Two Officials for JV Game

BAck to the point of not having time bc of work and kids schedules, all valid points. He obviously has enough time to go to enough games to critique and publicly admonish, in this case football, officials. I could've gone to plenty of games had I not officiated 17 years. I also made the balance of work life, kids and wife when it came down to it. Once my son started playing football, I didn't do games on the day he played but my wife understood it was football season and I'd be gone a lot.
 
How are you going to get rid of “abusive” fans?! They have 1st amendment rights
The 1st amendment does not apply to "disruptive" speech or behavior at public events. Where that line would be drawn would be up to the courts and case law. In general terms, your right to be an obnoxious a-hole ends at the point where someone else's enjoyment of the event begins.

Do you really want to be "that guy"?
 
There are many states where officials earn far more than Ohio, yet there are shortages in those states (many of them worse than Ohio). So, what should the pay be raised to? What will that increase do to ticket prices and what will the fans that already gripe about ticket prices do once the increase is enacted? (remember, if you increase pay for one sport..... they all have to be increased accordingly)
I'm willing to bet those states that pay higher than Ohio are states where it's more expensive in general to live. So the pay has to be relative to the cost of living and must be worth while for people actually want to do it while putting up with all the other issues associated with officiating. Yes, love of the game is great, but it's obviously not worth people's time or else there'd be a waiting list for people to become officials.
Please describe how you will get rid of abusive fans. Is it temporary, if so, what is the duration of the ban? Who is enforcing any ban, temporary or permanent?
I'm struggling about what's hard to understand about this. Schools would enforce it. Each school can decide if it's temporary or permanent. Perhaps the first time it's removal from that one and only game. Next time it's the rest of the season. If there's a third, it's permanent. If schools want to host thousands of people at their facility, then they are responsible for monitoring those people and their behavior.
You do know that there is something already in place don't you? But humor me...... what do you suggest?
So, they don't get playoff games? That's the only thing I've seen mentioned on here. But again, just like any business, there can be regular evaluations. Maybe head coaches must give report card grades on officials after each game. Or there is regular check-ins/evaluations with superiors that pick a game at random to look over film of to see if you are actually doing the job well. Maybe associations should give officials grades like state grades teachers and schools. Maybe every official has a public rating system like this official here is a 4.7 highly rated official. We could prevent poor officials from getting games. Not working would be pretty motivational to get better for most. How about we stop protecting people who are bad at their job, if that means games are cancelled, or your crew is short a guy because he blows calls all the time..... well, I bet you would make sure that everyone else in your crew would make sure he's doing his part.
What are your qualifications for determining whether or an official is bad at their job?
I coached high school football for well over a decade, am a student of the game. I am not perfect by any means, and don't expect officiating to be perfect, but it's frustrating when so many simple things are not enforced regularly. A perfect example is players in proper equipment per the rules. Every game has kids in violation of those rules with knee pads not covering properly.
So again..... explain what held accountable means?

No generalizations like you typically offer, give us real solutions. (I bolded that word in an earlier post hoping you'd give specifics)
Accountable can mean a few things as I explained above. But to add, maybe officials should be required to have a higher score on passing the mechanics and rules test..... 75% now is I believe what's required. Or Ohio could list what score the official received so everyone would know how well the official knows the rules. How about a basic vision test, seeing clearly is pretty important for officiating any sport. Or how about a basic physical fitness requirement.... can you jog from point a to point b.

I've given more than a few suggestions and specifics on how to help get rid of problematic officials. I'm sure you and others will come back and tell me how ridiculous and unrealistic these are. Fine, but doing what we have been doing isn't working. So someone has to think outside the box to fix the problem. And let me reiterate 85-90 percent of officials are doing a phenomenal job and should be applauded for the work that they do. But the bad ones are really bad and it's hurting the game and sticking up for them is also hurting the game that we all love.

2 years ago in NKY, they started a program where they are encouraging 15 year olds to get a youth football certification to officiate youth games. They get paid, and work games with at least 1 KHSAA official. And it's been great so far. Time will tell if it translates into more officials, but as of now it's looking like it will because the number of high schoolers officiating youth games has increased from year 1 to year 2 significantly. If more states or regions can implement similar programs, it should hopefully grow the number of officials long term.
 
I'm willing to bet those states that pay higher than Ohio are states where it's more expensive in general to live. So the pay has to be relative to the cost of living and must be worth while for people actually want to do it while putting up with all the other issues associated with officiating. Yes, love of the game is great, but it's obviously not worth people's time or else there'd be a waiting list for people to become officials.

You would lose that bet. In Cincinnati Football officials make $90 per game and in Cleveland and Columbus they make $120-$130. In Georgia they make $128 a game and their COL is the same as Ohio.

I'm struggling about what's hard to understand about this. Schools would enforce it. Each school can decide if it's temporary or permanent. Perhaps the first time it's removal from that one and only game. Next time it's the rest of the season. If there's a third, it's permanent. If schools want to host thousands of people at their facility, then they are responsible for monitoring those people and their behavior.

If its so easy why have schools not already done this? Make that make sense please! Schools want nothing to do with it

So, they don't get playoff games? That's the only thing I've seen mentioned on here. But again, just like any business, there can be regular evaluations. Maybe head coaches must give report card grades on officials after each game. Or there is regular check-ins/evaluations with superiors that pick a game at random to look over film of to see if you are actually doing the job well. Maybe associations should give officials grades like state grades teachers and schools. Maybe every official has a public rating system like this official here is a 4.7 highly rated official. We could prevent poor officials from getting games. Not working would be pretty motivational to get better for most. How about we stop protecting people who are bad at their job, if that means games are cancelled, or your crew is short a guy because he blows calls all the time..... well, I bet you would make sure that everyone else in your crew would make sure he's doing his part.

No level of football publicly lists their scores for officials, NONE. Why would the OHSAA do that? They already rate us with a composite score which coaches, ADs, assigners and the associations all have input. To add to that point, if "bad" officials were not allowed to get games (with a shortage already) we just cancel the games that can't get enough officials?

I coached high school football for well over a decade, am a student of the game. I am not perfect by any means, and don't expect officiating to be perfect, but it's frustrating when so many simple things are not enforced regularly. A perfect example is players in proper equipment per the rules. Every game has kids in violation of those rules with knee pads not covering properly.

Your experience does not mean you are an expert at the rules like many of the officials out there. I have dealt with many coaches that have no clue about some of the differences in the rules between high school and the NFL. Take the officiating course and get a 90% on the test then we can talk.

Accountable can mean a few things as I explained above. But to add, maybe officials should be required to have a higher score on passing the mechanics and rules test..... 75% now is I believe what's required. Or Ohio could list what score the official received so everyone would know how well the official knows the rules. How about a basic vision test, seeing clearly is pretty important for officiating any sport. Or how about a basic physical fitness requirement.... can you jog from point a to point b.

So you want to make it harder to get into officiating when there is already a shortage? That makes a ton of sense...


2 years ago in NKY, they started a program where they are encouraging 15 year olds to get a youth football certification to officiate youth games. They get paid, and work games with at least 1 KHSAA official. And it's been great so far. Time will tell if it translates into more officials, but as of now it's looking like it will because the number of high schoolers officiating youth games has increased from year 1 to year 2 significantly. If more states or regions can implement similar programs, it should hopefully grow the number of officials long term.

the OHSAA did this at the same time and the OHIO DOE allowed schools to give credit toward graduation as well.
 
How are you going to get rid of “abusive” fans?! They have 1st amendment rights and unless they are making a legitimate physical threats you can’t do a thing. That would start more lawsuits than asbestos!
Any fan can be removed from an athletic contest. This does not violate your rights.
BAck to the point of not having time bc of work and kids schedules, all valid points. He obviously has enough time to go to enough games to critique and publicly admonish, in this case football, officials. I could've gone to plenty of games had I not officiated 17 years. I also made the balance of work life, kids and wife when it came down to it. Once my son started playing football, I didn't do games on the day he played but my wife understood it was football season and I'd be gone a lot.
Yeah it does and can work. I officiate soccer games at tourneys my son plays in for other age groups in the game slots when he is not playing.
 
You would lose that bet. In Cincinnati Football officials make $90 per game and in Cleveland and Columbus they make $120-$130. In Georgia they make $128 a game and their COL is the same as Ohio.
Cleveland and Columbus are more expensive than Cincy. And Georgia has a higher cost of living than Ohio.
If its so easy why have schools not already done this? Make that make sense please! Schools want nothing to do with it
I know they want nothing to do with it. But maybe they shouldn't have crowds at their games then.
Your experience does not mean you are an expert at the rules like many of the officials out there. I have dealt with many coaches that have no clue about some of the differences in the rules between high school and the NFL. Take the officiating course and get a 90% on the test then we can talk.
I didn't say I was an expert like the officials. I do read the NFHS rule book and try to keep up to date. And again, I'm not talking about 90% of the officials out there.
So you want to make it harder to get into officiating when there is already a shortage? That makes a ton of sense...
I was asked for specific solutions. I provided some, and said people wouldn't like it. And here it is right on time.
the OHSAA did this at the same time and the OHIO DOE allowed schools to give credit toward graduation as well.
I didn't know that. Great to hear. Hopefully it's successful.
 
\
I'm willing to bet those states that pay higher than Ohio are states where it's more expensive in general to live. So the pay has to be relative to the cost of living and must be worth while for people actually want to do it while putting up with all the other issues associated with officiating. Yes, love of the game is great, but it's obviously not worth people's time or else there'd be a waiting list for people to become officials.
You'd lose that bet. Tennessee, Iowa, and South Dakota all pay over $125 for varsity football, just to name a few.

What do you propose the fee should be and who is going to pay for it. (I guarantee you it won't be the schools)
I'm struggling about what's hard to understand about this. Schools would enforce it. Each school can decide if it's temporary or permanent. Perhaps the first time it's removal from that one and only game. Next time it's the rest of the season. If there's a third, it's permanent. If schools want to host thousands of people at their facility, then they are responsible for monitoring those people and their behavior.
Like most of your "solutions", this is what's done already..... Guess what, "it aint workin"
So, they don't get playoff games? That's the only thing I've seen mentioned on here.
Lack of (or minimal) playoff assignments and a regular season schedule that mirrors the ability of the official(s).
But again, just like any business,
Again.... it's an avocation
there can be regular evaluations.
Who is providing said evaluations?
Maybe head coaches must give report card grades on officials after each game.
They did that years ago and thankfully ditched it..... It was a terrible idea for a couple of reasons.... First, the coaches (collectively... there are some good ones whose opinion I value) don't have an unbiased point of view. Next...... they either didn't do them because they simply don't have the time or they waited til the end of the year and did them all at once in a haphazardly fashion.
Or there is regular check-ins/evaluations with superiors that pick a game at random to look over film of to see if you are actually doing the job well.
This happens, but not in a regular fashion like you propose. (who is going to do it?)
Maybe associations should give officials grades like state grades teachers and schools
There already is already a process in place where members rank their fellow officials
Maybe every official has a public rating system like this official here is a 4.7 highly rated official. We could prevent poor officials from getting games.
There's already not enough officials to cover the games..... You propose to make it worse?
Not working would be pretty motivational to get better for most. How about we stop protecting people who are bad at their job, if that means games are cancelled, or your crew is short a guy because he blows calls all the time..... well, I bet you would make sure that everyone else in your crew would make sure he's doing his part.
Happens all the time. Crews release members for poor performance at the behest of assigners and on their own volition.
I am not perfect by any means, and don't expect officiating to be perfect,
You expect high school officials to be treated in the same fashion as professional officials.
but it's frustrating when so many simple things are not enforced regularly. A perfect example is players in proper equipment per the rules. Every game has kids in violation of those rules with knee pads not covering properly.
A point of emphasis for years.... That said, there is a major misconception of this rule..... Simply having the knees exposed at any time is not a violation.
Accountable can mean a few things as I explained above. But to add, maybe officials should be required to have a higher score on passing the mechanics and rules test..... 75% now is I believe what's required.
Would have worked (and it did) 40 years ago because the numbers were so strong.... Doesn't work any more. There was an official (now retired) in your part of the world that pushed for officials to have to take a post season test and achieve a 90% grade to be eligible for post season assignments. That idea got about a 3 second consideration by the powers that be.
Or Ohio could list what score the official received so everyone would know how well the official knows the rules. How about a basic vision test, seeing clearly is pretty important for officiating any sport.
Now I'm convinced that you just have an axe to grind here.
Or how about a basic physical fitness requirement.... can you jog from point a to point b.
You just proved my prior point.
I've given more than a few suggestions and specifics on how to help get rid of problematic officials. I'm sure you and others will come back and tell me how ridiculous and unrealistic these are. Fine, but doing what we have been doing isn't working. So someone has to think outside the box to fix the problem. And let me reiterate 85-90 percent of officials are doing a phenomenal job and should be applauded for the work that they do.
More proof that you are just grinding an axe.... Throwing all this against the wall while praising 85-90%
But the bad ones are really bad and it's hurting the game and sticking up for them is also hurting the game that we all love.
Just like coaches, teachers, admins, police, doctors, accountants.....
2 years ago in NKY, they started a program where they are encouraging 15 year olds to get a youth football certification to officiate youth games. They get paid, and work games with at least 1 KHSAA official. And it's been great so far. Time will tell if it translates into more officials, but as of now it's looking like it will because the number of high schoolers officiating youth games has increased from year 1 to year 2 significantly. If more states or regions can implement similar programs, it should hopefully grow the number of officials long term.
Also done in Ohio and other parts of the country.....

Yet, we lose 80% of those kids inside of 2 years.....

Because of the BS that comes from the parents, coaches, and fans.
 
Cleveland and Columbus are more expensive than Cincy. And Georgia has a higher cost of living than Ohio.

Nope, the reason their fees are higher is because the officials up there said they would not work any games until the fee was raised. That will probably happen in SW Ohio next year.

I know they want nothing to do with it. But maybe they shouldn't have crowds at their games then.

There it is folks, no fans! Sorry grandma and grandpa, you can't go to Billy's game, no fans allowed.

I didn't say I was an expert like the officials. I do read the NFHS rule book and try to keep up to date. And again, I'm not talking about 90% of the officials out there.

Yes you did... you were asked what makes you qualified and you said 10 years as a coach. Take the course and test and see where the gaps are, I am sure you have plenty.


I was asked for specific solutions. I provided some, and said people wouldn't like it. And here it is right on time.

I can only shake my head
 
Nope, the reason their fees are higher is because the officials up there said they would not work any games until the fee was raised. That will probably happen in SW Ohio next year.



There it is folks, no fans! Sorry grandma and grandpa, you can't go to Billy's game, no fans allowed.



Yes you did... you were asked what makes you qualified and you said 10 years as a coach. Take the course and test and see where the gaps are, I am sure you have plenty.




I can only shake my head
Half the stuff he threw out there already is in place or was in place and got ditched.
The other half is sliding down the wall while he stands there hoping it will stick.
 
I coached high school football for well over a decade, am a student of the game. I am not perfect by any means, and don't expect officiating to be perfect, but it's frustrating when so many simple things are not enforced regularly. A perfect example is players in proper equipment per the rules. Every game has kids in violation of those rules with knee pads not covering properly.
Now we understand. You have an ax to grind.

Made time to coach for over 10 years but CANNOT officiate, which is a much more flexible schedule. ;)
 
The 1st amendment does not apply to "disruptive" speech or behavior at public events. Where that line would be drawn would be up to the courts and case law. In general terms, your right to be an obnoxious a-hole ends at the point where someone else's enjoyment of the event begins.

Do you really want to be "that guy"?
You’re missing the point, if you scroll back I posted a brief synopsis of applicable case law. There is no such legal charge as “disruptive speech”, though there have been references of type used by liberals in their attempt to impede first amendment rights to their favor. There is a tactic used in speech debates referred to as disruptive speech which is widely taught and used. I am not advocating or excusing anyone’s behaviors, just stating the possible legal ramifications for those who propose a remedy by simplify removing someone from a paid for public event for speech.
 
Last edited:
:ROFLMAO: None of those places have a 30% higher cost of living than Cincinnati

I get that you disagree..... but saying silly stuff like that only leads people to think you have an axe to grind.....
Eh, we got fees raised in other sports in SW Ohio long before these places, even in parts where the cost of living is fairly low. Some of our sports are the highest in the state. The ball is in the officials' court, so in the end the schools will be paying more, and it is up to them to raise revenue to cover. The old methods are dated and many new ADs are moving on to different ways other than the gate till to pay officials. The schools, leagues, boosters, etc will be footing this bill.
 
Who gives a shat about case law, people have been getting kicked out of games for years for being jerks, poor sports, or idiots.
 
School board meetings are not the same as football games.

People get kicked out of athletic events all the time for bad behavior, including offensive speech. Find me one person who has successfully sued a school because of it.

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals recently addressed the issue of whether a school district can ban a parent from school property during the school day and/or during on-site sporting events based on the parent’s prior conduct. The Court found that a principal had the right to ban an unruly parent from school property during the school day based on the parent’s previous interactions with the principal, but found that sporting events both on and off school property are limited public forums and thus banning a parent from a sporting event that is open to the public might run afoul of the First Amendment unless the ban is reasonable and viewpoint neutral.

The Court was ruling on a motion for summary judgment, which means the Court is required to accept the parent’s version of all disputed facts. Based on the facts as alleged by the parent, the Court found that the parent was entitled to a trial on the issue of whether the ban from sporting events was reasonable and viewpoint neutral.

A school may ban unruly parents or third parties from school property during the school day

The Court found that a school principal has the authority and responsibility for assuring that “parents and third parties conduct themselves appropriately on school property” and that school officials have a responsibility to prevent “the kind of boisterous and threatening conduct that would interrupt the peace and quiet and disturb the tranquility required for the academic aspects of a school’s function.” The Court thus found that a parent does not have a general and unlimited First Amendment right to access school property and that schools may ban unruly parents from the school property during the school day. The Court thus found that a school district can properly ban people, including parents, from school property during the school day in order to maintain order at the school.

Sporting Events held on school grounds that are open to the public create a limited public forum

The ban in this case also extended to all school events, except for attendance at school graduation. The Court, however, found that sporting events were different than all other school functions and that a ban of the parent from attending sporting events to which the public was invited could run afoul of the First Amendment depending on whether the ban was reasonable and/or whether it was based on the parent’s expressed viewpoints.

In distinguishing sporting events from the regular school day, the Court noted that sporting events were open to the public and that they were events in which “the audience is encouraged not to be quiet but instead to engage in raucous and sustained noise.” The Court further opined that people attending the games were “expected to engage in expressive activity, chanting and cheering for whichever team they favor.” The Court, therefore, found that “[p]eace, quiet, and tranquility are not characteristics of, or normally associated with, sports contests.” The Court thus found that such sporting events were limited public forums, and therefore, a school can only regulate access to sporting events if the restrictions are reasonable and viewpoint neutral. Based on the facts as alleged by the parent, the Court found there was sufficient evidence to send the case to trial on that issue.

Many districts face the issue of a parent or third party who is disruptive or threatening to staff or students. The Court made it clear that a school has the right to limit such parent from being at the school during the school day. As to sporting events, and other events that are open to the public, however, a school would need to meet a higher burden before excluding such a person from those events. While a school obviously has the right to exclude a person when there is a “clear and present danger of disruptions such as disorder, riot, obstruction of the event, or immediate threat to public safety” any other exclusions must be reasonable and viewpoint neutral.
 
I want to know what leagues in Columbus pay 120-130 a game. The biggest football conferences pay 106. The LCL and the smaller school leagues around the are are 99. Some more rural central leagues can be 90.
 
You’re missing the point, if you scroll back I posted a brief synopsis of applicable case law. There is no such legal charge as “disruptive speech”, though there have been references of type used by liberals in their attempt to impede first amendment rights to their favor. There is a tactic used in speech debates referred to as disruptive speech which is widely taught and used. I am not advocating or excusing anyone’s behaviors, just stating the possible legal ramifications for those who propose a remedy by simplify removing someone from a paid for public event for speech.
There doesn't need to be a "legal charge". It's a constitutional issue. Your right to say nearly anything you choose to say is protected. Saying them without consequence is not. If a school has a rule about not verbally abusing the official under penalty of ejection, it's perfectly legal.
 
Now we understand. You have an ax to grind.

Made time to coach for over 10 years but CANNOT officiate, which is a much more flexible schedule. ;)
No axe to grind whatsoever. Changed careers from the classroom to a career which doesn't allow me to coach high school anymore. Not that people care but with 3 kids at 3 different schools and volunteering for all of their organizations, it's quite literally impossible to put the stripes on.
 
No axe to grind whatsoever. Changed careers from the classroom to a career which doesn't allow me to coach high school anymore. Not that people care but with 3 kids at 3 different schools and volunteering for all of their organizations, it's quite literally impossible to put the stripes on.
Many officials have time conflicts as well, unless they are in the retired classification, but they make time so the kids can play the games.
 
\

You'd lose that bet. Tennessee, Iowa, and South Dakota all pay over $125 for varsity football, just to name a few.

What do you propose the fee should be and who is going to pay for it. (I guarantee you it won't be the schools)

Like most of your "solutions", this is what's done already..... Guess what, "it aint workin"

Lack of (or minimal) playoff assignments and a regular season schedule that mirrors the ability of the official(s).

Again.... it's an avocation

Who is providing said evaluations?

They did that years ago and thankfully ditched it..... It was a terrible idea for a couple of reasons.... First, the coaches (collectively... there are some good ones whose opinion I value) don't have an unbiased point of view. Next...... they either didn't do them because they simply don't have the time or they waited til the end of the year and did them all at once in a haphazardly fashion.

This happens, but not in a regular fashion like you propose. (who is going to do it?)

There already is already a process in place where members rank their fellow officials

There's already not enough officials to cover the games..... You propose to make it worse?

Happens all the time. Crews release members for poor performance at the behest of assigners and on their own volition.

You expect high school officials to be treated in the same fashion as professional officials.

A point of emphasis for years.... That said, there is a major misconception of this rule..... Simply having the knees exposed at any time is not a violation.

Would have worked (and it did) 40 years ago because the numbers were so strong.... Doesn't work any more. There was an official (now retired) in your part of the world that pushed for officials to have to take a post season test and achieve a 90% grade to be eligible for post season assignments. That idea got about a 3 second consideration by the powers that be.

Now I'm convinced that you just have an axe to grind here.

You just proved my prior point.

More proof that you are just grinding an axe.... Throwing all this against the wall while praising 85-90%

Just like coaches, teachers, admins, police, doctors, accountants.....

Also done in Ohio and other parts of the country.....

Yet, we lose 80% of those kids inside of 2 years.....

Because of the BS that comes from the parents, coaches, and fans.
At 1 of our home playoff games last year, someone came and sat in the press box and was rating the crew. It was very insightful to get his prospective on why the officials made the call they did and even the calls they missed and why he felt they missed them.


Sounds like we need to fix the abusive behavior from fans before we can even begin to draw new officials into the game at the rate we need. How we go about that is obviously up in the air.
 
At 1 of our home playoff games last year, someone came and sat in the press box and was rating the crew. It was very insightful to get his prospective on why the officials made the call they did and even the calls they missed and why he felt they missed them.


Sounds like we need to fix the abusive behavior from fans before we can even begin to draw new officials into the game at the rate we need. How we go about that is obviously up in the air.
I think I saw something where the NCAA has a program for former players to become officials.

It’s be great to have coaches encourage players not playing at the next level to consider officiating. If you played football in high school you can probably take the abuse that sometimes happens and are already pretty knowledgeable. Not sure how to incentivize it, but it could be something to chew on.
 
I think I saw something where the NCAA has a program for former players to become officials.

It’s be great to have coaches encourage players not playing at the next level to consider officiating. If you played football in high school you can probably take the abuse that sometimes happens and are already pretty knowledgeable. Not sure how to incentivize it, but it could be something to chew on.
Full transparency, I love the game of football and think I would enjoy being around it in the officiating capacity. But I also know myself enough to know that until I get my temper under control, I should not put myself in situations like that.
 
90% of the ideas mentioned on here (get former players involved, have classes in schools, etc) have been happening for over a decade in Ohio already.

It’s a permanent problem. The people with the most time to officiate are people who are retired, with kids that aren’t actively playing. That will never change.

Real solutions that may work (vastly increasing pay, strict enforcement of spectator behavior) the schools have no interest in doing, and probably never will. This thread will continue to exist every year as it always has. Unless we reach a point where a varsity game is more likely than not to get cancelled, no change will happen. Schools are reactive, not proactive.
 
90% of the ideas mentioned on here (get former players involved, have classes in schools, etc) have been happening for over a decade in Ohio already.

It’s a permanent problem. The people with the most time to officiate are people who are retired, with kids that aren’t actively playing. That will never change.

Real solutions that may work (vastly increasing pay, strict enforcement of spectator behavior) the schools have no interest in doing, and probably never will. This thread will continue to exist every year as it always has. Unless we reach a point where a varsity game is more likely than not to get cancelled, no change will happen. Schools are reactive, not proactive.

Agree… once Friday night lights gives way to Thursday night lights and Saturday morning varsity games. Nothing will be done.
 
\
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals recently addressed the issue of whether a school district can ban a parent from school property during the school day and/or during on-site sporting events based on the parent’s prior conduct. The Court found that a principal had the right to ban an unruly parent from school property during the school day based on the parent’s previous interactions with the principal, but found that sporting events both on and off school property are limited public forums and thus banning a parent from a sporting event that is open to the public might run afoul of the First Amendment unless the ban is reasonable and viewpoint neutral.

The Court was ruling on a motion for summary judgment, which means the Court is required to accept the parent’s version of all disputed facts. Based on the facts as alleged by the parent, the Court found that the parent was entitled to a trial on the issue of whether the ban from sporting events was reasonable and viewpoint neutral.

A school may ban unruly parents or third parties from school property during the school day

The Court found that a school principal has the authority and responsibility for assuring that “parents and third parties conduct themselves appropriately on school property” and that school officials have a responsibility to prevent “the kind of boisterous and threatening conduct that would interrupt the peace and quiet and disturb the tranquility required for the academic aspects of a school’s function.” The Court thus found that a parent does not have a general and unlimited First Amendment right to access school property and that schools may ban unruly parents from the school property during the school day. The Court thus found that a school district can properly ban people, including parents, from school property during the school day in order to maintain order at the school.

Sporting Events held on school grounds that are open to the public create a limited public forum

The ban in this case also extended to all school events, except for attendance at school graduation. The Court, however, found that sporting events were different than all other school functions and that a ban of the parent from attending sporting events to which the public was invited could run afoul of the First Amendment depending on whether the ban was reasonable and/or whether it was based on the parent’s expressed viewpoints.

In distinguishing sporting events from the regular school day, the Court noted that sporting events were open to the public and that they were events in which “the audience is encouraged not to be quiet but instead to engage in raucous and sustained noise.” The Court further opined that people attending the games were “expected to engage in expressive activity, chanting and cheering for whichever team they favor.” The Court, therefore, found that “[p]eace, quiet, and tranquility are not characteristics of, or normally associated with, sports contests.” The Court thus found that such sporting events were limited public forums, and therefore, a school can only regulate access to sporting events if the restrictions are reasonable and viewpoint neutral. Based on the facts as alleged by the parent, the Court found there was sufficient evidence to send the case to trial on that issue.

Many districts face the issue of a parent or third party who is disruptive or threatening to staff or students. The Court made it clear that a school has the right to limit such parent from being at the school during the school day. As to sporting events, and other events that are open to the public, however, a school would need to meet a higher burden before excluding such a person from those events. While a school obviously has the right to exclude a person when there is a “clear and present danger of disruptions such as disorder, riot, obstruction of the event, or immediate threat to public safety” any other exclusions must be reasonable and viewpoint neutral.
So, schools can remove and ban disruptive fans.

Thought so.
 
Top