nor do I think there should be.
 

AllSports12

Moderator
So not a concussion. Got it.
Not a concussion, but told by the doctors not to play basketball. Those three chucks at the bucket weren't playing basketball.

Not what I asked nor insinuated. I was inquiring to the official ruling in regard to starting the game based on your experience and knowledge as an OHSAA official.

It was stated that there was no tip prior to the event taking place... is that allowable in the context of starting a contest rather than the traditional tip? If so, and the game had officially started, which seems to have been the case since the points counted... She technically returned to competition which the law clearly states is not allowed until a medical doctor clears her.
This is an unusual situation. Both coaches agreed to this and given the reason makes it reasonable for the Referee to invoke Rule 2-3 which states....

"The referee shall make decisions on any points not specifically covered in the rules."

Instead of saying "we must have a jump ball" the officials allowed the game to "start" by handing the ball to the girl. Makes perfect sense to skip a ceremonial jump ball only to give the ball to her.

One detail that is unknown is her "clearance" to return to play. There is no suggestion either way. However, given the context, it seems that she was still in concussion protocol... but I could be wrong. IF it is the case that she was still in concussion protocol and also taking into account to your response to the above game status as being a legal start, it was objectively the wrong decision by the administration and coach. Subjectively, I fully understand WHY they did it and agree on that level wholeheartedly... just not at the risk of the potentiality and the objective nature of the rules that lead to liability and openness to litigation in the event that... you get my drift. It is sound logic... but often our hearts speak louder than our heads.
Given the public comments from the father of the injured player..... (forgiveness)

Makes the hang up on the law and a legal start of the game, after you take everything into consideration, nothing but typical Monday morning Quarterbacking.....
 
Last edited:

StSebastian

Active member
Not a concussion, but told by the doctors not to play basketball. Those three chucks at the bucket weren't playing basketball.
But they were in the context of competition and still not the same as a concussion in regard to return to play...

Not comparable in light of the rules governing one and not the other.

This is an unusual situation. Both coaches agreed to this and given the reason makes it reasonable for the Referee to invoke Rule 2-3 which states....

"The referee shall make decisions on any points not specifically covered in the rules."

Instead of saying "we must have a jump ball" the officials allowed the game to "start" by handing the ball to the girl.
Thank you for the clarification on that. It was a curious aspect of the whole thing and wasn't sure of the ruling. I've never seen it happen any other way. Thanks!

Given the public comments from the father of the injured player..... (forgiveness)

Makes the hang up on the law and a legal start of the game, after you take everything into consideration, nothing but typical Monday morning Quarterbacking.....

Time to move on

The angst about the potential liability seems to be unfounded.
The forgiveness is in regard to the opposing player and her actions. You cannot conflate the two situations although I do get your point on the ethical and moral character of the father leading them to believe he would not be vindictive or seek punitive damages if anything had happened BUT...

Would the father's reaction be the same toward the school (admin/coach/BOE) had something happened? No one knows and never will, but he would still have grounds for legal action even if he SAID he was fine with it. Not something I would be willing to stake my livelihood on...

Quarterbacking, sure. I subscribe to that. But it doesn't change the facts of the situation or the law/rule.
 

AllSports12

Moderator
But they were in the context of competition and still not the same as a concussion in regard to return to play...

Not comparable in light of the rules governing one and not the other.
There was nobody competing during this symbolic event. Nobody.....(see below)

Would the father's reaction be the same toward the school (admin/coach/BOE) had something happened? No one knows and never will,
So why are we even talking about this? If it were such a slam dunk, why hasn't he sued the school for allowing his daughter to play for this egregious violation of state law? Apparently, they put her in immediate danger. (deep down, you know the reason)

From all accounts of people I talked to who are from the area and know the guy...... It wouldn't happen.
 

CasualFan24

Active member
There was nobody competing during this symbolic event. Nobody.....(see below)



So why are we even talking about this? If it were such a slam dunk, why hasn't he sued the school for allowing his daughter to play for this egregious violation of state law? Apparently, they put her in immediate danger. (deep down, you know the reason)

From all accounts of people I talked to who are from the area and know the guy...... It wouldn't happen.
I think the context myself, and StSebastian are trying to get across here is that by rule/regulation - she shouldn't have been on the court. If we are talking about common sense - yes, 100%, she was fine and it was great that she got to participate. We are NOT debating that whatsoever.

From the rules/regulations standpoint - should she or should she not have been on the court? AllSports, you are the official - I know you take the concussion certification course every couple years just the same as the coaches. What is the rule?! It's black and white, it's clear - there are no "if's and but's"....the rule is the rule. You mentioned that it was put in place to stop players from full participation before they are medically ready. Does the concussion rule state that the player can return to a limited fashion prior to being medically cleared? No - it rules them out completely until being medically cleared. And based on the article that was previously mentioned - the girl immediately changed and put on sunglasses and pulled a hood over her head. Some will say that maybe she was just emotional - but in the context of that article - the author is specifically making note of that information to show that she was still dealing with concussion like symptoms....

The argument that this wasn't returning to play would never fly in the event that something bad happened. Was she on a basketball court? Was she in the score book? Was she in uniform? Was it a basketball that she shot? Was it through the basketball hoop? Did the clock run? Did her points show up in the box score? By definition of the act of what she was doing - she was playing basketball in some form....

Nothing here is personal - just trying to convey that it was a GREAT moment and act of sportsmanship and at the same time, did not follow the rules that are put in place for various reasons......that is all.....
 

USA70PP

Well-known member
The rules clearly were not followed earlier, else this entire thread would never have occurred. Having said that, I may have missed the rule that states an opponents hair may be pulled.
 

StSebastian

Active member
I think the context myself, and StSebastian are trying to get across here is that by rule/regulation - she shouldn't have been on the court. If we are talking about common sense - yes, 100%, she was fine and it was great that she got to participate. We are NOT debating that whatsoever.

From the rules/regulations standpoint - should she or should she not have been on the court? AllSports, you are the official - I know you take the concussion certification course every couple years just the same as the coaches. What is the rule?! It's black and white, it's clear - there are no "if's and but's"....the rule is the rule. You mentioned that it was put in place to stop players from full participation before they are medically ready. Does the concussion rule state that the player can return to a limited fashion prior to being medically cleared? No - it rules them out completely until being medically cleared. And based on the article that was previously mentioned - the girl immediately changed and put on sunglasses and pulled a hood over her head. Some will say that maybe she was just emotional - but in the context of that article - the author is specifically making note of that information to show that she was still dealing with concussion like symptoms....

The argument that this wasn't returning to play would never fly in the event that something bad happened. Was she on a basketball court? Was she in the score book? Was she in uniform? Was it a basketball that she shot? Was it through the basketball hoop? Did the clock run? Did her points show up in the box score? By definition of the act of what she was doing - she was playing basketball in some form....


Nothing here is personal - just trying to convey that it was a GREAT moment and act of sportsmanship and at the same time, did not follow the rules that are put in place for various reasons......that is all.....
ALL of this. 👆👆👆 👏 👏 👏
 

AllSports12

Moderator
I think the context myself, and StSebastian are trying to get across here is that by rule/regulation - she shouldn't have been on the court. If we are talking about common sense - yes, 100%, she was fine and it was great that she got to participate. We are NOT debating that whatsoever.

From the rules/regulations standpoint - should she or should she not have been on the court? AllSports, you are the official - I know you take the concussion certification course every couple years just the same as the coaches. What is the rule?! It's black and white, it's clear - there are no "if's and but's"....the rule is the rule. You mentioned that it was put in place to stop players from full participation before they are medically ready. Does the concussion rule state that the player can return to a limited fashion prior to being medically cleared? No - it rules them out completely until being medically cleared. And based on the article that was previously mentioned - the girl immediately changed and put on sunglasses and pulled a hood over her head. Some will say that maybe she was just emotional - but in the context of that article - the author is specifically making note of that information to show that she was still dealing with concussion like symptoms....

The argument that this wasn't returning to play would never fly in the event that something bad happened. Was she on a basketball court? Was she in the score book? Was she in uniform? Was it a basketball that she shot? Was it through the basketball hoop? Did the clock run? Did her points show up in the box score? By definition of the act of what she was doing - she was playing basketball in some form....

Nothing here is personal - just trying to convey that it was a GREAT moment and act of sportsmanship and at the same time, did not follow the rules that are put in place for various reasons......that is all.....
And again.....

The Rule/Law was written to prevent players returning to competition while they were still at risk. There was no competition here.

None

If you feel so strongly that this Rule/Law was egregiously violated in the spirit and intent of such rule or law, then it is incumbent on you to initiate the steps necessary to see that penalties/sanctions be sought immediately against all that conspired to allow this act to occur. I sincerely challenge you to bear that torch.

Now, if you don't feel that strongly...... which you have said repeatedly.....Just move on from it.....

With that, I'm done on this subject. The last word is yours..... take your best shots..... ;)
 
Last edited:

Red14

Well-known member
I think the context myself, and StSebastian are trying to get across here is that by rule/regulation - she shouldn't have been on the court. If we are talking about common sense - yes, 100%, she was fine and it was great that she got to participate. We are NOT debating that whatsoever.

From the rules/regulations standpoint - should she or should she not have been on the court? AllSports, you are the official - I know you take the concussion certification course every couple years just the same as the coaches. What is the rule?! It's black and white, it's clear - there are no "if's and but's"....the rule is the rule. You mentioned that it was put in place to stop players from full participation before they are medically ready. Does the concussion rule state that the player can return to a limited fashion prior to being medically cleared? No - it rules them out completely until being medically cleared. And based on the article that was previously mentioned - the girl immediately changed and put on sunglasses and pulled a hood over her head. Some will say that maybe she was just emotional - but in the context of that article - the author is specifically making note of that information to show that she was still dealing with concussion like symptoms....

The argument that this wasn't returning to play would never fly in the event that something bad happened. Was she on a basketball court? Was she in the score book? Was she in uniform? Was it a basketball that she shot? Was it through the basketball hoop? Did the clock run? Did her points show up in the box score? By definition of the act of what she was doing - she was playing basketball in some form....

Nothing here is personal - just trying to convey that it was a GREAT moment and act of sportsmanship and at the same time, did not follow the rules that are put in place for various reasons......that is all.....
And people drive 75 MPH in a 55 MPH and get away with it every day of the year....my point is it's pointless to even discuss this?? Has ZERO to do with this topic. The kid got to make a couple of baskets at senior night, THAT's the story.
 

eastisbest

Well-known member
And again.....

The Rule/Law was written to prevent players returning to competition while they were still at risk. There was no competition here.

None

If you feel so strongly that this Rule/Law was egregiously violated in the spirit and intent of such rule or law, then it is incumbent on you to initiate the steps necessary to see that penalties/sanctions be sought immediately against all that conspired to allow this act to occur. I sincerely challenge you to bear that torch.

Now, if you don't feel that strongly...... which you have said repeatedly.....Just move on from it.....

With that, I'm done on this subject. The last word is yours..... take your best shots..... ;)
Wait, wait, don't go yet. :D

He's been fair to recognize the sense of this versus the crossing t's part of it. No need to get hostile. If the player is on the court and scoring points, that sounds like competition. At least enough to where it should be addressed in the rules "agreed by both coaches...." No?

I'm going to bet that the governing bodies will not put in the rules is it okay for a player under injury to get on that court, regardless the common sense of it. This is not as cut and dried as we wish it to be. I feel he's made a good point about the difficulty of the situation and no one should be intimidated they're going to lose their feel-good stories.
 

Bevo

Well-known member
This is District week for the girls. Is the Lady red still playing? Hair puller has two sisters who are really good, also. I believe - not sure - an older one may have played at B.G. (Just information.) I believe the perp. was averaging around 25 and Bellevue was ranked in the top five. Lady Red lost its next game to Shelby.
 

serpico

Well-known member
Student safety, health, and well being IS and ALWAYS should be THE single greatest factor in ANY and EVERY decision made by school administration. If it is not the foundation for the argument you are making... you are wrong.
This isn’t what you are arguing, though. If what you are saying is truly what you believe, you as an administrator would never allow students to play any contact sports in the name of safety.

Your argument is solely about legal liability, and while I get what you are saying, there is almost always an element of risk in decision ps that admins must make. Should you agree to play a tournament game when there is some snow on the roads? You could get sued, you know. Good admins understand risk and how much they are willing to take. Sounds like Norwalk’s was fine with the minimal risk it took.
 

Mr. General

Active member
For a team that lost in the Reginal Final last year, to not even get to the District Championship is unreal. Since one of the worst bad sportsmanship moments in the history of OHSAA Girls Basketball, 2 losses in 2 weeks, no District Player of the year, no District Championship, Season over. Karma.
 

StSebastian

Active member
This isn’t what you are arguing, though. If what you are saying is truly what you believe, you as an administrator would never allow students to play any contact sports in the name of safety.

Your argument is solely about legal liability, and while I get what you are saying, there is almost always an element of risk in decision ps that admins must make. Should you agree to play a tournament game when there is some snow on the roads? You could get sued, you know. Good admins understand risk and how much they are willing to take. Sounds like Norwalk’s was fine with the minimal risk it took.
Good point.👌 Although my comment was made within the context of this situation and not a blanket statement on all inherent risk.

Each situationor decision should be made with context. All I am saying is that based on the rules and regulations set forth and within each individual context, student safety and health should be the first thing considered. There is a specific rule in place regarding concussion that should guide them in making that decision which they ignored. There isn’t one specifically for any of the other situations you mentioned.
 

Auggie

Well-known member
For a team that lost in the Reginal Final last year, to not even get to the District Championship is unreal. Since one of the worst bad sportsmanship moments in the history of OHSAA Girls Basketball, 2 losses in 2 weeks, no District Player of the year, no District Championship, Season over. Karma.
 

Auggie

Well-known member
Also, how bad do the AP voters look now? All these marginally good teams get tons of votes because they rack up Ws against lesser comp while teams testing themselves with tough Ls get ranked lower.
 

Gumcoach

New member
The whole Karma thing...so the other girls on the team deserved it because of the actions of their teammate? Also, Perkins is 20-4 with the district player of the year on the roster so they're not exactly a bad team.
 

Mr. General

Active member
If the other girls on the team, the coach (dad), or the Superintendent were affected or offended by it, they would've suspended her the rest of the season. They didn't. Other kids on the team were laughing and posting about the incident on social media. The Bellevue regime was more worried about a long tourney run then giving a life lesson and doing the right thing. The OHSAA sat on their hands too. No one did anything. She sat out meaningless games. Once it was seen that nothing serious would come as a result of this, there was a knock on the door. It was KARMA. And as it always does, KARMA remained undefeated.

Perkins is a good team at 20-4 with the DPOY. Obviously better than the overrated #2 team in the State.
 

RollingTrain

Well-known member
all the other stuff aside, that was a very strong district. Any of those four teams shared fairly equal chances of getting out of that district, especially when Perkins/Bellevue were meeting for the third time.
 

Auggie

Well-known member
Not knowing the area very well what is the unbiased take on the coach? Since some negative stuff is going around I am curious if much of the pub is because of his strong personality or is it because of this recent incident? Is he a teacher or employed in some capacity in the district? If not I always find it interesting if the best player on the team just happens to have a family member as the head coach.
 

D4fan

Well-known member
The whole Karma thing...so the other girls on the team deserved it because of the actions of their teammate? Also, Perkins is 20-4 with the district player of the year on the roster so they're not exactly a bad team.
Mom used to always remind me, "it's the company you keep". Translation, you may not be at fault, but if you hang with trouble, others will see you as trouble. Karma does not pay attention to who may be innocent when it goes after the guilty.
 

USA70PP

Well-known member
Mom used to always remind me, "it's the company you keep". Translation, you may not be at fault, but if you hang with trouble, others will see you as trouble. Karma does not pay attention to who may be innocent when it goes after the guilty.
Reminds me of something my Mom told me when I was around 16. Son, I know you have all the brains in the world because you haven't used any yet. She was commenting on a couple of guys I was running around with at the time.
 

Maple_City_Fan

Well-known member
To those that say Bellevue is/was overrated; not exactly. They did play a very competitive non-conference schedule, and for most part, had their way. This was an outstanding squad that had a solid shot at State if not winning it all. But, to Perkins credit, 3rd time the charm, and Perkins, Shelby, Willard et Al aren't exactly chopped liver.
 
.
Top